Arnold Schwarzenegger Warns We’re Raising a “Generation of Wimps”

[Husseinisdoingfine]

Is he correct?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwqxdCGCDE8

[Spiritual Warrior]

This is stage Blue: hard work, discipline, no excuses

[Leo Gura]

Yes

[BlueOak]

Getting angry at the symptoms alone, will not correct this.

1) Less parental discipline, breeds less parental discipline. I don't mean anger, I mean discipline. Not knowing the difference is half the problem.
2) Power and wealth is held in fewer and fewer hands, disempowering people and robbing them of opportunities.
3) Monopolies rule because of the way media is designed on the internet, and the inherent stranglehold it and they have over officiating bodies. Disempowering.
4) Social media means personal problems of the general public are sustained over a longer period, when they should be finished and moved on from.
5) More readily available distractions on your attention means a weaker focus.
6) Nihilism is a very strong influencing factor, We'd need 20 more points to break that down. People simply don't care. 
7) Chaos and conspiracy is seen as the new alternative to nihilism or corporate monopoly. Chaos doesn't build anything internally or externally.
8) Failure is being seen as a bad thing again, due to integrating authoritarian influences who hide it.
9) Authoritarian influences keep people in a state of disempowerment.
10) Comfort is seen as a better state than discomfort.
11) No land to call your own, robs a lot of the basic drive that created the conditions he talks about.
12) When you are living in a square box, working in a small square box, looking at a small square box. Where is the impulse to create strength or depth of character? Its soul crushing for the large population that exist in that state.
13) Harsh economic conditions means survival is the main focus, more important than growth or character building outside of the basics.
14) We are close to WW3. No hyperbole. Survival is so far out of your personal control that it overwhelms any sense of it. Things like personal development are not high on the list of priorities.
15) A lot of things are falling away. What's left does not have any impulse to be like the old.

That's a few that come to mind, you get the point.

Edited October 23, 2023 by BlueOak

[AerisVahnEphelia]

 @BlueOak great points.
Also what's success but a fairy tail to keep building and selling shit most of the time.

 

Edited October 23, 2023 by AerisVahnEphelia

[StarStruck]

Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face. 

[Nightshenroth]

3 hours ago, StarStruck said:

Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face. 

Nice quote. Mike Tyson said that. Both quotes are also a bit deeper than you realize when taking into account the evolution of the ego (i.e. Spiral Dynamics).

[Danioover9000]

@BlueOak

8 hours ago, BlueOak said:

Getting angry at the symptoms alone, will not correct this.

1) Less parental discipline, breeds less parental discipline. I don't mean anger, I mean discipline. Not knowing the difference is half the problem.
2) Power and wealth is held in fewer and fewer hands, disempowering people and robbing them of opportunities.
3) Monopolies rule because of the way media is designed on the internet, and the inherent stranglehold it and they have over officiating bodies. Disempowering.
4) Social media means personal problems of the general public are sustained over a longer period, when they should be finished and moved on from.
5) More readily available distractions on your attention means a weaker focus.
6) Nihilism is a very strong influencing factor, We'd need 20 more points to break that down. People simply don't care. 
7) Chaos and conspiracy is seen as the new alternative to nihilism or corporate monopoly. Chaos doesn't build anything internally or externally.
8) Failure is being seen as a bad thing again, due to integrating authoritarian influences who hide it.
9) Authoritarian influences keep people in a state of disempowerment.
10) Comfort is seen as a better state than discomfort.
11) No land to call your own, robs a lot of the basic drive that created the conditions he talks about.
12) When you are living in a square box, working in a small square box, looking at a small square box. Where is the impulse to create strength or depth of character? Its soul crushing for the large population that exist in that state.
13) Harsh economic conditions means survival is the main focus, more important than growth or character building outside of the basics.
14) We are close to WW3. No hyperbole. Survival is so far out of your personal control that it overwhelms any sense of it. Things like personal development are not high on the list of priorities.
15) A lot of things are falling away. What's left does not have any impulse to be like the old.

That's a few that come to mind, you get the point.

   This is a complex issue given the developmental factors of value systems, cognitive and moral developments, personality types/traits, ego development, other lines of development personally to societally, ideological beliefs indoctrinated, groomed and gas lighted by culture, family upbringing, mainstream/alternative media, social media sites, news papers, tv programs, radio, peer pressure, schooling and education, group thinks, and many more information points of manufactured consent via marketing and ads by big tech companies that influences how we think and feel about the world, and what our biases and preferences are internally projected onto the external world.

   Half of your points are the ramifications of perverse incentives within the internet cultures here:

https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/95853-perverse-incentives-of-the-internetonline-culture/

   And the other half of your points, including decrease in work ethic and discipline, lies with the increasing egalitarianism, progressivism, socialism, feminism on the rise in most western countries and western divisions with neoliberalism/capitalism ideologies. half of you points and half of your problems would be solved if we limited more democracies down, elected more congressmen and statemen, made some internet based government body, we'd  see either those problems solved or a reduction in those problems you've listed. In fact, a strong correlation to your points is the decreasing birthrates experienced by western countries and some eastern countries that have adopted western values and westernized by America, for example Japan and south Korea have low birthrates due to egalitarianism and feminism indoctrinating women to pursuing careers way more than marriage and family and raising of children, and the ramifications of atheism and secularism, as well as consumerism and hyper materialism.   

[RawJudah]

There’s literally no resilience these days with kids. They can’t handle criticism, they spend more time online than in real life, they look up to the wrong people, their parents are probably clueless but powerless too. 
 

Everyone living their lives digitally cannot be a good thing. As helpful as the internet is, it is not real life. The things that put hairs on your chest are things that happen in real life. 

[RawJudah]

That being said, why suffer needlessly? We’ve got it soooo good these days, so much freedom. Why complain about it? We should be celebrating the fact that life isn’t as hard as it was 100 years ago…

[Twentyfirst]

Only wimps could raise a generation of wimps

[BlueOak]

2 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@BlueOak

   This is a complex issue given the developmental factors of value systems, cognitive and moral developments, personality types/traits, ego development, other lines of development personally to societally, ideological beliefs indoctrinated, groomed and gas lighted by culture, family upbringing, mainstream/alternative media, social media sites, news papers, tv programs, radio, peer pressure, schooling and education, group thinks, and many more information points of manufactured consent via marketing and ads by big tech companies that influences how we think and feel about the world, and what our biases and preferences are internally projected onto the external world.

   Half of your points are the ramifications of perverse incentives within the internet cultures here:

https://www.actualized.org/forum/topic/95853-perverse-incentives-of-the-internetonline-culture/

   And the other half of your points, including decrease in work ethic and discipline, lies with the increasing egalitarianism, progressivism, socialism, feminism on the rise in most western countries and western divisions with neoliberalism/capitalism ideologies. half of you points and half of your problems would be solved if we limited more democracies down, elected more congressmen and statemen, made some internet based government body, we'd  see either those problems solved or a reduction in those problems you've listed. In fact, a strong correlation to your points is the decreasing birthrates experienced by western countries and some eastern countries that have adopted western values and westernized by America, for example Japan and south Korea have low birthrates due to egalitarianism and feminism indoctrinating women to pursuing careers way more than marriage and family and raising of children, and the ramifications of atheism and secularism, as well as consumerism and hyper materialism.   

Everything is connected and has influence on the whole. We have to focus on something. I will watch the video and have a comment there if I get time thank you.

To add important points. The economic and biological factors should be mentioned.

Living costs drive people to work. Men and Women both. Even beyond just surviving, we want things in our lives that cost money.

Birthrates in Japan are also due to having no room to live. When a species gets to be too populated with insufficient space birthrates go down, especially when survival rates are high. This is increasingly true in a lot of Western societies.

Further authoritarian influence will not go well for Western culture. It is not going well right now. It hasn't gone well for 20 years. It causes internal turmoil trying to put a square peg in a round hole. In simple terms it's trying to put stage green and majority orange personalities into another stage.

The problems with trying to extend authority over a global platform such as the internet have long been shown, its very easy to find a way around any rules a single body enacts if another country doesn’t follow them. As it’s a global network.

Socialism is one part of the whole, dealing with equality and provisions for others. Atheism is another part of the whole, the act of questioning a being outside of yourself ruling over you. Feminism as an advocacy group is useful to ensure that identity is represented collectively, as with any group.

In this case positive feminism in a society that didn’t recognize their own concept of equality as absolutely essential could have a woman balance life and career, but fundamental changes would need to be made. For example, in europe we have much longer maternity leave. Basically stage green values and above would need to be integrated for a healthier career/home balance.

When taken to ideological extremes they all have their problems, as with any identity or value system.

Part of the eternal issue we have is vilifying part of ourselves over and over and over. Then wondering why we are not balanced. I did it with corporate monopolies, chaos causing and nihilism above, so I welcome the reflection. My perspective is not superior over another part of me, and all of these things are within me also. Thank you for reminding me to not push that part of me away.

Edited October 23, 2023 by BlueOak

[itsadistraction]

19 hours ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Is he correct?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwqxdCGCDE8

Only compared to some arbitrary previous generations. But who made them the standard to live up to? And sure maybe they were "tougher" but we're they happier? But maybe they were happier idk. Some younger generations are pretty sad and depressed. 

Just gotta work on your own happiness and forget the generation wars maybe

[UnbornTao]

Yes.

[Danioover9000]

@BlueOak

2 hours ago, BlueOak said:

Everything is connected and has influence on the whole. We have to focus on something. I will watch the video and have a comment there if I get time thank you.

To add important points. The economic and biological factors should be mentioned.

Living costs drive people to work. Men and Women both. Even beyond just surviving, we want things in our lives that cost money.

Birthrates in Japan are also due to having no room to live. When a species gets to be too populated with insufficient space birthrates go down, especially when survival rates are high. This is increasingly true in a lot of Western societies.

Further authoritarian influence will not go well for Western culture. It is not going well right now. It hasn't gone well for 20 years. It causes internal turmoil trying to put a square peg in a round hole. In simple terms it's trying to put stage green and majority orange personalities into another stage.

The problems with trying to extend authority over a global platform such as the internet have long been shown, its very easy to find a way around any rules a single body enacts if another country doesn’t follow them. As it’s a global network.

Socialism is one part of the whole, dealing with equality and provisions for others. Atheism is another part of the whole, the act of questioning a being outside of yourself ruling over you. Feminism as an advocacy group is useful to ensure that identity is represented collectively, as with any group.

In this case positive feminism in a society that didn’t recognize their own concept of equality as absolutely essential could have a woman balance life and career, but fundamental changes would need to be made. For example, in europe we have much longer maternity leave. Basically stage green values and above would need to be integrated for a healthier career/home balance.

When taken to ideological extremes they all have their problems, as with any identity or value system.

Part of the eternal issue we have is vilifying part of ourselves over and over and over. Then wondering why we are not balanced. I did it with corporate monopolies, chaos causing and nihilism above, so I welcome the reflection. My perspective is not superior over another part of me, and all of these things are within me also. Thank you for reminding me to not push that part of me away.

   Let me address each point you're made.

   Sorry, that link is a thread I did, not a video link. I don't know why it's showing as a link, could be related to the forum crashes and error code EX144. Yes, while it's true everything is interconnected and has influence on the whole(globe?), We do need to address the problems with egalitarianism, feminism, and other western values that is now too much on 1st world democracies, We need to bring back more control to the patriarchy and to smaller limited democracies.

   Yes, the economic and biological factors are important to consider, agree here.

   I partly agree that living costs drive men and women to work, but it's not an equal distribution. It used to be that living costs effected majority of the men and less women because the men were the main providers and protectors, the bread winners of a nuclear family unit. However, due to feminism, egalitarianism, and just socialism/progressive ideas from too much stage green post modernism, with too many women doing career and other jobs more and being married/having children less and pursuing the singles life, hyper individualism, and too much dating and polygamy and much less commitment to long term relationships we see a spike in unhappiness and mental illness. Well being and happiness indexes do show that women generally are more happier married and having children, versus being focused on career and working, happiness is greater in intake family homes then separated family homes. Basically stage blue community building, and religious communities, and religious way of life, is shown to have grater happiness levels and well being than stage green excesses of feminism, egalitarianism and hyper pursuits of individualism.

   I also agree that limited space may factor into less birthrates, but that's another factor among many others. For instance, Japan's and south Korea's declining in birthrates severely is due to egalitarianism, feminism, and other western values run amok in those cultures, plus excess stage orange work ethic and insane work culture of the 9-9-6 work style(work from 9 am until 9 pm, for 6 days a week) which is basically hyper individualism, neoliberalism and capitalism pushed by American's culture onto South Korea and even Japan for no fault of their own other than getting beaten during the Pacific wars and bombed twice with nuclear bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which made American ideology much easier to indoctrinate into Japan's modern culture. Another interesting example is why we have higher birthrates in third world countries, sometimes higher than estimated replacement numbers for those societies, yet they're generally much more happier and have greater well-being than 1st world democracies despite externalized challenges to their societal developments and other developmental factors? It's once again stage blue values, especially with autocracy and patriarchy in those 3rd world countries, not neoliberalism or capitalism, or egalitarianism and feminism that can't survive in such environmental conditions.

   I'm confused by what you mean with further authoritarian influences onto western societies? I'd actually argue we need to stop and slow down the feminism, egalitarianism and hyper individualism rampant in most westernized countries, by limited democracies with more congressmen and statemen. We need much less feminism and especially in the USA we need to either remove or update the 19th amendment of women's rights to vote, because the way it is right now, almost any women of any educational background, when they reach the age and other conditions for their eligibility to vote, can vote regardless if most are stage orange, some are stage green excess, and a few stage blue women. In fact we can see the majority of history that patriarchy and authoritarianism was the majority ruling structures for almost every society worldwide, and that democracy was just a recent new evolution of government, which unfortunately has mixed results and mixed outcomes. For instance under the Obama administration, and a few administrations in the past when the left party was elected, we tended to see increases in divorce rates and due to no fault divorce the majority of wives can just divorce and get half to more than half the income of the husband, and if they have children, due to breaking up the intake family, put undue stress onto them, which effects them into their remaining adulthood. In fact we do see that children generally speaking are happier when they come from intake family homes versus adopted, or from single parent households.

   I think the main problems with building an internet government, and extending authority to the internet world and refining authority in the real world, is due to big tech companies, and how neoliberalism and capitalism is set up. However, main issue is the enforcement arm to extending that authority onto the internet world. It can do so, and the world and society can enforce new standards and build an internet government if more and more men decided to enforce that new rule. Another factor is just due to 1st world democracies and that everything has to be thought over and voted for. In fact if we look to Britain's history, and see Oliver Cromwell and how the parliament was repeatedly dissolved from democracy to autocracy, and back and forth several times, we clearly see how indecisive a democracy can be, in fact when Oliver Cromwell was in charge most things went ahead faster than when he stepped down temporarily to allow parliament back into power, before after some time getting dissolved again LOL.🤣 So ultimately for such a change we actually need a dictator type of smart person to rule and lead that change, like a philosopher king because we don't want some stage red/blue leader too tyrannical, but we also don't want some hippie moral relativist as leader either.

   Not sure about socialism, atheism, feminism as you've described them. For example, with feminism and it's 'advocacy' and 'multiple representations' I disagree generally speaking. Main reason why, is really to ask your the following: What is enforcing those feminism ideologies? What is enabling feminism in patriarchal societies? What can women actually do if all men decide to revolt and remove women from places of political power, from the work force and to only lead traditional female gender roles? IMO the harsh reality is that very little all women can do against such an uprising, and the reason why we allowed feminism here at all is because OTHER MEN, in some police forces, military, and other places of the law, allowed feminism to exist in societies. Ever since the civil rights movement and when communism infiltrated feminism, feminism nowadays is just something different from it's original suffrage movement. Speaking of communism, socialism is just too difficult to install and build social infrastructure for, case in point Russia and China, both still needed to borrow features off of capitalism to thrive first, and once they're built a solid capitalistic economic framework can they put onto it socio economics, because during the fall of the soviet union most satellite states and foreign countries using the communism economic framework fell apart, like Venezuela, Cuba, Chile, and a few others trying for socialism too soon. In fact egalitarianism has this principle of equality above all else, yet when factoring in economics and biological factors, and many other factors we clearly see that equality is very difficult in reality, and egalitarian and feminism has eroded the family values and the nuclear family unit to the point that most men are dissatisfied, mostly chasing dates and simps for women, most women who are more careers oriented are dissatisfied when their male partners are lesser than them.

   I also agree that any ideology taken to their extremes can be unhealthy. Despite my biases and preferences, I do admit I don't want the world to regress to monarchy or feudalism even though I love the Queen, that's too traditional for me. I do want more conservatism and more back to family values though, but I especially don't want to bring back slavery industry. I'm mostly moderate to conservative, sometimes in some specific case I can be left leaning for example tax the rich I'm in favor for, just how you'd implement taxing the rich, like if you can find a way to tax higher for millionaires and billionaires, but tax lesser rates for small local business owners, or even give tax benefits or insurances to start ups that's nice.

[BlueOak]

Yeah that’s what I mean a link with a video in it, it’s a long one that I’ll try to watch tomorrow.

Try considering the biological or physical influence across all things not just the part of it that supports what you are trying to say.  It’s a primary driving force in all things. Both yes men being physically stronger and holding space for things to exist, but also why many cultural or societal trends happen in the first place.

Where there is no space for a home. A home can’t exist. Have you seen the places a lot of Japanese people are living in, they look like boxes. No place to raise kids. I can see the UK being that way eventually and heading that way now.

When you can’t afford to raise a family adequately because of fierce resource competition, then you can’t do that. This is a fundamental reason it doesn’t happen, or people work more hours than they want. People don’t like working excess hours. Look at the levels of poverty or the balance of resources people are working with, globally. It's in increasingly fewer hands.

So a void is created, and something comes to fill it. Nothing ever goes away, the impulse just gets moved somewhere else. This creates a trend, and people look at the trend and say that trend is bad. A symptom.

In 2022 I believe it was 22% in the UK after housing costs that live in poverty, so a quarter of the population. Poverty Data UK parliament link.  That’s a huge amount of financial pressure against being able to raise a kid.

There is almost no socialism in America that I have heard described correctly, and certainly no communism. Some government policies giving people things like welfare are socialist, keeping the police running, or keeping the roads from closing, but things like that are about it. There is more in Europe, in things like healthcare, education, and more support for those in worse circumstances but not a lot more.

People use the word socialist when they don’t like something, to describe usually in my experience an authoritarian policy. I would say here you are using it to describe liberalism.

I’d be happy to read any data that shows the career of a woman makes her unhappy. If you have any? What you might find is that cost of living, the approach of war, covid, and all the other pressures we talk about is making everyone unhappy.  But regardless, that’s up to that person's perspective, not yours or mine, to decide.

The stages are a part of you. You are putting down one stage and elevating another. If you really looked at them, you’d see a multitude of challenges and benefits of each. All within you right now. When they are in balance, we are in balance. Yes BTW there are good indications that things like feminism have taken authoritarian stances too far, (like almost anything liberal countries dislike).

Egalitarianism or Equal rights have little to do with a lessening birth rate and even less to do with social breakdown. I assume charitably that you mean abortion, not the right of the man alone to choose when a woman will have a kid, which would be barbaric. Rights are structured by the state or inter-state agreement. There is nothing outside of it defining rights. It’d be difficult to argue the way society is constructed by the state, (in a purely equal society) and its people, for it being the reason that same structure is not working as intended. People doing this are usually assuming their perspective is superior. We could tackle abortion alone separately if that is your meaning, because most of the talking around it is incredibly lacking in any depth. Removing abortion without vastly increasing the welfare state is going to increase crime, drug use, broken homes, abuse, and social breakdown.

I suggest your view of third-world countries being happier than someone living in comfort and security is completely wrong. Go visit those countries and talk to the people who can’t get enough to eat, or might be killed for walking down the street, and ask them if they’d like to swap places. Maybe you mean some of the more stable low-tech second-world countries? Which I can’t offhand name but I am sure exists.

While autocracy was more widespread, democracy is not a new invention of government. The first democracy existed around 400 BC, with the longest still existing ones created in the 10th Century AD. Divorce rates lowered under Obama:

US Divorce Rate statistics I am not sure why a centrist largely status-quo politician makes any difference. An elected politician in this context would again be a symptom.

Increasing authoritarian influence: Removing or lessening democracy is replacing it with autocracy. Which is the point you keep making to solve issues. When that very line of thinking has caused, not just influenced, but caused much of the conflict and polarization in Western society and global relations we see today. One perspective cannot be overlayed upon another.

Liberalism is the polar opposite of authoritarianism, so when people try and turn liberals into authoritarians it doesn’t work, the same as people doing this in reverse and all the problems that brought overseas. - It seems the world is going to go through this again. Look how that worked out in countries America has tried to do it in. Integration and balance tailored to the challenges are far more favorable and have less harsh conflicting points

There is no way you could force someone to accept an internet rule that they want to get around purely by law. If they really cared enough. Unless every country on earth that I can access also accepted that rule. So unless a very high amount of suppression was applied, along with jail sentences it's not going to help. - This is applying purely authoritarian thinking to a liberal problem - it doesn’t work. Again it's easier to use authoritarianism in conjunction with liberalism, socialism, and capitalism.

This is dragging on a bit, I’ll touch on the rest briefly. You are using extreme examples to justify taking positions against other perspectives like feminism. Which is usually what people do. They look at the worst situations or examples of them and then say that’s why they are bad. In this case, you are separating yourself from it to use it as a problem or lever for other perspectives you’d prefer.

Yes China and Russia both used capitalism AND socialism to function effectively. To be completely in balance they’d use capitalism, liberalism, authoritarianism, and socialism in balance. That's the point.

Democracy being indecisive is often beneficial. It means many perspectives are being considered and taken into account. Its less useful when in war or in a crisis.  I’d need another post to talk about all the problems these ideologies have caused but trust me I know. If you were talking about how great they all were, I’d be saying well look at this X. Also I would design governance differently, as I suggest in that bold point above :).

All the best.

Edited October 23, 2023 by BlueOak

[Danioover9000]

   It's a link to my thread...

   But why are resources in increasingly fewer hands, despite the shortage of working and living spaces? Or the declining birthrates, egalitarianism, feminism and neoliberalism, which leads to the devaluing of stage blue values, and religion?

   Another causation of increasing expenses for raising children and a family, is the increase in competition of human resources, like more women taking over male centric jobs, immigrants competing for similar jobs and work, and the increasing usage of automation and A.I technologies that are threatening to even replace knowledge workers, all because of multiculturalism claiming we can have all kinds of cultures in one region with little ramifications to our country/nation, our economy and ideologies, feminism pushing women to be less married and be mothers and more like men and compete for careers men do, and egalitarianism claiming all people are equal when we clearly see differences in biology and psychology between the sexes.

   You'll find data in history that countries with more religious backgrounds and programming, and the families that are religious, tend to be far more happier than the secularists, atheists, and modernists who adopted and are indoctrinated by egalitarianism, feminism, and multiculturalism. It even makes sense through Spiral Dynamics, as stage blue values tend to be conformist and support social group cohesion, meanwhile stage orange is more individualistic, even antagonistic to group cohesion unless it's for materialism and secularism gains, and when the wave swings away from individualism to collectivism when going to stage green, it's moral relativism and post modernism casts too wide a net of inclusion that it threatens to destroy itself with it's stage orange/blue shadow and over empathy and sympathy for stage red/purple, which have little moral qualms in killing off and taking over stage green societies if not for the strong enforcement arms of stage blue soldiers, police, securities to protect those in tage blue societies and even oranges and greens.

   NO! Democracies being too indecisive can be a potential weakness and dangerous to that nation's survival. Another example is looking at the Falklands war, which parliament was busy talking to itself what to do or what not to do, Margaret Thatcher decided for them they were going to war to reclaim those Islands back regardless, and she stood firm on that decision, which allowed Britain to save face in reclaiming those Falkland Islands that Argentina wanted because their dictator needed to show strength to his people, and a political victory of taking the Falklands back into Argentinian control suited their survival agendas, which clashed with GB's survival interests as a nation that conquered third of the world, and a defeat in the Falkland wars or even too much indecisiveness was intolerable and embarrassing for Britain.

   Are you sure egalitarianism has little to do with lesser birthrates and social breakdown? When Egalitarianism and feminism is preached over the top to all women, women then are indoctrinated into working more like men and less like traditional gender roles that have them married and raising children and family on average, which then takes up potential space from men working those same jobs and types of work, which then increases the unemployment rates specifically for men, which then influences those women to have more male centric views and be more careers orientated, which psychologically fucks up their feminine worldview and makes them have false expectations for their sexual and long term problems, have them complain more that the men they're dating are less adequate than them, which increases unhappiness and lesser well-being of the women and men. 

   Also, speaking about rights, where do rights come from? Not even looking to history yet, and thinking through this logically, where do rights come from? You said from institutions and organizations, I ask where do institutions and organizations comes rom? You may say that institutions and organizations come from people and society, which I may ask where do people and societies come from? You may answer that people comprise biological men and women on average who were children when growing up, birthed from marriages and family on average, and societies are from social contracts formed under a strong leader and follower base, which is autocracy, which I may ask on average what created the institutions and organizations and social groups in the first place, and what demographic enforces those institutions, and what demographic of people provided and protected the women and children throughout history, and what demographic created and enforced rights on not just women but men too? Whether you thought through this logically, or you cheated and looked through history, the major demographic has always been MEN. MEN have created and passed those rights onto others in their groups and enforced them in their in-groups and even out-groups, MEN make up the majority of wars and border skirmishes and battles, which allowed some interior peace within societies they protected from other foreign societies that wanted territory, human slaves, land, and conquest, it's men on average that fought others back so that egalitarianism and feminism was possible within the inner circles of societies. It's not an accident or unfortunate that, for example in the middle east, feminism and egalitarianism are struggling so hard to survive in those regions, because practically how can they survive without MEN to protect those fragile values against stage purple/red/blue tribes and kingdoms there?

   I did propose a limited democracy, similar to republican state, but I also propose another solutions: Revision of the Roman empire's senate and emperor government system, which IMO is a well balanced governing system that enables or disables autocracy when needed, for instance if you look in history of Rome and how the ruling system is structured, they do have senates which have the power to allow an emperor to rule in times of crisis or in times of war, when an autocracy rule is most appropriate, but when times of peace happen, or if the emperor was too incompetent or too corrupt they can vote him out of power and reinstate senate rule. I think this system is very promising, opposed to the democracy we have currently that's just too indecisive and too much voices vying for power, when really we need the ability to switch from democracy to autocracy and back when the world NEEDS AUTOCRATIC RULE. This is especially helpful with an interne government, although it'll be an uphill battle against big tech companies and other parties who want to be the new rulers o this internet government.

   For a fictional example, look at the movie Shin Godzilla, the Japanese government depicted is accurate to the real world Japanese government, too much talking and too much haggling in board meetings, when an autocratic government sees Shin Godzilla coming on land, or even before land when he's approaching from sea and they knew beforehand, will allow military action IMMEDIATELY! DECISIVE and FAST action from the collective, armies are readied and fighting Godzilla before he even reaches the land with warships and submarines, evacuations two days prior and the shores lined with mines, followed by artillery and tank barrage and jet fighters attacking blowing up the first stage of Godzilla's form before he gets to evolve. So why the inaction collectively? Because Japan was beaten up so badly by the Americans, by two nuclear bombs, and due to them adopting the more American style of democracy, can't launch into immediate military action and must wait it out.

   

   

[ValiantSalvatore]

I think the guy is wrong and misses so many points of human interaction which he himself was part of. 

Still, yes I find men weaker especially not women. 

I don't think this guy gets the nuances of our generation properly, the pain is very different from just go gym & work hard. Times change so drastically and differently due to technology. The guy was also 100% at workaholic levels of work. What is even strength if we all get weaker? How about a different definition that empowers instead of this bickering and lamenting. I dunno I hope baby-boomer generation dies off. It's crazy for me personally, to see Arnold more fake.

He also is part of the creation of the toxicity of body culture, and I bet the guy did this out of weakness when he saw the mirror iirc he felt weak and wanted to get strong. I dunno hope for the best....

Please Leo also read my message or mods. I want my account to be deleted. I don't want to engage anymore with this website. ( This is independent of my post, yet quiet severe due to mental/physical well-being) Thank you!!!!!!!!

Edited October 25, 2023 by ValiantSalvatore

[Danioover9000]

@ValiantSalvatore

8 hours ago, ValiantSalvatore said:

I think the guy is wrong and misses so many points of human interaction which he himself was part of. 

Still, yes I find men weaker especially not women. 

I don't think this guy gets the nuances of our generation properly, the pain is very different from just go gym & work hard. Times change so drastically and differently due to technology. The guy was also 100% at workaholic levels of work. What is even strength if we all get weaker? How about a different definition that empowers instead of this bickering and lamenting. I dunno I hope baby-boomer generation dies off. It's crazy for me personally, to see Arnold more fake.

He also is part of the creation of the toxicity of body culture, and I bet the guy did this out of weakness when he saw the mirror iirc he felt weak and wanted to get strong. I dunno hope for the best....

Please Leo also read my message or mods. I want my account to be deleted. I don't want to engage anymore with this website. ( This is independent of my post, yet quiet severe due to mental/physical well-being) Thank you!!!!!!!!

   Please curb your feminism and egalitarianism in check. You are here because men made the societies and laws, and rights, and enforced those rights for people like you such you didn't have to risk your life through war.

[Danioover9000]

@Husseinisdoingfine

On 2023-10-23 at 0:38 AM, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Is he correct?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwqxdCGCDE8

YES!