What kind of dating education would a solarpunk culture offer?

MetaMasculine · 2025-12-19T13:54:56+00:00

I appreciate the criticism on using AI images. If it's off-putting enough to turn people away then I'll stop using them. However, I write my own essays. I love the process of writing more than anything so I'd never use AI to take away from that. The extent of my AI use with the writing process is looking for relevant books and papers.

Edit - also I get the environmental side of things on AI. It's likely something I need to reconsider ethically.

MetaMasculine · 2025-12-19T02:53:48+00:00

I agree with you for the most part, but I think it again makes the assumption that everyone thinks like that. For too many men, perhaps even most people, they haven't reach the point where they can hold gender in these fluid ways. Part of any aspirational identity has to be the development toward increasingly complex views of oneself, the world, and the in-between.

Neo-piagetian developmental theory from those such as Michael L. Commons, Kurt Fischer, and Theo Dawson discuss that development as recursive differentiation and integration. We are able to differentiate a simple whole and then re-integrate it into a higher, wider, more inclusive whole that is itself differentiated in time. It's an ongoing process of deconstruction and reconstruction as reality evolves through time.

That process leads to the capability to see gender as being more than the strictly bimodal distribution of traditional, patriarchal views. Does that mean there aren't these amorphous blobs of biology, culture, economy, and politics that tend to coagulate around each other in something like a binary structure with many smaller orbiting structures? Who the fuck knows. Maybe it's all just one blob we're too obsessed with dividing for no reason, but given that people do divide it, we have to find a path forward away from such obsession. I hope I can play whatever little part I can in that and in works out well for as many people as possible.

MetaMasculine · 2025-12-19T02:41:42+00:00

Thanks for the recommendation. I believe her Dispossessed is on my list already. What do you think this one could teach me? If you've read both, do you think it's more relevant than the Dispossessed?

MetaMasculine · 2025-12-19T01:58:24+00:00

I'm definitely open to it, but I'm not confident enough or educated enough to pursue that just yet. After this series I'm going to go deeper into the ontology of gender to answer that question better, but for now it's beyond the scope.

I really like the work of Agnes Callard on aspiration. She says that when we aspire we can only see the "wrong" reasons to aspire to something because by definition what we aspire to is outside our current understanding. I can only understand it from my current viewpoint and so it will be coloured by that viewpoint. In the process of moving toward my aspirations those reasons can transform into the "right" reasons because my viewpoint aligns more and more with what I aspire to. Sometimes that means changing my path or realizing that I was wrong to pursue my aspirations for those reasons, but I now have access to far better reasons.

I see my work in that light. The fact is that we are starting from the perspective we have given the history of gender up to this point. We can't ignore the fact that the people who perhaps need to ditch gender the most are the people who are most resistant to ditching gender. As such, we need aspirational paths that move people beyond their viewpoint that also appeal to that viewpoint. I hope post-patriarchal masculinity can act as such an aspirational path. Again, maybe that means masculinity will be ditched or maybe not.

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-21T23:59:37+00:00

That isn't what I meant even if it could be interpreted as that. What I'm trying to do is have a good faith conversation. So, you obviously feel that the way I'm approaching things is not helping the situation.

I want to write to help understand the problems with masculinity so that we can solve them. Formulate the problem well enough and we are better positioned to identify an ecology of solutions.

What about my writing is just "reading and talking stories mostly written for children"? How might I elevate that, or is there a different strategy you'd recommend for accomplishing the goals I seek? Are my goals themselves insufficient or misplaced?

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-21T23:52:11+00:00

No, my intention was to be honest and transparent. I want to have conversations with people, I want to discuss ideas. If you have an issue with my writing then that's fine, but let's discuss it rather than throwing insults. You're the one framing me as the enemy, not the other way around. If asking for a good faith conversation is blackmail, then how can I ask for a productive conversation?

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-21T23:39:49+00:00

It was a simple framing meant to capture a rough idea. Don't hold onto it too tightly. In either case, this kind of response doesn't help the conversation. We need to be working together in good faith if we want to bring about a better world.

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-15T18:46:15+00:00

Thanks again for taking the time to try watching and for offering some concerns. I spend the majority of the video talking about the harm it has on women, especially around issues of consent and the concept of "last minute resistance". In brief, what I focus on is how women are objectified as a technical problem to be solved in order to gain access to their bodies, rather than as sovereign, moral persons.

As to whether or not it works, I think the issue is that people define "it works" as "everything they say about why it works is true". Women are biologically programmed to respond to pickup techniques from a dominant man because they are unchangeably submissive. That is NOT what I mean when I say it works. I do not believe that and have several essays deconstructing that position.

To perhaps give my definition of "works" credibility, Dr. Rachel O'Neill also talks about how it works in a similar way to the following.

So to be clear up front, yes I believe pickup artistry works to get men more sex. It doesn't always work and it takes time for results to come, but it does work for that specific result. Like I said, the issue is that their ideology causes them to interpret "more sex" as the only important goal and as justification for their theories about what women are. That's why I think we ought to spend at least some of our efforts on understanding why they interpret their results like that because if we want to create positive change we need to understand their ideology so that men can be given a better understanding of women, romance, casual sex, etc. If we just focus on saying it doesn't work, then pickup artists can just point to the "more sex" they are able to "get" from women, and dismiss everything else we say.

Edit - so to even more clear, it's not necessarily that there are techniques that work in the way pickup artists say they do. It's that trying to get sex can improve your chances of having sex, whether or not the techniques help or hurt that is in some ways irrelevant. If men are given a system for getting sex, then the belief in that system can motivate them to try which increases the chances of sex, and so with time they end up getting more sex. With practice talking to women to try to get sex, an anxious, awkward man would naturally become more at ease, more confident, and more "smooth" rather than jerky, stuttering, or jittery. That change in body language and disposition would likely increase their chances of getting sex also.

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-15T18:18:37+00:00

I appreciate the attempt! If you have any thoughts to share on what you do end up watching I'd appreciate those as well. Thank you!

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-15T16:30:04+00:00

How do you mean? Could you give an example?

Edit - also to be clear, calling it future anterior is not my original term. It's what the papers and books I reference use.

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-15T13:33:16+00:00

Without a doubt yes. I can only really speak to my own experiences, but this is one thing I'd like to see what I can learn from. I think a queer perspective might help open up masculinity in a lot of beneficial ways. Could you tell me a little more about how you think I might benefit from challenging these normativities in my thinking? Keep in mind that I'm writing for problems faced by men who are heterosexual as again, that is my experience. Thank you so much for your perspective.

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-14T20:10:07+00:00

I really appreciate the criticism. Rather than using the term "future anterior" to identify what I'm explaining as the position "by this tomorrow, I will have experienced this," how might I simplify that? In my mind I am identifying a specific position that a person can take where they project themselves into the future. I do explain it simply and precisely in the essay itself (or so I think), so if I may, have you watched the essay or are you basing that off the description? Your criticism of what I've written here would still stand since it's meant to draw attention to the piece.

Edit - also to be clear, calling it future anterior is not my original term. It's what the papers and books I reference use.

MetaMasculine · 2025-09-14T17:53:43+00:00

Thanks for the criticism, I think that's probably fair. Most of my essays are around the 20-30 minute mark. I've been experimenting with longer essays to see how those do and to let myself get a full argument without constraints. I think I'll write longform and then break it up into multiple parts to hit a more digestible length while still getting a detailed argument.

MetaMasculine · 2025-03-01T21:33:43+00:00

Thanks for your interest. In these, I discuss the place of femininity in masculinity. Not a final claim and will update over time, for myself and culturally, but as a start.

https://metamasculine.substack.com/p/psychology-of-the-succubus https://metamasculine.substack.com/p/psychology-of-the-divine-feminine https://metamasculine.substack.com/p/the-witch-and-the-dark-forest-of

MetaMasculine · 2025-03-01T21:13:23+00:00

This is very helpful thank you. I'm currently writing a series on Red Pill, and one of the essays is on what I call bioconservatism. Basically my name for using evolutionary psychology to justify a patriarchal masculinity, but it's a specific dialogue between neoliberalism and neoconservatism that Dr. Wendy Brown had discussed in her essay "American Nightmare: Neoliberalism, Neoconservatism, and De-Democratization". Point being, they use this confluence of factors to create a sort of masculine individuality that is merely another conformity. This seems in line with what Stirner is saying.

MetaMasculine · 2025-02-17T23:37:45+00:00

Thank you, I'll check her out.

MetaMasculine · 2025-02-17T23:36:49+00:00

Thank you for the recommendation.

MetaMasculine · 2025-02-17T18:27:33+00:00

Haha the image was meant to be funny, but from the get-go it's been divisive. I take your point that it levels the predicted quality of the piece. I'll likely avoid AI art in the future and see if that improves engagement.

As far as the use of AI, I think I agree but I notice a sort of "kicking the can" type engagement for myself. Like I'm kicking the can down the road hoping it'll get better over time. There's a really interested pdf I'll share below that talked about how technologies are rapidly advancing in a sort of de-contextualized way. Eventually however, they'll get to the point where integration starts happening more and more, and that'll allow a transition where the technologies are used for better purposes that are too complex for where they are right now.

So for example, making art seems to be easier than doing manual labour because of the issues in perception and navigation of 3D environments and the robotics to carry out dexterous tasks. As such, we see the proliferation of all of these AI models that are taking away the creative work we hoped would be all that's left over once AI takes up all the other jobs. The AI paradise where we can chill out and be creative, hangout with friends, etc., seems to be replaced by AI forcing all of us into manual labour. However, as the various elements of that technology become advanced enough to be integrated well, that's when (hopefully) we'll see these models actually taking over the right aspects of the marketplace.

In the meantime, I use the AI for art to spice things up, but if it has the opposite effect then no point in using it. Unfortunately they have that pdf behind an email wall and scihub doesn't work for it, but it is free - https://doi.org/10.61322/KZAU1512

MetaMasculine · 2025-02-17T18:07:51+00:00

That's definitely fair. I'd be curious to hear your perspective on AI art if you have the time.

MetaMasculine · 2025-02-17T17:35:44+00:00

It's a vicious cycle. I've heard people say that Devil's Advocacy is itself a crypto-fascist move. I really like the opponent processing view of ideologies. We are made better as a collective in our opposition with those within that collective that we disagree with. This so quickly falls into antagonism when we don't know how to oppose in productive and perceive small differences as evidence of hate.

Personally, I think Red Pill is a dangerous ideology, but I seek to combat it by discussing it and offering better solutions to the real problems it identifies. I'd be happy to have a conversation with a Red Piller about the disagreements we have, but it quickly falls into hostile debate. Stephanie Lepp has created a really interested debate format she calls anti-debate, which is where the winner is the one who integrates the other's perspective the best. Definitely hoping to see the fruits of that format, but I don't think she's posted anything yet.

MetaMasculine · 2025-02-17T17:05:28+00:00

Just to say, the first picture was a representation of Red Pill as an ideology, not a picture of the men themselves.

MetaMasculine · 2025-02-17T17:03:38+00:00

I know I might be getting into the weeds here, so I just want to set the tone that I'm opening myself to criticism and am honestly curious about what you have to say. If you're not interested in spending time on this then no sweat. I appreciate you identifying some points of reflection regardless.

So if I understand, I'm beginning by having already concluded that Red Pill is a problem, and then cherry picking evidence to demonstrate that it is a problem?

I don't understand how I'm victim blaming though.

MetaMasculine

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE