u/TheFudd

>Well, yes. Thats the whole idea of grades.

Not trying to talk shit, but I believe you misunderstand how grades like that work on a larger scale.

If a teacher flunks one or two kids, that means there's a problem with those one or two kids.

If a teacher flunks every kid in the school, that means there's a problem with the teacher and/or the school.

Make sense?

Thank you, and I fully agree. I truly hope we're not so far down that path that bringing these boys back to sanity is impossible. Liberal western society spent a lot of time neglecting these boys, and that's ruined a ton of trust these boys once had in society.

Literally all that right-wing extremists like Tate had to do is tell these boys, "Hey, everyone seems to think you're the problem. I'm here to tell you that you aren't a problem - rather, *they* are the problem, and here's how to deal with them and get yourself ahead" and before you know it, they were eating out of the palm of his hand.

It's pretty clear to me that looking at boys as "the problem" instead of as human beings has a lot to do with the mess we're in right now.

No, "time outs" aren't the problem.

From what I've seen and experienced, Western liberal educators spent a ton of time focusing on the success of women and girls - which was necessary, I'm not trying to vilify women's equality here - but unfortunately, the pendulum swung from "girls don't need an education because they'll just be homemakers, focus on boys" to "ignore boys, because girls need to catch up" and has been stuck there for a while.

We can't fix a problem that we refuse to acknowledge even exists, and we need to start admitting that we really *have* been pushing boys and men to the side for years now - Yes, even the white boys whom we also assumed were so "privileged" - and that we're going to have to make some steps to amend that by reaching out to boys and treating them in ways they will respond positively to, if we want to resolve this issue.

The alternative is letting men like Andrew Tate take the wheel and mentor these boys as he sees fit, which is obviously a terrible idea.

>Can I look down on them with disgust instead?

Andrew Tate would probably thank you for doing so. Without contempt and disgust from folks like you, he wouldn't have nearly as large of an audience, nor such an obscene amount of money.

I disagree. Maybe if they received validation from their families and community, they wouldn't need validation from grifters? I think it says quite a bit about society when people feel the need to purchase the same kind of validation that they used to receive for free from their own communities in ages past.

Nobody likes being told they're worthless, they're a loser, they're an incel, or a "stupid bro", or that all of their struggles aren't valid. If everyone around them is telling them those things - Including you - Then validation becomes a rare and valuable commodity... A commodity that someone like Tate can make a lot of money selling to people.

There’s so many other, manlier, kinder folks out there who can provide that same validation.

And yet, those "other, manlier, kinder folks" are not out there doing that, are they? Instead, many of them are calling these people losers and incels and lost causes beyond all redemption, just like you are right now.

Why should they listen to those "other, manlier, kinder folks" when they aren't acting very kind to them?

^ This reply shows me you don't understand what men like Andrew Tate are selling. He's selling *validation* to these boys and men, and you're providing a perfect marketplace for that product to sell like hot cakes.

When you reply like that to these people, the mental picture of grown men having hissy fits and "mashing downvote buttons with tears in their eyes" might feel good in the moment, but those men and boys aren't actually reacting like that. Instead, the message they get is they were right the whole time, that people like you really do just hate men and masculinity, and that people like Andrew Tate are the ones "on their side".

I get that it feels good to trigger people you don't like, but all you're doing is making Andrew Tate's job easier. Don't you think he's already making enough money as it is?

So what happens when they grow up and start beating *you* senseless because they learned that violence is a quick and easy way to get people to do what you want them to do, rather than something to be used as a last resort?

Why do you think handing out massive numbers of "F"s will change these kids' behavior?

That might work when there's only a few kids screwing up and there's social pressure on them to change for the better, but right now the social pressure is going in the opposite direction because of people like Tate. The boys will just say they're getting "F"s because teachers/women/"liberal educators"/whoever just hate boys and masculinity, and people like Tate will validate their views there.

I get that the idea of flunking these kids to "teach them a lesson and show them how wrong they are" might provide a nice, satisfying dopamine hit to you in the moment, but all it's going to do is make the problem worse.

Okay, now how many of those boys were saying they have a "negative opinion" of Tate just because they didn't want to get in trouble with their parents/teachers/etc. for listening to Tate?