Consept

A lot of Leo's followers were big into trump as well

Someone like Barrack Obama is a good example of a successful man and guys may take inspiration from him but he doesnt speak directly to young men especially not the ones who would listen to Tate. He doesnt teach you how to be masculine he is more an example of it. But in general the issue is that mainstream and society doesnt really know how to deal with and promote healthy masculinity at the moment, its not that role models dont exist. Its almost like society is saying we dont need men but men do need to purpose otherwise they can become dangerous, so we are in a state of flux

So in terms of the HU, from what i understand i wouldnt say its an out and out scam, it basically seems like a course on different ways you can make money, I would say there are much better courses for a lot less money but that doesnt make it a scam. What people are pointing to is the affiliate part of it where you get paid for promoting HU to others, again if we go with this just being a course its quite common that there would be affiliates, this is not unusual at all. Also I would say there are a lot worse 'marketing gurus' in the space, you just have to browse coffeezillas channel to find them, a lot of these are out and out scams, nft/crypto pump and dumps, claims that dropshipping is going to make you rich etc where the only people getting rich are the ones offering these promises. Tate getting banned i dont think has anything to do with HU by itself, if he wasnt the face of it, it wouldnt be banned point blank. The issue is more his views specifically on women. Now heres the thing, Tate has in my opinion exaggerated these views and presented them in a way where if you dont agree you will be offended, hes done this to create traction and controversy and to boost up his name and sell more courses. If we go with this being an exaggeration then hes effectively selling something thats not even real (his persona) to vulnerable young men who are aspiring to be him (if you look at sneako now thats a good example), so this in itself is a Hustle theres no way around that. Also if he is willing to reap the rewards of his persona he should accept that there will also be backlash as he himself is aiming to court this backlash. So i feel like he is trying to get it both ways. Also a wider point is that his rise shows the lack of strong masculine role models who do have integrity, if these existed i doubt he wouldve got anywhere close to the traction he has been getting. Im pretty sure most young men who have a father with integrity that they look up to, would not be taken by Tate. Having said all that I dont hate or even particularly dislike him but I think you could definitely make the argument that hes a net negative for society. There are plenty of good male youtubers who can motivate young men in more healthy ways, thats pretty much what people are commending Tate for. I think the very fact waving money and luxery in front of his followers faces completely lacks integrity and it is actually what you see with every get rich quick, mlm, pyramid scheme, all of them know that the people below them will never make that money but they dangle it to get money from them, it is pretty bad tbh.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0zN02uiYg9KUwYs4JY8Nwg?si=kWouqMPiSc6WRZdxWReDFA&utm_source=copy-link Slightly surprised but good to see I think

Direct experience is always best. But I'll take I guess at what you'll get, I think there will be various suggestions for how to make money, all will be online, he won't go super in depth about each but will give you the basic framework for it. Interspersed will be motivational stuff about how to get out the matrix and how other traditional ways of making only are dumb. Might be a forum or some way to connect with other users. Of course the big one is his affiliate strategy where you promote him, set up YouTube channels etc and get a cut from the link. I will say he's very smart in how he's set it up. I always think though that there's such a wealth of information out there for free if you can drill down on something and take action, I'm just not sure how effective this is, but I'm open to be proven wrong.

This is actually gold, unless these a sorted out i feel like youre going to run into problems if you try and skip them

I get you but if you read those 2 books thy will probably change your outlook on personal finance completely and probably change your life.

Read millionaire next door and millionaire fast lane

Im going to breakdown why i believe bitcoin to be a pyramid scheme, I may be wrong or missing info on some points so please feel free to correct me or debate me if the need arises. Briefly, Bitcoin was intended to be a new form of currency to offer an alternative to the current fiat currencies used globally. The main advantage of bitcoin is that its anonymous and decentralised from governments and financial institutions using the blockchain technology. This means that money can be moved around the world and stored without it being used for investments by these financial institutions, which of course has been a problem in recent years. So why am i saying its a pyramid scheme? Obviously this tech sounds great, but here are the issues - Bitcoin is really only bought now on speculative basis, meaning people are buying it with the express purpose of selling it at a later date for a higher amount. Only 1.3% of bitcoin transactions are used to actually buy anything. Of course people will not want to buy anything if they know that they can make money from holding it, no one wants to tell the story of how they bought a pizza thats now worth $100 million. Currently Bitcoin is not a good currency for mass use, although its relatively easy to make transactions, the fluctuation of price puts people off. If i were to get paid in Bitcoin for example and the price halved, it would mean i would mean i basically did my months work for half the price, yeah i could hold onto it, but i got bills to pay. Essentially to be a widespread currency there has to be a fairly flat value, different currencies do change in value of course but nothing like crypto, in fact governments have to work hard to keep it quite flat so it can be used by the general public. So if people are only buying for speculation, the popularity is because of that, the currency argument is secondary and really an argument to get people to invest into it. If we look at the numbers of who holds bitcoin, we can see it take on a pyramid type shape, with the few who own the most at the top and everyone else at the bottom. The top 0.38% of wallets hold over $790 billion in bitcoin, this is spread between less than 150k wallets. On the flip side around 97% of wallets collectively own less than $50 billion and this is spread between around 40 million wallets. Now keep in mind the value is speculative and rises depending on what others coming in are willing to pay, the new people coming in are buying at a premium which raises the price further, meaning those at the top increase their value by huge amounts anytime someone invests at a premium, which is the basis of a pyramid scheme. Then we might look at who owns these huge amounts of bitcoin at the top, 3 wallets own nearly 3 % of all bitcoin at the very top, these are likely to be the people that created it or invested extremely early, most likely theyll have some connection with the creators if they arent themselves, the rest of the top 0.33% are said to be corporations and rich people that got in early. Corporations pour a lot of money into bitcoin for various reasons but the point is that the wealthiest are still at the top making money for nothing from the average person. So you might say, 'well this is just the structure of loads of investments, look at stocks, gold etc, you have to find someone else whos willing to buy it'. The difference is of course that there is intrinsic value behind stocks, there might be cash in the bank or the could be positive earnings which could mean you make dividends, the whole point is that companies 'produce' something that can grow the business and make income. Gold is a physical metal that is relatively scarce, it can be used in manufacturing, for jewellery etc, it doesnt make money but it has intrinsic value that can be worth something to someone. Bitcoin does not have intrinsic value, it cant make you money, you cant rent it out or use it for any production. Theres always a fiat currency comparison made, people will say 'bitcoin is just the same as normal currency all the stats youve given could also be attributed to fiat currency'. Of course this is true but the difference being, no one, especially not rich people, hold their cash in the hope that it would be worth more later. Fiat currency is simply a means to spend acquired value, its really just a temporary measure that is extremely liquid and is accepted worldwide. Comparing Bitcoin to this is really a false equivalency. Now the wider point here is that people are really looking for a work around of providing value and in some respects it makes sense because you could argue that a lot of peoples value is not being fairly rewarded, especially when you hear of ceos getting 100k x what their average worker gets. But there needs to be an understanding that you cant really work around this, either the value is there or its not and most likely if you have a middle man who youre selling your value to, they are going to make a lot more off of it than you. In fact those at the top are just giving you hope that you can make a lot of money, meanwhile profiting off of your investments. Also keep in mind, if you do make money, its most likely because some greater fool has given you theyre money hoping some other fool will give them their money.

When the bots come out to defend it, you know things are bad

To me it does sound like this is coming from a place fear, could be fear of failure or fear of not being happy but its definitely something. The thing with the system is you do have freedom to go and live outside of it, you can go buy a plot of land and live in the middle of nowhere. If you wanted to do that sincerely you would've just done it instead of posting stuff like this. Nothing is free and it never has been, people for 1000s of years have spent time gathering or hunting food, there has never in the history of man been any system that just does nothing. In fact we are probably as close to that as has ever been, with welfare and potentially ubi coming in and the only reason that's even remotely possible is because the system has been able to provide that. Of course not saying its perfect, many drawbacks including damaging the environment, but it still can be improved. Point is you just have a fear of entering the game and before you've even entered to know what it's like, you've demonised it. It's the equivalent of seeing a girl you like and not approaching and then rationalising by saying 'why do we even have to approach, women should just come up to me'. Just do something man.

That would actually be cool, I always find it can be a bit of a battle keeping them happy with that bit of distance at first they're cool with it but eventually it always comes up like 'we should be more serious etc'

How do you stop it stagnating and do you live together/ spend a lot of time together?

The energy behind this feels bitter and angry, sometimes that can be a good motivator especially if youve been depressed or something previously. However it can also lead to rash, rebellious decisions that dont work out long term or cause so much damage it takes a long time to recover. Your plan can very easily lead to burnout or breakdown. A lot of the times when everyone else is the problem for your negative feelings it could be something to do with you and if that is the case the same feelings will follow you everywhere you go. A move and a fresh start might not be a bad idea but you still have to work on yourself, thats the most important thing.

I've found this biggest problem with relationships, I feel like I always grow so much myself and almost regress in relationships. Even trying to keep it fresh is not easy, I'm currently debating whether to be in one or just do me

You need to question why you're dating, what is the intention behind it? In theory you should be dating people long term to find a life partner, as in if you can't see yourself with this person for the rest of your life after say 6 months or a year then you should question why you're with them exclusively. But also you could be dating just to burn through your karma, so let's say you're having casual relationships at some point you'll probably get bored of it and want something more serious. If you've got this urge for casual stuff and you're in a long term relationship, you'll always have that itch and want to get out. I mean you'd still get the itch regardless but at least you know you've made a conscious decision.

I applaud you taking ownership of how you feel and trying to become a better person. I'm not an expert but I don't think you're highly narcissistic, for one a true narcissist would most likely not even be aware of how their actions affect people. Narcissistic personality disorder is ego-syntonic meaning that the person who has it sees at as a part of them and can even enjoy the traits they have, although other people around them might suffer. As oppose to something like ocd where the sufferer is the one that suffers the most and once to be free of it. I see why you say you have it and maybe you do have some traits of it I don't know, but Narcissism at its core comes from deep insecurity and its a way to mask it. It's very rare that a full blown Narcissist would be worried about how they affect others and the awareness to point out bad behaviors. So I wouldn't be hard on yourself or even use the label, for whatever reason you've felt like you weren't enough and you've done things that you felt ashamed of to make you feel like you were. I think most people have done that including myself, you're going the right way in terms of building up awareness and taking responsibility and that's all you can do.

@JoeVolcano I'm more thinking about how you can actually make this society as great as possible. I have had the thought of yes if everyone's consciousness rose and everyone chose freely the kind of personal transformation you're talking about then yes of course it would be amazing and everyone would be happy etc, but for me it's kinda waste of time as it's not going to happen anytime soon, further to that humans just don't evolve in that way. Development is messy and takes long, as in thousands of years. Your perspective is that things could be much better, but that could and should always be the perspective throughout human history. Where we are now is built on what was down before and where will be in the future is built upon what we do today. Saying this society is terrible and not worth it because everyone is not fully conscious and aware is really absolving yourself of any responsibility.

I think we maybe speaking about different things. But to speak to what youre saying, the more complex the organism the more teaching is required, for example chimpanzees, doplhins, Elephants etc, all have very complicated societies and they are taught how to navigate that society if only by seeing what their parents do or being reprimanded when they do something wrong. As humans we are very complex beings in comparison to other organisms on earth and ass such more direction is actually required not less, to avoid catastrophic consequences. Further its not just about survival or preventing bad things happening its how can we prepare ourselves to live the best life we can and give value to the world around us. I think in general there is a fallacy, its also in libertarian beliefs, that if everyone is just left to their own devices and is free everyone would be fine and happy. What you dont take into account is that our society now IS the product of everyone being left to their own devices, we have organised ourselves in such a way because its the current best way that we can conceive and agree on life to balance autonomy with organisation. I can guarantee you that kids that grow up with someone like the guy in the video as their father will have a very positive outlook on life and will most likely enjoy it as well as being productive. A lot of kids that grew up in hippie communes actually seek structure and go into careers like the army. Point is there has to be a balance between not suppressing kids but also giving them good role models and guidelines

I get where youre coming from but again something like 'men dont cry' I would consider unhealthy masculinity, healthy would be teaching a child how to navigate and express their emotions. The fact is that not teaching your kids anything or just having guard rails, which in some ways i agree with, is also a way of raising kids which could potentially be damaging. Kids in general do need direction and that is the point of role models and parents. Without these they can very easily slip into toxcity especially males, Leo did a video on toxic life purpose which highlights this. Also from personal experience I have worked in a charity that was supposed to help children, the most problematic boys were the ones with really bad home lives and in most case there wasnt a father figure in sight. These boys got into trouble, were watched by the police etc, when hey did have male role models and activities and whatnot you could see that it was something they craved for and desperately needed. So i would argue that you're actually downplaying the need for healthy role models, Ive seen the results first hand and its not good. Also i think there is this fear of restricting people and making them fit into a mould, the goal of a healthy teacher would be to give the guidance for that boy or girl to become the best person they can be. One example would be to teach taking responsibility for your actions, i really believe this one teaching, reinforced with consequences, would literally change a persons life if taught correctly.

lol yeah maybe, but i would say there is value in teaching the next generation but not necessarily forcing them down a certain path. Healthy values can always be passed down, keyword being 'healthy'. Say you had someone who was healthy stage yellow their wisdom could be passed down to the next generation, that is how society evolves. Even you saying adults are stupid the adults before them were probably even more stupid and caused more damage. A good example of this is if you have a genuinely psychologically healthy couple and they raise a kid, they are very likely to be psychologically happy themselves. Most boys go off the rails specifically because they dont have positive male role models, so i wouldnt downplay the importance of it, especially with how destructive boys and men can be without proper guidance. Here is an example of i think incredibly healthy masculinity being taught to young boys, the effect it must have is immense

This can be difficult though, the way i see it as humans we are like conduits for different energies, the masculine and feminine are extremely powerful and important energies. Usually boys and men are the best conduit for masculine energy and women and girls are the best for feminine, of course this is not to say that there cant be great conduits in the reverse I'm just talking generally. So i think its important that healthy masculinity be taught to boys and healthy femininity taught to girls, if it so happens that a boy shows feminine traits then there is no problem in teaching them healthy femininity. Both sexes should also be taught about the other energy and look for it in themselves as well. The key thing is that the other side should not be demonised, it should be understood, explored and integrated. So i dont think we should suppress or ignore this polarisation at an early age and in fact i would suggest that because we have been doing that in the last few decades, ie encouraging men to be more feminine and women to be more masculine or at least to lessen these energies, we have seen a decline in relationships not only a rise in divorce but overall happiness. Dating is also harder for men because they are no longer as masculine as they were and that is what is attractive to women. (I actually experienced this at a speed dating event a few years ago where women were complaining about the men)

Also i think the other point of contention is whether or not young kids should be able to gender themselves and start taking puberty blockers other treatments at such a young age. There have been some issues with de-transitioning, which must be a terrible thing to go through or a therapist and those around the child really encouraging them to go ahead with it when it may just be a phase or theyre not sure how they feel. I think that is a very controversial area because on one hand it could be almost child abuse but on the other it could really help if the child does really know and will stay trans forever. I aint got the answers man!

Im not sure it is a transcendence of ones own sexuality, i might have misunderstood what youre saying, but a transcendence of ones sexuality would end up at no sexuality. For example if you said someone transcended their 'self' in a spiritual way, that would be the realisation that there is no self. However with trans people they are essentially changing from one sex to another. Non-binary might be closer to what my understanding of what you said is. I mean i guess thats where the issues pop up, the sports thing and a couple other issues are the only things that really cause friction with trans people and my take on it is this just comes about from the belief that trans women are exactly the same as biological women. All in all i have no problems with trans people and am not saying theres a fundamental problem with it, i can also empathise with their situation. It probably wouldnt be much different, you should give it a try, im too conditioned to try myself

I have seen a couple of her videos actually which were very thought provoking and well laid out, I havent seen this one but will check it out. This is somewhat true, although I believe 'Black Lives matter *too*' probably wouldve shut down a few of the all lives matter crew and made a bit more sense in terms of what was trying to be conveyed. Having said that 'trans-women are real women' plays out in real world scenarios such as with sports, which then lead people to think that there isnt context to the argument and take it at face value, I think a lot of people would accept the statement if there wasnt this fight for inclusion in womens sports. Regardless if there are some trans people that transitioned early and they have no advantage, there will still be some that didnt and will also claim that they should be included, which could really damage womens sports as a category, Im not saying its a massive problem but I think without clear boundaries it does spoil the integrity of the sport category. Yes I agree she is attractive and it is hard to even know she was born male, I would probably be in the camp of not wanting to date her if i knew. Although im aware this is probably not fair, my generation and those previous and probably a lot of the current generation, will have a problem dating due to how we were brought up and the definition of what a straight man should be. There are as i said also lesbiens that wouldnt be down with that so im not sure the precise reasoning. The other aspect is having biological kids and obviously the genetalia situation. Im sure there are a lot of guys that dont have any qualms about it as well and i think this will also increase in future generations. But i think trans people have to understand that it is a big jump for hetero men that have grown up in a certain way, right or wrong.