Hopefully we all familiar with the 3 steps cycle of shit. It goes like this.

Step 1: Men are encouraged to act a certain way in society, because of gender roles.

Step 2: Men are then demonize for having the same behaviors society encouraged them to have in the first place.

Step 3: Then men come up with alternative solutions to those toxic behaviors. But yet society still doesn't accept. Since men aren't doing what they were encouraged to do.

Step 4: The cycle repeats itself. It goes like this encourage = demonize = alternative, back to fo square one. We are going in circles here.

https://youtu.be/SnyVC9aFqoY?si=X1hgdqxBXlhwAGxH

This video was great until the 18:38 mark. Where she says we live in a culture that promotes violence against women. She says this what causes men to rape. But she is ignoring the root of the problem. Men aren't rapists or misogynists, because society says it cool to be those things. Men are those things because they live in a society with a lot of contradicting mixed signals. That even women and feminists themselves perpetuate.

Sure evolution psychology is misandrist, because it claims that raping is a part of men DNA. And sure only idiots from the red pill community and some conservatives that are sexist are going to be the ones to get all excited for evolution psychology. Since the pseudo science "validate" their views on gender.

But this is when the 3 steps program comes in though. Ana says we live in a culture that promotes violence against women. But I won't be surprised if she is the type of feminist that either ignores or pretend that women don't encourage men to have these behaviors that leads to violence in the first place.

In my last post I talk about women preferring benevolent sexism. Because they think true equality is hostile sexism. That's already women (and feminists) encouraging men to have chivalrous attitudes towards women. Then that chivalrous attitude manifest into some men thinking women are inferior and incompetent. And then BINGO, men are demonize for being toxic masculine. Despite society saying this was "positive masculinity" in the first place.

So it's not that society promotes violence against women. It's the fact that we live in a Cakism society. Where people want to have it both ways. But in the end not every thing goes to plan. And everyone gets a surprise Pikachu face, when their "postive" encouragement of male behavior often leads to toxic behavior. Hence why society both encourages and demonize men for the same behaviors. And people don't want to talk about the roots of these problems, because that require alternative solutions to me behavior they don't like. Hence why they judge men for doing the alternative.

Men are often encouraged to embody certain behaviors aligned with traditional gender roles, but when they act on these roles, they face backlash for exhibiting "toxic masculinity." This cyclical pattern reflects a societal contradiction. While some feminists advocate for "positive masculinity", they simultaneously demonize the very traits they encouraged, leading to confusion and frustration from men.

Evolutionary psychology suggests traits like assertiveness and competitiveness are biologically rooted in men. While society or feminists themselves can often celebrated those same traits as positive masculinity. Because it shows that men are confident. However, when these traits manifest in aggressive ways, society demonizes them, perpetuating the cycle of encouragement backlash, and not being happy with the alternative.

I could be wrong here. But I won't be surprised if Ana is the type of feminist that would still judge men for doing the opposite/alternative of these toxic behaviors, because they aren't being encouraged to act a certain way. After all I saw her engage in benevolent sexism once with another YouTuber called Dr. Grade. Saying he shouldn't criticize her, because she is a young woman with less power, and all that power dynamic BS. Even despite her saying men are equal. I guessed the social factors go out the window. And all of a sudden men and women aren't equal anymore.

And the thing about social conditioning playing a bigger role than biology here. Is that Feminists are never truly ever 100 percent all in with deprograming social norms. They are always one foot out the door, or half adding it. Again like the last post about women preferring benevolent sexism over true equality, because they think true equality is hostile sexism. Feminists only want to deprogram social norms for women.

Which is fine. Since feminism is for women right. But the issue here. Is that most feminists aren't neutral to social norms that harm men though. Matter of fact they usually participate in social norms that harm men. Because in some of their twisted/backwards minds, they think social norms are "positive/healthy masculinity" for men. Since the social norms benefit women, again like the benevolent sexism. And they will just use mental gymnastic to justify it. For example, saying it's ok because of the patriarchy, male privilege, and women are oppressed.

The only downside is that this leads to more toxic behavior and misogyny. So you can criticize evolution psychology all you want, call it pseudo science. You are still not doing a good job, when you still encourage these same behaviors in men, same behaviors that are seen as "innate" or "biological" by your misogynistic enemies. And still judge men for doing the opposite/alternative of these behaviors.

In conclusion.

Encouragement: Society promotes traits like competitiveness and assertiveness in men. Because men are viewed as confident and ambitious for having these traits.

Demonization. When these traits lead to aggression or dominance, men are criticized for toxic masculinity.

Alternative: Men may then seek healthier expressions, like collaboration or emotional openness, but face backlash for deviating from traditional norms, perpetuating the cycle of encouragement, demonization, and alternative behaviors.