liberal women have been complaining about conservative men on dating sites for over a decade now. they caught on to “apolitical” a while ago, not sure what the current meta is.
agreement isn’t the only thing but there is a floor for a lot of people.
the author’s contention is that white liberal feminists are not finding partners because they are insufficiently radical in their politics (unlike the virtuous author). are these liberal women you are referring to complaining about men being too radical? is the issue for these women that they haven’t read Capital? are their potential beaus waiting for them, if only they joined a co-op or foods not bombs?
this is a fantasy. there are plenty of liberal men and women. the issue, for these women, and of reduced partnering generally, is not a lack of options, it’s not a lack of a pool of liberal men, if it is really an issue at all. the people not partnering, who are rationalizing their lack of partnering as moral deficiency in the other gender, are deluding themselves about the nature of changing gender roles and expectations, of structure issues defining the dating market, and, mostly, their own attraction and expectations.
liberal women are wrong qua being liberal, and only in the domain of this moral stance. they aren’t wrong because this stance substantially reducing the number of potential life partners they could match with, or not sleeping with the author.
Based on what right-wing YouTubers are doing, I’d think they’re not labelling themselves at all and avoiding buzzwords like “woke” entirely. Use vaguely anti-establishment phrases like hating corporations. Linking to studies/long form doghshit articles that aren’t good or don’t support their claims in a pseudo-intellectual way. Use IdPol for themselves by claiming POC, disability, LGBTQ status in some tangential way. Try to reframe their views of minorities and pseudoscience as “choice-based”/“tye right to choose” etc.
liberal women have been complaining about conservative men on dating sites for over a decade now. they caught on to “apolitical” a while ago, not sure what the current meta is.
agreement isn’t the only thing but there is a floor for a lot of people.
The current meta is not using dating sites.
Thank god
that’s always been the meta
i’m not sure what you’re taking issue with.
the author’s contention is that white liberal feminists are not finding partners because they are insufficiently radical in their politics (unlike the virtuous author). are these liberal women you are referring to complaining about men being too radical? is the issue for these women that they haven’t read Capital? are their potential beaus waiting for them, if only they joined a co-op or foods not bombs?
this is a fantasy. there are plenty of liberal men and women. the issue, for these women, and of reduced partnering generally, is not a lack of options, it’s not a lack of a pool of liberal men, if it is really an issue at all. the people not partnering, who are rationalizing their lack of partnering as moral deficiency in the other gender, are deluding themselves about the nature of changing gender roles and expectations, of structure issues defining the dating market, and, mostly, their own attraction and expectations.
liberal women are wrong qua being liberal, and only in the domain of this moral stance. they aren’t wrong because this stance substantially reducing the number of potential life partners they could match with, or not sleeping with the author.
Based on what right-wing YouTubers are doing, I’d think they’re not labelling themselves at all and avoiding buzzwords like “woke” entirely. Use vaguely anti-establishment phrases like hating corporations. Linking to studies/long form doghshit articles that aren’t good or don’t support their claims in a pseudo-intellectual way. Use IdPol for themselves by claiming POC, disability, LGBTQ status in some tangential way. Try to reframe their views of minorities and pseudoscience as “choice-based”/“tye right to choose” etc.