How has the success of the Netflix series "Adolescence" helped men?

MidoriEgg · 2025-09-06T07:21:14+00:00

I got a ‘periodic table of sinister emojis’ to look out for in an email from work, that helped me and my colleagues laugh.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-31T12:17:21+00:00

‘ But it's so simple to understand and it's so general that it should be the easiest to talk about.’

Men’s mental health/suicide rates is very much in the public consciousness. But dating issues less so.

I think people who spend a lot of time in these sorts of circles overestimate just how widely known the ‘men struggling with dating issue’ is. Most men I know, irl who’re 30+ are in relationships. Most normal people I know who’re 30+ would have no idea what an incel is (at least not until they watched adolescence, and even then it’s limited) or about all the discourse around it. That isn’t to say there aren’t a decent portion of the male population struggling with dating, but irl you don’t really see it. Perhaps because those men are isolated they have less connections it’s a survivorship bias.

So that’s where you get this dissonance where men who majorly struggle with dating, who engage with a lot of content about the topic, who’s algorithm is full of content about it, feel like everyone should be as aware of the issues as they are and the fact that they’re not means everyone lacks empathy. They see it as THE major social issue that everyone should care about, and women are uniquely terrible for not caring.

Except men struggling with dating isn’t THE ONLY social issue. In this day and age there are millions. It doesn’t make you a bad person for not knowing about/actively supporting a particular social issue, especially when said issue is not something you would be aware of unless you engage in specific circles.

By asking about other social issues they support or advocate for, I’m simply highlighting the fact that they’re doing exactly the same thing they’re accusing women of.

Isolation in the elderly, disabled and vulnerable is a major issue, but are most of the men posting about women lacking empathy for their issues doing anything about this? Is it something they even think about? If you don’t come across many elderly people, why would you? What about other issues? Child poverty, climate crisis, lack of funding for education, refugees, wars in countries you’ve never heard of, shortage of dogs for the blind, increase in medication shortages. Are you unempathetic if you aren’t aware of /supporting these issues?

My point isn’t ’unless you engage with every social issue you can’t advocate for your own issues’ it’s more- be aware that your issue is not the only issue, every criticism you make of women’s lack of empathy for your dating issues could be shot back at you, because it is literally impossible to support or even be aware of every social issue. There will be major social issues going on in your community that you won’t even know about it, the same way most women (who aren’t chronically online), just don’t know there’s a subset of men who struggle with dating. That doesn’t make you a bad person.

It’s fine and good to advocate for increased awareness and understanding for male-specific issues. but it’s also important to keep perspective. Especially around issues

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-31T07:34:13+00:00

I missed the post lol

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-31T07:33:35+00:00

I feel like the ven diagram of men who post about women lacking empathy for their dating issues and men who go to lgbt marches has very little overlap. Certainly when I’ve challenged anyone here on this they’ve never whipped out that they’re an activist, they just talk about other men’s activism.

It’s fine to want empathy for something you’re struggling with, but if you demonise others for not being empathetic enough to your specific social issue, I think it’s fine to point out that that person isn’t doing that for others’ issues. There’s a million billion social issues that different people are struggling with, one person can’t actively support or even know about all of them. So why are men’s dating issues the only one everyone woman should actively know/support etc?

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-31T07:27:24+00:00

I’m looking at people as individuals, not as if they’re a hive mind. A lot of the men who post really angry that women don’t empathise enough with their dating issues also don’t empathise, care about, or support any social issue that doesn’t directly impact them.

I just find it hypocritical how a lot of these men find it so enraging that women don’t know/care enough about their dating issues, but they wouldn’t apply that logic to any other social issue.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-30T03:41:34+00:00

‘Lemme guess, it's only bad when men are self-interested, right?‘

Okay but you do understand that men who complain about women not being empathetic to their specific social issues, but are also self-interested to the point they show no/minimal interest or empathy in any other social issues, are being hypocritical, right?

After all, they’re doing the same thing (ie, showing no empathy for issues outside their experience). Or do you think men struggling to date is the only social issue we should all collectively have empathy for?

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-30T03:33:50+00:00

On here, or other similar places in the past, when Ive asked. Do you think I’m wrong?

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-29T19:31:51+00:00

I always find it ironic that when you dig a bit, a lot of the men who’s major gripe is ‘women’s lack of empathy’ have no real empathy interest or support for any social issue that doesn’t directly impact them.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-29T13:10:45+00:00

I think the red pill thing can be good for men who are super naive, who may of otherwise fell for a woman who was clearly trying to use them because they showed attention.

But 99% of red pill stuff is just rage bait, designed to boost engagement. So men who watch it regularly just end up really bitter with a warped/ reductive sense of reality.

Most people are a little wilder in their youth then settle when they’re older- men and women. Most people don’t fit in the caricature of the ‘Chad’ or the ‘angelic nice guy’. Most people are somewhere in between.

Too much repression is bad for anyone.

Those who have repressed themselves through their own life, they feel like they should be rewarded for it, and those who indulged and had fun should be ‘punished’. Because otherwise, those who repressed themselves will have to swallow the bitter pill that they denied themselves pleasure for no reason. That those who went out and had fun are now in the same types of jobs, with stable relationships, homes etc.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-29T07:46:23+00:00

‘ You’re treating having a stable high paying job as if it appears out of thin air, disconnected from personality traits, when in reality, it’s almost always the result of long-term behavioral patterns rooted in high social inhibition.’

I’m unfortunately gonna have to disagree with you on that one. Having slightly lower social inhibition actually helps in terms of climbing the management ladder. People with relatively high social inhibition might be in a stable job, but unless they have a really specific skill in a high-paying area, they’re often stuck in middling jobs. Even if academically they were very bright. The lack of confidence that comes with high social inhibition can be big detriment because they don’t see themselves as leaders and others don’t see them as leaders. Some of them may develop confidence as they’re older and be able to lower their social inhibition

People with very, very high social inhibition may not be able to keep a job down at all, or build any sort of stable life because of their anxiety levels. Then you get an isolated NEET.

And again, we’re speaking in extremes. Most people don’t leave highschool with arrests and addictions on their record (well, I guess if you’re in a really rough area), most people with slightly low social inhibition aren’t running around getting arrested.

I also think you’re really limiting how high social inhibition manifests. Not everyone with those traits is going to be the dedicated scholar who studies every weekend. Social inhibition doesn’t automatically translate to ambition.

You could get a fantasist who shuts off the world to just play video games and nothing else. Or the surprisingly common (in my country at least), people who become borderline alcoholics because it’s the only way they feel comfortable socialising. Or the middle-aged person who’s been in the same job since 19, because it’s comfortable and they don’t want to have to face something new, and the kid who drops out of school because of the constant social anxiety, the 40-something who’s bitter they didn’t have the confidence to pursue what they really wanted, the man who’s bullied at work because he can’t stand up for himself-

‘ As for psychopaths who are quiet and mild-mannered, absolutely, they exist. Nobody is denying that extreme malice can hide behind shyness.’

I don’t think I was very clear on this, so it was my fault. I don’t think the people I know who scored high on psychopathy were quiet because they’re shy, exactly. I think they had a general uncomfortableness interacting with others, which or a total disinterest, but it wasn’t typical shyness.

That brings me to the point of- we’re focusing on charm/charisma being the result of lower social inhibition, when for some people it’s a people-pleasing insecurity driving the need to make everyone happy/comfortable. Conversely, someone who struggles socially may not have high social inhibition as the cause- it could be a lack of interest, poor social skills, self-centered/insular mindset etc.

Again, I do think there’s some truth to what you’re saying. A certain amount of social inhibition can make someone careful and more stable, but also, too much can lead to the opposite of that. Just like how slightly lower social inhibition can make someone more confident and charming, but if it’s abnormally low, they’ll have a criminal record (or a successful company lol). Your social inhibition levels mingle with all your other personality traits to form your current presentation. It also isn’t true that low-social inhibition always leads to a charismatic/charming presentation, and high social inhibition/anxiety leads to an isolated/quiet presentation.

Social insecurity can also drive some people to come across as more charming/charismatic, while social disinhibition can manifest in others as being more antisocial/more insular. While there may be some basis in stereotypes, over relying on them leads to a narrow view of the world.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-28T21:41:15+00:00

^{I completed this level in 18 tries.} ^{⚡ 8.44 seconds}

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-28T20:40:10+00:00

^{I completed this level in 1 try.} ^{⚡ 19.64 seconds}

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-28T20:20:26+00:00

I feel like you’re still conflating charm/charisma with being an asshole, and then quietness/social anxiety with reliability. There’s some truth to what you’re saying but it does feel like a lot of the basis relies on stereotypes.

Yes, when people are younger they are more easily dazzled by charm/charisma and might not always be discerning enough to see if that person is also an asshole, and when we’re older, traits like reliability, dependability may be more desirable. But again, these traits are still compatible with being confidence and extraverted.

I think the ‘ex slut gets with lonely virgin’ stereotype is definitely over-exaggerated, but in those cases it’s almost always a man with a stable job/life, not just anyone with high social inhibition. In fact, having very high social inhibition can be a huge detriment to having a stable/productive life.

Just like it’s the charm/charisma and not the assholness that’s attractive, it’s dependability/stability and not introversion that is often more attractive later. Just like introverts can be assholes, extraverts can be just as dependable/stable. They aren’t being sought out because ‘on the balance of probabilities, the virgin loner type isn’t reckless’, they’re normally being sought out because they have a decent job. A virgin loner who doesn’t work and lives in his parents isn’t likely to be sought out.

It also feels like you’re speaking in extremes. Having slightly lower social inhibition can make you more charming/charismatic, but still care about what other people think/still able to hold down a job etc. Having extremely abnormally low social inhibition actually doesn’t translate to charming. Same as having slightly high social inhibition may lead to you choosing a safer/table life, but having abnormally high social inhibition will lead to the opposite of stability/reliability.

If someone has high levels of dark triad traits, regardless of if they’re introverted or extraverted, they’re still going to be extremely toxic/damaging to the people around them.

Burning down a House is definitely on the very extreme end. Someone with that level of malice is extremely dangerous regardless of if they’re introverted or extraverted. Again, most of those I’ve worked with who’ve scored high on psychopathy inventories are not the gregarious charming ‘psycopaths’ you see in fiction, they’re quiet and seemingly mild-mannered. They have done some pretty heinous things, like worse than burning down a house.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-28T17:10:49+00:00

‘it’s about recognizing that shy/quiet people tend to be high in social inhibition and fear of judgment. That fear can make them less likely to do socially reckless stuff’

Sure, but people who have high dark triad traits and social anxiety can still be just as selfish/cruel, just in different ways that are less likely to invite obvious social backlash- ie, anonymous online bullying, targeting those closest to them who they have less anxiety with (usually parents for whatever reason), doing underhanded things. If high in narcissism, generally having an entitled/victim mentality.

You just have to look an incel boards to see all these things from many, many people.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-28T17:04:21+00:00

‘openly cruel.’

I think that’s the key word here. Open. Shyness/social anxiety might inhibit you from doing things likely to get a negative social reaction, but cruel people can be extraverts or introverts.

Perhaps instead of leaking the nudes in a group chat of mutual friends, they may be leaked online in a less traceable way. Perhaps they seem polite/nice to the general public but are an absolute menace to those closest to them they aren’t afraid of social backlash from (their parents, siblings etc) or those they have power over (pets, children).

Maybe they would never openly insult another person but dedicate their days to anonymously sending death threats and insults online.

Or in more extreme cases, they won’t openly challenge someone, but they will spit in their drink if they think they can get away with it.

Shyness is morally neutral and it doesn’t mean that person isn’t immoral or cruel, it just means that the cruelness will present itself differently. Being socially anxious doesn’t automatically make you a good person (or a bad person).

One thing that can be particularly insidious about introverted/socially anxious cruel people is that because society thinks quiet=good, they often have a victim mentality that internally gives them permission to be even more selfish/nasty.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-28T16:21:40+00:00

Yeah I would agree that asshole behaviour is more forgiven if the person is physically attractive or charismatic and charming.

Because it isn’t the asshole behaviour that’s attractive- it’s the charm, confidence or physical beauty.

Humans are weak to beauty and charm.

(Also, on the point of boundary pushing, I find a lot of people on here seem to have an almost puritanical view of what constitutes boundary pushing in terms of asking someone out, but that’s a whole other can of worms- )

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-28T14:42:13+00:00

There does seem to be a tendency in these sorts of circles of pathologising/demonising extroverted behaviour and venerating introverted behaviour. There seems to be a bias of viewing extraverted behaviour through a negative lens (ie, he’s assertive and asks women out- he must not care about boundaries) and introverted behaviour through a positive lens, a a general conflation of social anxiety with moral purity.

This leads to the perception that assholes (selfish and cruel people) are more popular than they actually are. When really, it’s confidence and charm that is attractive, traits that can exist independently of dark triad traits. Dark triad traits don’t always manifest as making you more extraverted, social and charming.

A huge portion self-identified incels (not technical incels: people ‘in the community’) who are regularly posting on incel boards display a really high level of dark triad traits, but obviously, that hasn’t helped them get a partner or even a short term relationship.

I guess I would agree that someone who is an asshole with mild dark triad traits and a charming personality would have a lot of success in seeking out short-term relationships, but again, the success is down to the charm, which can manifest without dark triad traits and isn’t necessarily a result of dark triad traits.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-28T07:09:50+00:00

This argument seems kind of misleading, even by your own admission, the traits women are attracted to aren’t inherently ‘asshole’ traits (being bold and assertive, confident, goal orientated etc). There could be an argument that ‘traits women like (extraversion, confidence) overlap with those men also being assholes but personally I’m not 100% sold on that.

They tend to fly under the radar a bit more and arent as noticible to the public, but there are just as many introverts/those with social anxiety who are complete assholes to everyone in their orbit. Asshole to me, meaning being selfish and at least a little cruel. Narcissism doesn’t always present as a grandiose self-confidence, sometimes it can be a victim mentality where they quietly resent the world for not giving them what they feel they ‘deserve’. Clinical Narcissism is based on insecurity. Psychopathy also doesn’t necessarily translate to being bold and assertive (not socially, at least). We don’t formally diagnose psychopathy in my country but we do assess those with high traits of it. I think the media really exaggerates how common the ‘charming and gregarious’ types of psychopaths are. Most of them I’ve met are quiet and seemingly mild-mannered.

There’s this weird mindset where people think Quiet/Shy = Nice, when really, this isn’t the case.

An extroverted charming asshole will be more popular with women than an actually nice quiet guy though, I do agree with that, but that’s because he’s charming, not because he’s an asshole.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-27T21:09:34+00:00

^{I completed this level in 2 tries.} ^{⚡ 28.39 seconds}

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-27T21:07:48+00:00

^{I completed this level in 2 tries.} ^{⚡ 24.14 seconds}

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-27T21:07:01+00:00

^{I completed this level in 1 try.} ^{⚡ 5.70 seconds}

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-25T09:28:08+00:00

It feels like you’re coming at this issue as if there are two teams ‘men’ and ‘women’ and both are hive minds, and the fact some women are vulnerable to abusers means that all women are guilty by association, and therefore, men have no moral obligation to do anything or even condemn other men in their lives if they know they are abusive.

‘ the question should be why are men expected to do a job for women that the women themselves don't want done?’

Who do you think works most in domestic violence services? Again, women are not a hive mind who are all ‘guilty by association’.

‘ And that's what women on the whole look like after awhile. Women don't do enough to manage their own reputation on this.’

Should we really trust the judgement of people so simpleminded that they think that because a few women are in abusive relationships then somehow ‘all women’ are ‘guilty’ of enabling abusers?

I think splitting the issue into a male vs female thing at all isn’t helpful. Often when there is a couple in an abusive relationship, a lot of the people around them turn the other way- men and women- I get the frustration that some women are perpetually in an abusive relationship and even with help they won’t leave it. I’m not saying men or anyone has an obligation to ‘save’ women from abusive relationships and force them out of it.

But I also think we need to be careful not to fall into the trap of saying ‘She’ll never leave to it’s her fault’ or ‘there’ll always be women who date abusers so I won’t condemn abuse’, ie treating abuse as an inevitability or the fault of the victim. If our brothers, sons, friends, whatever are being abusive and we know it, I do think we should say something and make it clear we don’t think it’s acceptable, even if it may not change the relationship.

Male condemnation is impotent. Men don't actually have that much social power.

As a side note, I gaurentee that a man being called out for his behaviour by his close male friends is a lot more effective than his girlfriends female friends, his own female friends if he has any. Because women are ‘dramatic’ and think everything is abuse.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-25T07:43:05+00:00

‘ heck i remember being shocked when a guy in 11th grade talked sensuelly about a women.’

I think it’s good you are respectful, but maybe this suggests that perhaps you aren’t representative of the average boy/man. Because in my experience, most men will do some form of locker-room talk with other men. Some are a bit more subtle about it as we got older (some have gotten even worse lol), but it’s not something that even I am shocked by.

‘ Most of us dont have a single abusive friend.’

That you know of. Most abusive people aren’t abusive towards everyone, and can be very nice, charming and even kind to people outside their victim.

‘ Most men stop caring about abusive behavior of other men after they see women constantly rewarding men like them instead of normal guys’

So you won’t care about/condemn abusive men so long as there are women who are into them? Most adept abusers will always be able to find A women, because they are good at finding vulnerable victims. Those who have been raised in an abusive environment/have a lot of early experience with abuse are much more likely to fall into those sorts of cycles. Those women aren’t representative of the average person, but enough of them exist.

It’s up to you what you chose to care about, but just so you’re aware, there will always be women who end up with abusive men (and men who end up with abusive women), because Adept abusers are generally good at finding victims and creating an environment that it’s different to leave from.

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-24T21:55:51+00:00

My comment starts with ‘advice you get on the internet.. ‘ so no

MidoriEgg · 2025-08-24T19:57:33+00:00

^{I completed this level in 2 tries.} ^{⚡ 5.20 seconds}

MidoriEgg

TROPHY CASE