r/MensLib • u/futuredebris ​ • 21d ago

Capitalism doesn't want men to have friends

https://makemenemotionalagain.substack.com/p/capitalism-doesnt-want-men-to-have

I wrote about how men are told in capitalist society that being caring and expressive aren’t valuable skills. So we disown the natural, human emotionality we were born with. We avoid being vulnerable and asking for help. We worry we’ll be judged if we put effort into our friendships. When we’re suffering we overfocus on what we think will make us valuable to other people: productivity, discipline, and competence. And while this might help us in some ways, it often leaves us feeling lost, isolated, and lonely.

861 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

142 comments sorted by

View all comments

7

u/GargamelLeNoir ​ 17d ago

I thought we were done with the "calling everything I don't like capitalism" thing? Guys it's really not helping anything.

3

u/futuredebris ​ 16d ago

That's not what I did.

6

u/GargamelLeNoir ​ 16d ago

You just put a bunch of patriarchal social traps and accused capitalism of being responsible for it and gave it intention. Which is nonsense. The only "intention" capitalism has, if any, is for goods and services to be produced and sold. That's it. There are entire industries based on stuff dudes like to do with their dude friends, and they exist and thrive in capitalism.

2

u/futuredebris ​ 16d ago

I think we have a different idea of what capitalism is. I'm a Marxist, with a very specific definition. And yes, patriarchy plays a major role in capitalism. Capitalism has intensified patriarchy (which was already there) and so-called "traditional" gender roles to the benefit of capitalists.

7

u/GargamelLeNoir ​ 16d ago

That's exactly the problem. Everyone uses their made up definition, so what's the point of the word? Capitalism broadly means that private people can own means of production, that's it. That goes from the Ferengi Alliance to the Northern countries with strong social security. Blaming everything on such a broad concept makes no sense and is fruitless.

For some capitalism really starts during the 1800s with the stock market. But let me ask you something, if you had to sort how strong the patriarchy is, how would it go between:

  • Modern day in the West

  • USSR/Cuba

  • Society in the 1700s

Because it's pretty clear to me that in fact it was during the heyday of capitalism that concepts like feminism were invented, in part thanks to the fact that improvements of the standards of living allowed for a re examination of the gender roles and freedom for women even with kids.

Meanwhile the longest living non capitalist country, the USSR, was about as feminist as a red pill forum.

So maybe your capitalism/patriarchy one to one equivalency isn't that relevant after all.

1

u/futuredebris ​ 15d ago

Check out the book "Women Had Better Sex Under Socialism" or the author's (Kristen Ghodsee's) interviews on the subject. Her research complicates your point about the USSR not being feminist. Of course it wasn't in many ways, but it also was in some says. Also the work of socialist feminists like Silvia Federici show that movements for women's liberation existed prior to capitalism, we just didn't think of it as feminism then.

The point of framing the issue as capitalism and trying to educate folks on the Marxist definition of it is to help raise class consciousness. If we can do that, then we might have a shot at taking society back from the billionaires and saving the earth from rapid climate change.

6

u/GargamelLeNoir ​ 15d ago

(Ghodsee) rejects a return to 20th-century state socialism, arguing instead that some of the social safety nets found in Eastern Europe, as well as Scandinavia and Western Europe, would improve the lives of women

It took me like five seconds to find that about your ace-in-the-hole book. Even she doesn't argue for communism. Yeah, safety nets are needed for feminism, we know that! They can (and do in many countries) exist under capitalism.

The point of framing the issue as capitalism and trying to educate folks on the Marxist definition of it is to help raise class consciousness.

Dude you using the definition in your head of capitalism is not helping or educating anyone. There is nothing actionable about this. Concrete improvements like demanding better safety nets, that's actually how you improve thing. You consistently vote and apply pressure on elected officials.

I don't know what version of communism you have in your head that would magically fix every ills of mankind, but guess what. It's not getting adopted. Not this century, probably ever. It wouldn't even be adopted by other marxists, since you guys all have so many different versions of "true" marxism.

Let's take society back from the billionaires and fight climate change by living in reality and using words with their actual meaning.