> Defending all this in a 3 hour Joe Rogan interview. Ranting about the lack of "masculine energy" at the company.
Was it as excruciatingly cringeworthy as it sounds? I don’t want to give them the view or spend three hours of my time on that, but I’d take a highlight of the weirdest moments.
> Is this history's most bizarre midlife crisis? What is going on with this man?
It feels like he suddenly became a Musk fanboy and wants to mimic him. Maybe because Zuckerberg completely failed at going into politics when he dipped his toes in it in the past and Musk just got his candidate elected.
No not really - it's quite a good interview. Here's the masculine energy bit if you want to judge for yourself. You only have to watch a couple of minutes to get an idea https://youtu.be/7k1ehaE0bdU?t=5329 To me "ranting" is not true. He calmly says he was brought up with girls and it's quite nice go get out and do martial arts for a change. To me that's normal and getting upset about 'men' not getting free tampons is kinda weird.
> Here's the masculine energy bit if you want to judge for yourself. You only have to watch a couple of minutes to get an idea
Thank you for the link, I did watch it.
> To me "ranting" is not true.
Agreed. That didn’t feel at all like a rant. Though from the little I watched I do disagree with him and think he doesn’t have a good understanding of the zeitgeist. He claims that culture has swung in the direction that “masculinity is bad” and “masculinity is toxic” when that’s not at the argument. The term “toxic masculinity” refers to specific traits of masculinity which promote destructive facets, it doesn’t mean that all masculinity is toxic.
Note I’m not implying you yourself don’t understand the concept, I’m merely taking this opportunity to add my own comments on the segment, and the reply to the post where you graciously provided a link seems like a good place.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, but seeing what seem to me to be colloquial, recently originating informal phrases linked to from Wikipedia seems a bit silly or giving conceited "get educated" vibes.
It reads as though that's somehow where it came from or is an authoritative source required to use or interpret it. In this case, the phrase vaguely associates toxicity with masculinity, and whether it's intended or not, if a more specific nuanced meaning is intended, then it should be articulated concisely with a different choice of language that probably should have been chosen in the first place; the intuitive interpretation is the one that takes hold.
In different contexts in real life, I've had people be outwardly racist, sexist, or otherwise prejudiced toward me, and when responded to in a very calm manner, they scoffed that "oh here's a book to read on why actually that's impossible" when actually nah we're all just using language, and if there's a progressive, genuine intention to create a space that's as equitable and as conflict-free as possible for all, than shit like that isn't going to fly.
Supposedly he actually talked about both "masculine energy" and "feminine energy" being valuable as opposed to the modern corporate environment being "neutral" or "neutered," so take that for whatever.
Was it as excruciatingly cringeworthy as it sounds? I don’t want to give them the view or spend three hours of my time on that, but I’d take a highlight of the weirdest moments.
> Is this history's most bizarre midlife crisis? What is going on with this man?
It feels like he suddenly became a Musk fanboy and wants to mimic him. Maybe because Zuckerberg completely failed at going into politics when he dipped his toes in it in the past and Musk just got his candidate elected.