#Stefan Molyneux

[kentonralphtoews]

[furby-organist]

[imaginemirage]

The law is an opinion with a gun.

Stefan Molyneux

[barbarian15]

[benthejrporter]

The Soul- a Reply to Stefan Molyneux

New HPANWO TV film: https://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2024/08/the-soul-reply-to-stefan-molyneux.html

[lily-orchard-archives]

December 14, 2016

[greggslife]

I usually ignore weirdoes online that filter every popular film through culture war/woke/whatever politics, but it was hilarious seeing one dickhead say the mario movie was woke (princess peach wears trousers at one point lol) and another dickhead saying its anti-woke (for having two white male protagonists lol).

I'm not joking about the trousers thing either.

[reuna]

I was watching this yesterday and soon found myself going insane because, during the last 6 months, I've heard ALL THE TALKING POINTS this Stefan Molyneux says about the Native American genocide, but in relation to Gaza.

Srsly... There's the "they aren't all dead so it couldn't be genocide", "it's the rules of war and civilian casualties can't be avoided", "the government isn't responsible for what their army does" and ALL THE REST. ASdfgj<lvö

[ikeameatballspoisonedme]

I don't blame people for not knowing, IH did a lot of rebranding after all, but IH is definitely at least right-leaning. Alt-lite, if you will, where he doesn't say too much blatantly alt right stuff Tucker Carlson style (put a pin to this) but if you know the dogwhistles, you'll realize that he's just better at hiding his political tendencies. A cryptofascist, if you will. I knew because a) well, look at his fans and b) I was a fan since his very beginning, when he just released the Dashcon video and also back when I unfortunately was right-leaning anti-SJW. And boy looking back there were a lot of dogwhistles I was familiar with.

Take a look at the bikelock video (still up to this day!) where even outside of the blatant 1488 reference it's clear he's not fond of antifas. Or the HWNDU video where it's just /pol/ wankery and lots of clips of people being very antisemitic being shown uncritically. The most blatant proof of him being alt-lite is the deleted Seize video that hbomb mentioned. He admitted he watched Tucker Carlson (!!!), he put a clearly anti-semitic username on display and even said it, and he did racist caricature of Japanese people. Clearly too much bigotry for an alt-lite so he deleted it.

Again, these aren't blatant alt-right declaration like say, Sargon of Akkad or Stefan Molyneux (yeah remember that piece of shit). But put the pieces scattered across his videos together and you have someone very fond of right-leaning ideology. But with enough plausible deniability so when people brought it up he'll have an army of defenders saying stuff like "duuuhhhhh 14/88 is just a number triggered much" or "these r 5 years ago he changed!!!!!!1!". Lol if he truly changed he would've denounce his fans' antisemitism but he didn't do anything.

[generalchelseamayhem]

OK. I'm not super-duper knowledgeable on MRAs or men's rights activists/associations in general, and I'm not ashamed to admit that.

But, even I can see that it's never been as big as people make it out to be.

Correct if I'm wrong, but doesn't feminists have celebrities and politicians backing them, while mras have... themselves? Or has anything changed?

If not, that's hypocritical to ignore when critiquing.

Well the thing is, MRAs, despite the size of the actual community, get identified with a lot of other movements, which is generally pretty unfair to do. I would never say there can't be good feminists just because, say, Andrea Dworkin exists. Dworkin has been and continues to be unaccountably influential, basically pioneering radical feminism as it exists today, but that doesn't stop 'women having rights and dignity' from being a fundamentally noble goal. I can see how people can take that premise and do good, useful things with it, even though Dworkin did not.

Nevertheless, one news beat-up about one idiot man who did something objectionable, and suddenly the MRM has to take full responsibility for the existence of entire social movements which have nearly nothing in common with it - perhaps a questionably-sized overlap in membership.

The problem with this model is that, obviously, men are multifaceted, and can care about multiple things at one time. Some of the things they care about have directly competing interests with other things, and that's relatively normal. You pick and choose which values of broad-scale movements you personally support. There are LGBT people out there who are devoutly religious. What I'm trying to say is that some men might be both MRAs and something else, like conservative Christians, but as a whole you'd be hard-pressed to say the entirety of conservative Christians definitively care about men's rights.

Note also: some people only pretend to care about men's rights. This is called grifting, and it sucks. Part of the reason it sucks is because men aren't actually being helped by it, and another part is that it gives MRAs a whole new organisation to be wrongly associated with.

So, in no particular order, MRAs have been deemed responsible for the following things:

MGTOWs

Incels (including Elliot Rodger)

The Alt-Right, and by extension, neo-nazis

Trans activism

Pick-Up Artists

The curation of men-only spaces

Religious trads (Thank you, Stefan Molyneux...)

GamerGate

In general, anything that is deemed anti-feminist

So, you know, when critiquing the movement, or the very idea that men have issues that need addressing, people can just point to those things instead.

It freaking sucks.

[thesimplyone]

“Baseless victimhood is usually the last stage before outright aggression.”

- Stefan Molyneux

[alphaman99]

If you are for gun control, then you are not against guns, because the guns will be needed to disarm people. So it's not that you are anti-gun. You'll need the police's guns to take away other people's guns. SO you're very Pro-Gun, you just believe that only the Government ( which is, of course, so reliable, honest, moral, and virtuous...) should be allowed to have guns. There is no such thing as gun control. There is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political elite and their minions.

Stefan Molyneux

(thanks, Steve Bradford)

[collapsedsquid]

God Stefan Molyneux got loads of attention not too long ago, he fucking loved the logical fallacy thing but he's fucking totally dropped out of my awareness since probably mid-Trump admin, did he fuckin die?

[knuckle]

though if "gen z is for zendaya" at 26, i'm technically gen z, I'm old enough to have grown up in a landscape where all kids were thought of as millenials as the next generation had not been popularly conceptualized

& therefore i remember the intense panic and judgment about "our" generation from gen x that i feel like millenials (for the most part) have tried not to pass onto gen z so i think there is some merit in both identifying why there are some microtrends about still shitting on millenials for being debt-ridden and poor & not examining conservative upswings in youth mindsets for kids & young adults who grew up under trump, covid denialism, mainstreaming of bigoted conspiracy theorists/influencers like joe rogan, the weinstein brothers, sam harris, alex jones (briefly) etc. etc.

i'm not saying millenials didn't face a conservative grifter problem, but it feels stronger and more mainstream than ever - & i hardly see anyone younger than me even acknowledging that whereas when i was a teenager people frequently discussed people like stefan molyneux, glenn beck et al.

[benthejrporter]

Mysticism- a Second Reply to Stefan Molyneux

New HPANWO TV film: https://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2023/09/mysticism-second-reply-to-stefan.html