Society/Culture Why are young males now more right wing then older males?

[evolved2]

It's difficult to do so, the work force has basically decided that we need the option now, hard to get staff if you're hardline on WFH.

I reckon you're fortunate if you still have that option. Many employers have gone back to pre-covid policy in that area.

Amazon tells staff to get back to office five days a week

The e-commerce giant is ending hybrid working and will stop people hot-desking in the US.

www.bbc.com

In a job market that favors corporations, they'll make the final decision.

 

[Chief]

In a job market that favors corporations, they'll make the final decision.

This is an argument against monopsonies. Amazon is now a choke point on worker rights and independent innovation, as Microsoft was before courts started cracking down and forcing them to cease their anti-competitive practices.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I'd argue that the modern Western corporate world would make an easy path to management for a gay trans black Muslim woman who wears a hijab.

Really? Can you please explain how that's the case? Some real-world examples would be nice to hear about too, the more prominent the better.

There's been a shift that you haven't acknowledged.

It doesn't tally with my experience really. I've seen more female executives than 20 years ago perhaps, but I haven't seen sexuality or religion enter into it at all. And rarely do I see people at the executive or even managerial level who are non-white, let alone in outsized numbers. The only non-white manager I've ever had was very old and experienced (and perhaps more importantly, fit into the greedy dickhead vibe that many managers at that company seemed to, regardless of their skin colour or gender).

Anyway, the bigger issue is the power corporations have and the inequality they perpetuate, rather than whether we have more women or brown people running them.

Going back to the 20th century, women were getting University scholarships in male-dominated fields for simply being female while males were not getting the same privilege in female dominated fields.

You'll find those female-dominated fields were generally much less glamorous and well-paid. Even now, despite the shortages we have in nursing and early childhood education, they're not well-paid professions despite how hard they work. Compare that to male-dominated professions with labour shortages like tradies, engineers and software developers, where wage growth has been pretty good on average.

I've worked as an engineer and seen women who I didn't think were head and shoulders above me in competence get some good opportunities and more patience from some managers. But I also recognised that this wasn't about me, but the problem engineering companies have in attracting and retaining women, and they needed to do what they did, or they'd always have that problem. And, I had no idea what those women had to go through. I only saw the nice behaviour towards them. If they were flirted with by a creepy manager, or implied that they would only progress in their career by sleeping with higher-ups who liked them, it's not something that would have happened in front of me.

Possibly in QLD. I don't know any white male Melbournian youth that yearn for the 1950's.

I'd say the fascination with Andrew Tate or even Jordan Peterson-like figures is more common amongst the male youth than we may think. All of them primarily market themselves to young men by suggesting they can have a lifestyle like 1950s men and women shouldn't get above their place. Tate is more obvious about his misogyny, but Peterson has also consistently tried to drag down women, and then wondered why fewer women watch his videos.

In general, I'd say Victoria is more progressive overall than Queensland, major urban areas are more progressive overall than regional areas, and a higher percentage of Victorians live in major urban areas than Queenslanders. These are all factors too.

It's reasonable to question immigration levels and the ability of ANY nation to assimilate so many people from different cultures and belief systems. I see the same sentiment in several Asian nations.

I didn't mention immigration at all actually.

Yes, it can be reasonable to question immigration levels, but a good faith exploration of it would be honest and tactful, presenting evidence for as well as evidence against. They'd be willing to acknowledge the many groups that have integrated into Australian society in the past, some of whom are from the same groups that are being most heavily questioned today.

However, I think many people, especially in the media, who want to question immigration levels don't do so from a position of good faith. Rather, they have already made their mind up against immigration and then go looking for figures and rhetoric to back up their preconceived position. People like that poison the ability to have a proper debate, because it's clear they're using the questioning as a disguise (sometimes not very subtly) for xenophobia.

And as I've said before here, "assimilate" is an ugly term that people are likely misusing. Perhaps they mean "integrate". As a person of non-European ancestry, I am happy to integrate into Australian society, but I will never assimilate.

It's a strawman. Is anyone asking for 1950s policy?

It isn't a strawman, it's literally what the Andrew Tates of the world are advocating for.

I'm quite sure Pauline Hanson isn't.

Are you? Why? Hanson has openly said she thinks family courts are biased against men, and that women are routinely lying about domestic violence and abuse to stop fathers seeing their children. While I'm sure this has happened before, in reality, only 3% of fathers are refused access to their children, and many family court decisions are giving fathers access even when there are repeated allegations of domestic violence against them. And a study suggests that the allegations of abuse are three times more likely to be made by non-custodial parents (mostly fathers) than non-custodial parents (mostly mothers).

A fraction of fathers lose access to their kids: why the Family Court isn't anti-men

Just three per cent of fathers who go before the Family Court are refused access to their children, casting doubt on One Nation senator Pauline Hanson's claims that mothers are using the court to deny their ex-partners time with their kids.

www.smh.com.au

Pauline Hanson sparks fury with claim domestic violence victims are lying to family court

Citing prominent grievance among men’s rights groups, One Nation leader says she has personal experience to back up claim

www.theguardian.com

On top of this claim, Hanson's Senate colleague Malcolm Roberts claims that men are driven to violence by family courts and have little other option. And he pals around with men's rights activists. Hanson has never condemned his comments and continues to endorse him for Senate elections. This is all textbook pandering to men and claiming they unjustly have fewer rights than in a bygone age before women's rights.

Malcolm Roberts says family courts driving men to lash out and 'hurt the other person'

Video emerges of One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts saying while "there's no excuse for violence" the family law system leaves men in custody disputes no choice but to "check out" or lash out, sparking condemnation from domestic violence campaigners.

www.abc.net.au

Hanson also seems to want a snow-white society, which is very 1950s.

Hard disagree. The left have failed to capture the minds of young men, and it seems they have no desire to look in the mirror and make corrections.

This has little to do with what I wrote. But I agree the left have failed to capture the minds of many young men. It's always a harder sell to say "some of your perceived problems are not actually problems" or "perhaps you could lift your game", compared to saying "you are an oppressed victim, and it's all the fault of this other group of people". Particularly when the group of people being blamed aren't numerous or powerful or wealthy enough to counter such messaging. It's also harder to reach people when speaking in terms of a broader group, like the poor as a whole, than to pander to one specific group individually.

I would argue the left are trying to make corrections to be more effective and inclusive. My evidence for this is how Zohran Mamdani has managed to secure the Democratic nomination for New York mayor by talking as little as possible about race, gender or sexuality, instead talking about the problems that everyone who isn't wealthy is facing. Every time the media try to bait him into discussing those topics, he simply pivots his response back to widespread economic issues such as the cost of living. I think his approach will be the model for a lot of leftist rhetoric going forward.

You'll blame Elon, Murdoch and Tate, but they're not the biggest problem.

Why's that?

That has a feel of gaslighting to me.

Okay.

Like most SRP lefties, you ignore evidence when it doesn't fit the victim narrative of any minority group you're placating.

Not surprised to see lefties do this, then cry victim when they face consequences

I suppose the left need to find a 'victim' group to help their fight against Christianity

Progressives love to reframe each issue so they can play the victim.

I already told you how they do it - they play the victim.

You should know as someone who plays it well.

You (the SRP, not just you) view each issue through the prism of skin color, sex, gender identity...there always has to be a victim to protect. It's nauseating.

Gender ideology, racial stereotyping, victim mentality.

Yet to see you accuse the right of playing the victim to any comparable degree.

 

[evolved2]

Jesus Johnny Bananas

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Muhammad evolved2

 

[demondavey]

Jesus Johnny Bananas

Johnny is a sharp operator. He always replies succinctly and thoroughly. He knows his facts and is very diplomatic.

 

[evolved2]

Muhammad evolved2

There's no need to resort to Islamophobia.

I was in awe at the length of your response and I intend to respond to it in full.

 

[Gralin]

There's no need to resort to Islamophobia.

 

[evolved2]

Johnny is a sharp operator. He always replies succinctly and thoroughly. He knows his facts and is very diplomatic.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

There's no need to resort to Islamophobia.

Oh yes there is!

I was in awe at the length of your response and I intend to respond to it in full.

Thank you.

 

[Northalives]

Why are young males now more right wing then older males?

Macho macho man, Gangsters, WWE, social media/peer group pressure .....

 

[Coolangatta]

Why are young males now more right wing then older males?

Macho macho man, Gangsters, WWE, social media/peer group pressure .....

Conservatives have always been good at railing in wannabe tough guy insecure types.

 

[parsons nose]

I would hazard a guess the reason why young white men are more right wing than older males, is because the left side of politics has gradually realigned its focus. When I was growing up the essence of left wing politics was the labour movement, universal health care and access to higher education. Young white males were supportive of these agendas, because there was nothing in them that identified as threatening toward them.

The left side of politics began to shift its focus to issues that are important to women and minorities and away from issues that are important to men. On its own this may not have been a decisive shift in the political sentiment of young men, however the political realignment of the left was ably promoted by various interest groups that not only furthered the interests of these groups, but demonised anything associated with white maleness on university campus and through the public discourse.

I suspect young white men and men in general were a little slow on the uptake of online communities to advance their causes when compared to women’s rights groups and minorities. They are now using these tools and the uptick in right wing rhetoric is a manifestation of this connectedness.

 

[hippyhippy]

Imagine being told from a little kid that you're society's biggest problem. The patriarchy, white supremacist, nazi, the oppressor. You're the source of all our problems. You struggle at school and go through young adult life only to find out that other people are getting an advantage over you because simply because they they were a woman or they had a different skin colour from you at the same time you can't buy a house or have a family because now everything costs too much....

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Imagine being told from a little kid that you're society's biggest problem. The patriarchy, white supremacist, nazi, the oppressor. You're the source of all our problems. You struggle at school and go through young adult life only to find out that other people are getting an advantage over you because simply because they they were a woman or they had a different skin colour from you at the same time you can't buy a house or have a family because now everything costs too much....

Wearing a suit and pretending to be a Christian fixes this?

 

[hippyhippy]

Wearing a suit and pretending to be a Christian fixes this?

Trump is the result of everyone getting sick and tired of leftwing ideology creeping into our lives... Americans are sick of it... while over here we couldn't be governed hard enough.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Trump is the result of everyone getting sick and tired of leftwing ideology creeping into our lives... Americans are sick of it... while over here we couldn't be governed hard enough.

Trump is the result of the majority of Americans not bothering to line up and vote.

 

[hippyhippy]

Trump is the result of the majority of Americans not bothering to line up and vote.

Half of them voted. The other half had their chance.

 

[Markfs]

To answer the thread's question - joe rogan. He leads and we obey....

 

[parsons nose]

Trump is the result of the majority of Americans not bothering to line up and vote.

Trump is a result of many things. When he was elected in his first term, I thought it would be a good thing. not because I anticipated Trump would be a good Leader. I mistakenly believed that he’s election would prompt some meaningful self critique from the Democratic Party.

Instead the Democrats learnt very little from the episode and failed to extricate themselves from the influence of billionaire donor/special interest class. Trumps second coming was in no small a result of this and an underestimation from the left side of politics of the power of the meme to young white male voters.

 

[.Shotties.]

I would hazard a guess the reason why young white men are more right wing than older males, is because the left side of politics has gradually realigned its focus. When I was growing up the essence of left wing politics was the labour movement, universal health care and access to higher education. Young white males were supportive of these agendas, because there was nothing in them that identified as threatening toward them.

This doesn't paint young, white males in a particularly good light.

The left side of politics began to shift its focus to issues that are important to women and minorities and away from issues that are important to men.

Sorry, what? You know there can be minorities who are men.

 

[RedStarUncle]

Imagine being told from a little kid that you're society's biggest problem. The patriarchy, white supremacist, nazi, the oppressor. You're the source of all our problems. You struggle at school and go through young adult life only to find out that other people are getting an advantage over you because simply because they they were a woman or they had a different skin colour from you at the same time you can't buy a house or have a family because now everything costs too much....

I mean... you can be a white male without endorsing the patriarchy, white supremacy, Nazism, and oppression.

And if you're a white male that does endorse those things..... then yes, you are the problem.

 

[1990crow]

Why is the NSN not an outlawed political organisation?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Half of them voted. The other half had their chance.

Only 31% of the US population voted for chump.

The reason we have chump is because of the US's flawed voting system.

 

[Carringbush2010]

To answer the thread's question - joe rogan. He leads and we obey....

I don't listen to or obey to joe rogan.