• 0 Posts
  • 10 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: July 29th, 2026

help-circle
  • you seem to be implying high testosterone = bro = fascist

    I think it’s more that obsession with testosterone and projected/performative masculinity (i.e. machismo, toxic masculinity) is very much associated with fascist leanings.

    There are a whole lot of fat, angry, unhappy middle-aged men who want to feel powerful and intimidating. Most of them don’t want to do the actual work of getting fit. They don’t want to go to a doctor, because that’s for weak people, like women and effeminate men. They don’t understand that their excess adipose tissue is messing up their hormones. Ads tell them that they just need more protein and sunlight on their testicles and finally they’ll feel powerful. They post passive-aggressive meat breakfast photos on Instagram and glare at people from their pickups, while listening to an ad telling them to buy some unregulated supplement that will boost their testosterone for only $29.99 per month.

    There are also a bunch of young men who have grown up watching toxic influencers. They’re taking steroids and trying to get huge. It’s all toxic masculinity and masked insecurity.

    Incidentally, I’m not in any way saying that fitness or masculinity are inherently toxic or fascist. It is, however, a popular pipeline for recruiting men into far-right and fascist ideologies these days.



  • There was a fitness epidemic in the 90s?!

    Aerobics and running were big in the late 70s to early 80s, but the 90s was about being big and soft. The clothes were oversized. Waists were high. Centerfolds had big boobs and wide waists.

    The 90s was obsessed with “lite”, i.e. cutting fats – especially saturated fats – out of foods, and with lowering cholesterol. Oh, and fiber. I don’t recall any fitness craze, though.

    You’re absolutely right about the right-wing machismo trend. Manly men eat lots of meat and maximize protein. Just look how manly I am with my steak, nevermind how I waddled in from my lifted pickup.




  • Most importantly, love requires both partners to be emotionally vulnerable, right? So then under gender roles, men can’t love women, only objectify them?

    By that logic, a man or woman can’t love his or her child. Children don’t really want to see their parent(s) being vulnerable. Is it good to model vulnerability for, say, a teenager? Sure. But if you’re breaking down in tears in front of your four year old, you’re probably going to upset and frighten the child.

    I think that people’s interpretations and expectations of ‘love’ vary tremendously, and plenty of people feel like they’re in secure, loving relationships that you wouldn’t see any value in.