To be fair, in the article he does give a pretty detailed and reasonable answer, which is more or less that if you’re a functional human being, people will find that attractive, so you should work on that. The lure of the easy dunk is hard to resist though 🤷🏻♂️
No the article does the same conflation as the rage bait framing — it moves from an assumption that leftists are men. Women have said everything he says, most of them better but he doesn’t include them in “people on the left”.
The frame of the piece is “This is a way to make the case to young men not to be total dicks” though. He’s not arguing that this is particularly original, nor that women haven’t been saying this all along. That’s a fair criticism of the piece, but I don’t think it invalidates it.
It's flawed from the get-go because it's coy about the actual goal of these men: not orgasm (or we'd talk toys, sex ed, sex workers, and destigmatizing all that) and not relationships (or we'd talk communication and more than sexual), but access to women. The focus is still on acquisition.
And to be blunter: why should we have to bribe young men "not to be dicks"*? Do they not have hands? *ie "treat women as human"
We shouldn't. They need to become human themselves so that they see others as humans too.
In which case we can't sell this to them as "how to get laid," because that still positions women as a prize they can earn. Not as egregious as PUAs, but nonetheless "do x in order to get girls." I think a lot of the approach he suggests in the piece would be useful. But his framework is poison.
“The progressive left seemingly has no opinion on men getting laid.” This is the premise. It is demonstrably false. Arguing from that position reinforces the idea that women (and queer people) are not part of the “progressive left”. There is no cleaning that up. It is wrong and it isn’t helpful.
The frame of the piece is “the left isn’t helping men get laid”. The left includes women, who are doing exactly that.
That’s not at all what I got from it. I read it as making the case that we can make a counter argument against right wing manchildishness based on being a responsible adult. If that is indeed his argument think it’s basically correct.
That’s a direct quote. it isn’t what I got from it. It is what he said. I’m not sure why I should have a better understanding of his point than he has of it.
The quote I see is "The progressive left seemingly has no opinion on men getting laid." The word "help" occurs twice in the piece: "helpful" and "self-help." To me, that says the left isn't making a case that cuts through like the right is. I'm afraid the service you posted isn't working for me.
Who is the “progressive left” in “The progressive left seemingly has no opinion on men getting laid."
I haven't the faintest idea. And yes, I agree that is a flaw in the piece. I just don't think it invalidates the whole argument that we can make the case for a masculinity built on taking responsibility for our lives.
Sound conclusions don’t usually follow from a bad premise. The premise reinforces precisely the thing he seems to think he is arguing against. I won’t agree to those conclusions piecemeal. But then I’m one of the type being ignored in his premise. I suppose I would feel that way.
Fair enough. I’m a massive fan of your work, by the way, so I will just quietly fanboy my way out of this argument 😁.
I think the outcry is less against the article itself and more about the state of the culture where men EVEN NEED TO BE TOLD "Consider being a functional human being." Ian Dunt is catching a lot of strays because the Right wing advice-o-sphere is a horrorshow.