“b-but bears are actually dangerous!” Shut the hell up.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    specifically the intent here is to drum up drama, controversy and attention. Which obviously worked, but the problem is that nobody is using it to do something productive with.

    • Kedly@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Some people are definitely using it to create drama sure, but others are using it to vent, and yet others dont understand why some men wouldnt just try to understand why women would choose the bear… basically its a clusterfuck of a meme

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        i only said drama since i think the point of it is to bring up discussion around the problem at hand here, the problem being that people dont understand that part of it.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah the whole “any press is good press” idea mostly applies to things you want to make money from because for any position you can think of, there’s people out there that will support it. So, given your position, if you can get more attention by creating loud arguments, even if they are generally against you, that extra noise means you’ll reach more people that might be sympathetic to your position, and you’ll increase revenue from those people.

      If the goal is to capture hearts and minds to change the world, controversial attention is the opposite of what you want because antagonizing a group of people will always generate opposition, sometimes where there was none, and sometimes even where there was formerly support.

      One of the real dangers of sexism and racism and all that is that it generates more sexism and racism. So even if you decide that you really don’t care about group x, you’re done with them and they can all die in a fire and you don’t even care if that makes you evil, expressing that will contribute to a cycle that will come back to hurt others in your group.

      It’s why genocide keeps coming up in human history. That’s where this all leads when it’s a racist or cultural thing. Sexism is different because the genders can’t survive without each other, but it is a reason why we’re seeing a resurgence of conservatives willing to unironically talk about the worst parts of patriarchism as if they are good things, like women just existing as servants to men.

      Though when I look at everything going on in the world, it really feels like humanity in general needs to get the fight out of their system because so many conflicts are caught in this kind of cycle with no peaceful resolution in sight for any of it that doesn’t involve some major compromises on things I’m not sure anyone is willing to compromise on. WWIII is going to be messy because I think the national conflicts might be overshadowed by domestic ones, which will cause even more issues as they spill into each other.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        If the goal is to capture hearts and minds to change the world, controversial attention is the opposite of what you want because antagonizing a group of people will always generate opposition, sometimes where there was none, and sometimes even where there was formerly support.

        i think the intent was to be inflammatory to gather the obvious negative responses and double back on those so you can use the whole thing as publicity stunt essentially. Though there are going to be negative aspects of it, that’s why i’ve been pretty critical over most of it.

        As for patriarchy, i think it’s both a bit of thinking back to the good old days, and trying to edge a little bit of “trust me bro, it’s going to work” out of people. Because for men, it obviously has some advantages that we don’t need to talk about, but they also have to sell it to women, so they’re selling it by claiming stuff like “you won’t have to work anymore” and the list goes on really. None of that is true or beneficial, but an incorrect statement sells a good story, so.

        Honestly, i don’t forsee a world war 3, i feel like it would’ve already happened if it would have. At best north korea is going to try and pull some shit, but that will almost certainly do nothing. I think realistically a lot of places are going to collectively agree on “enemy bad” “kill enemy” and there is a non zero chance that some sort of mutiny happens during or immediately after, but given some time people won’t want it. I don’t really think it’s a significant concern to be honest, i think most of the political shit is mostly rhetoric, things seem a lot worse than they are, a lot of bark and no bite essentially.

        If ww3 ever happens it’s going to be incredibly messy, because ww2 was, and ww1 even more so before it.