Zuckerberg did not use those exact words but did call for more masculine energy in corporations, saying they are “neutered” and are “trying to get away” from masculine energy, while a culture that “celebrates the aggression” has merits. He also said “you want feminine energy, you want masculine energy,” while adding “you’re gonna have parts of society that have more of one or the other. I think that’s all good.”
Visit us @ !fediverse_vs_disinfo@lemmy.dbzer0.com for all the latest news on the topics of astroturfing, propaganda and disinformation.
deleted by creator
First we give corporations personhood and now they’re getting genders.
[The] kind of masculine energy, I think, is good. Obviously, you know, society has plenty of that, but I think corporate culture was really, like, trying to get away from it. […] All these forms of energy are good, and I think having a culture that, like, celebrates the aggression a bit more has its own merits that are really positive.
Could not agree more. Let’s all fucking murder Zuckerberg in the street!!! RRRRaaaarrrrrgh! Kill! Kill! Kill! Kill! Kill Zuckerberg the fascist horror! Rip his fucking head off!
Oh yeah. I’m feelin’ it. Totes positive Zuckerbiggles. Called it again, techbro. That’s why you get the cockside seat to Trumpmerica, brah!
Reminder: Snopes was acquired in a hostile takeover by an advertisement and media group
See this comment for a breakdown of this: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/34341361/15643163
I’ve include the content here, to save you the click (credit to @Optional@lemmy.world :
Okay so I sludged through all the links and comments and I think I have it now:
- Barbara and David Mikkelson started Snopes. They got divorced, she sold her half to RIchmond and Schoentrup.
- They had met because Richmond started an ad company, their first client was Snopes.
- After Barbara sold, David claimed they only got 40% not 50% of the shares which meant everyone spent money and time on lawyers, which everyone loves doing.
- Around this time, Richmond sold his ad company. He sold it to Sovrn, who - if they did own Snopes it would totally suck, but they don’t. Richmond held on to Snopes.
- In 2022, Richmond and Mikkelson finally agreed to a buyout where Mikkelson would take more of their money and then GTFO. Which he did.
So no, Richmond (and his ‘business partner Schoentrup’ - I suppose just a financial backer? it’s not clear.) runs Snopes by hisself. No ad company involved.
I mean, you could argue that someone who started an ad company at all, in the first place, should be pelted with rocks and garbage, but even then he sold it before fully acquiring all of Snopes. Presumably, they were also keenly aware that running Snopes and an ad company would not be a good look.
I think that’s it.
So in truth, Snopes is now run by Richmond, who sold his ad business prior to taking over Snopes. Yes, he used to own an ad company, which isn’t a great look, but considering he divested from the ad business before taking control of Snopes that was at least a step in the right direction.
I never thought I’d agree with Zuckerberg, but here we are. He is right. Certain elements of our society have been telling men to stifle their inherent nature for years now. Much of the younger generation’s move to the right is fallout from that messaging. Yes, let’s continue making toxic behavior taboo, but just being masculine doesn’t make someone or something toxic, and that’s been the general attitude lately.
been telling men to stifle their inherent nature
Boy does that sound rapey
Nothing I said had any sexual overtones at all. The fact that your mind went to sex and then rape says a whole lot more about you than me.
No you just use the same coded language that rape apologists use and you’re to scared to be clear.
Companies already allow “positive masculinity”. It’s the negative aspects of masculinity like being aggressive towards others, bullying, sexual harassment etc that corporations have been working to minimise. This move is just a dog whistle to let the Republicans know FB isn’t going to be “woke” any more. The inevitable result will be an uptick in workplace harassment and sexual assaults towards women and minority groups.
What do you mean by “inherent nature” here?
And more importantly, what do you think Zuck means?
I don’t see the problem with this. We increasingly hear that masculine = bad. It’s not bad, it’s just different. It serves different purposes at different times.
Imagine downvoting this person for stating facts. It is insane to me that there are people who can’t even entertain the concept that the human species is dimorphic and it requires both men and women to function.
Kids (really all people too) need to experience both feminine and masculine “energy” (or whatever you want to call it) in order to be healthy and well rounded when they grow up. This is not some hair brained guess either. There are years and years worth of data that prove this over and over. Whether or not they want to admit it the human species is evolved and designed around having a father figure that brings certain “masculine energy” to the family as well as a mother that brings the “feminine energy”.
Imagine living in an English speaking country today and not being in the midst of “masculine energy” at every turn.
When did I say there wasn’t “masculine energy” around? I was just piggy backing off that other guys comment when I saw he was downvoted for pointing out an objective truth. I clearly state that it’s important for both feminine and masculine energy to exist.
I’m not even touching the current gender wars nonsense. I am literally just talking about humans as a species and you come in here with this “men are everywhere”. Like that isn’t what either of us were talking about lol.
I clearly state that it’s important for both feminine and masculine energy to exist.
I guess you’d have to define “exist” in that context. I agree it’s important that two things exist, but the clear comment Zuckerberg is making is there should be more “masculine energy” “in business” as if it wasn’t already inundated in it.
Typically support for that notion involves the mistaken belief that “everything” is “neutral” and somehow the “masculine” is being lost, overrun, dismissed, or some such, which is just simply not the case in almost any culture we’d recognize in recent history.
I’ve worked in corporate America for all of my adult life. Women and pro women’s initiatives are non-stop. I would argue that if anything the working environment in most offices (I am only talking about office workers here) is leaning towards more feminine energy currently.
My current work space is 3 to 1 female. My last job was overwhelmingly female as well.
The only jobs I’ve worked that had “masculine energy” were the physical labor jobs I have done. Those were exclusively men. Not many women fighting for more feminine energy in the jobs where you spend all day crawling through literal shit sometimes.
