Hope
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hope/

Edit: javi2541997 - I see you have deleted your post. Why? — Amity

Yes, sorry, Amity. After reading my post again, I realised that it wasn't well elaborated. I saw that you didn't reply to my post yet, so I thought I was in time to delate what I wrote before you could read it. 

But I see I was wrong because you quoted a paragraph of that post in time.

I tend to be wary about what I write. Maybe too much, and maybe it wasn't a big deal.  :sweat:

I tend to be wary about what I write. Maybe too much, and maybe it wasn't a big deal. — javi2541997

I think we can all be wary about what we write - sometimes editing what we really think or feel.
And that's fair enough. It's good to be thoughtful and consider how we present our views to others. I too have deleted some posts. Regretting either the quality or quantity - my tone or whatever.

However, your thoughts stimulated without need for further elaboration. Imagining a 'what if' scenario :up: You are that Creative :fire:

I think that some of the things discussed about creativity are pertinent. To well-being.
The fear of making mistakes can block us. And that is where some education systems let us down.

Where mistakes are punished. And different kinds of intelligence are not explored or given free rein. There is a richness in imagination. A real gift if used wisely. To educate the whole being.

How can 'optimism' be 'inhumane'? — Amity

One example, at the personal and interpersonal level, is toxic positivty.

Otherwise, a few times on TPF I've made use of Terry Eagleton's distinction between hope and optimism. The way I see it, optimism, particularly with respect to society and history, has a tendency to disregard or minimize bad stuff, whereas hope does not.

I have plenty of experience with toxic positivity, and I've noticed that it is humourless. So my tentative scheme is like this: on one side we have optimism, humourlessness, and inhumanity--a lack of attention to real people and real experience--and on the other side we have hope and humour, where humour is often if not always built on an attention to misfortune.

Excellent News.

The Guardian said content on the platform about which it had longstanding concerns included far-right conspiracy theories and racism. It added that the site’s coverage of the US presidential election had crystallised its decision.

“This is something we have been considering for a while given the often disturbing content promoted or found on the platform, including far-right conspiracy theories and racism,” it said.

It added: “The US presidential election campaign served only to underline what we have considered for a long time: that X is a toxic media platform and that its owner, Elon Musk, has been able to use its influence to shape political discourse.” — Guardian - No longer posts on Elon Musk's X

...on one side we have optimism, humourlessness, and inhumanity--a lack of attention to real people and real experience--and on the other side we have hope and humour, where humour is often if not always built on an attention to misfortune. — Jamal

That's given me plenty to consider. My first reaction is that I don't care for the either/or scenario. Optimism includes hopefulness. But yes, I agree that some can minimise the bad stuff. To the extent that can be 'toxic' I have yet to explore.

I tend to go with hope and see it as a motivating force. To bring about change. And with that comes courage and creativity. A positive way forward. It can come from misfortune or simply wanting something better. It is a noun, a verb and a philosophical concept. Is optimism more of a psychological state or personality type? A few more P's added to the list.
From positive psychology: https://positivepsychology.com/learned-optimism/

Humour and a lack of it can travel alongside both, no?
Black humour. Is there such a thing as 'white humour'?

Here we go. The Guardian is taking it on :fire:

In addition to withdrawing from Musk's X, a reporter questions Project 2025.

Kevin Roberts, the head of the influential rightwing thinktank the Heritage Foundation, told a Guardian reporter to “go to hell” at the launch of Roberts’s new book on Tuesday night, then threw the reporter out of the venue, apparently in response to reporting on the organization.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/13/kevin-roberts-project-2025-book-events

No more invites, then? Pretty much what happened on the Tory watch with Channel 4 news blocked.
The hard right can't stand the light. No scrutiny allowed. So much for freedom.

Isn't there a need to explore all aspects of humans and their place in whatever worlds they find themselves in? — Amity

Sure, but I perceive no shortage of writers exploring the deepest, darkest crannies, describing the vilest acts in the most graphic terms. They don't need any help from me. I'm more interested in the small, everyday pleasures and pains, loyalties and betrayals, courageous and craven acts or ordinary people. Lately, I've been exploring how someone decides which side to take in a conflict. If my protagonists end up with the forces of light, I'm in no position to fault them.
I've written sad stories and happy ones; they tell me the tone they prefer.

I'm not sure about that judgment of optimism and hope. Have never thought about which is humane -- but then, I sniff around the word 'humane' like a poodle at the corner lamp-post. On reflection, I tend to reserve hope for specific situations, in which something bad is likely to happen, but may yet be averted, and optimism as a general outlook on life and the world. I have some hope for individuals, for ideas, for the preservation of seeds, culture and knowledge. But not for this civilization, about which I'm wholly pessimistic.

Small footnote about poetry in school. I've read some quite remarkable collections of children's poems, written as school assignment. I imagine the inept and resentful ones were omitted. I definitely think poetry should be taught - both reading and discussion and the mechanics of writing. I wouldn't force any child to submit a poem for grading, but I would test them on understanding.

Hope
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hope/ — Amity

Thanks. :up:

Fwiw, my conception of courage sans hope is primarily indebted to Aristotle, Spinoza & Camus (as well as e.g. Laozi, Epicurus, Epictetus, P. Zapffe, F. Kafka, S. Beckett, C. Rosset, A. Murray ... who aren't mentioned in the article) and grounded in lived experience.

:death: :flower:

Fwiw, my conception of courage sans hope is primarily indebted to Aristotle, Spinoza & Camus (as well as e.g. Laozi, Epicurus, Epictetus, P. Zapffe, S. Beckett, C. Rosset, A. Murray ... who aren't mentioned in the article) and grounded in lived experience. — 180 Proof

Yes, I do appreciate that, thanks.
However, I don't have a full understanding of this and what it means for you. This conception of 'courage sans hope'. For those, like me, with limited time, energy and resources and not quite so invested in philosophical concepts, there is always wiki. From the mythology section on 'Hope':

From ancient times, people have recognized that a spirit of hope had the power to heal afflictions and helps them bear times of great suffering, illnesses, disasters, loss, and pain caused by the malevolent spirits and events.[48] In Hesiod's Works and Days, the personification of hope is named Elpis.

Norse mythology however considered Hope (Vön) to be the slobber dripping from the mouth of Fenris Wolf:[49] their concept of courage rated most highly a cheerful bravery in the absence of hope.[50 — Wiki - Hope

How does your conception of courage/hope compare with a Norse warrior?
Care to tell your story, or part of it? Sans salivating :wink:

My experience probably leans more to 'hope sans courage'.

I have hope and it asks nothing of or from me. It's just there. Along with love. I also 'hope that...X, Y or Z'.
Generally, it is a hope for better wellbeing. For individuals and other beings in the world.

I may have courage in dealing with challenging health issues and services. My own and others. But I think it always stems from or coexists with hope. There is hope, along with a sense of perspective.
A case of 'Hope for the best, prepare for the worse'. Or 'plan for the worse, hope for the best'.
A mix of optimism and being realistic.

***

In previous posts, I've mentioned Emily Dickinson's poem 'Hope' and how I was drawn to it.
It's interesting to consider her religious school curriculum where:

religious questions were examined and the state of the students’ faith assessed. The young women were divided into three categories: those who were “established Christians,” those who “expressed hope,” and those who were “without hope.”

Much has been made of Emily’s place in this latter category and of the widely circulated story that she was the only member of that group. Years later fellow student Clara Newman Turner remembered the moment when Mary Lyon “asked all those who wanted to be Christians to rise.” Emily remained seated. No one else did. Turner reports Emily’s comment to her: “‘They thought it queer I didn’t rise’—adding with a twinkle in her eye, ‘I thought a lie would be queerer.’ — Poetry Foundation - Emily Dickinson

Here is her poem: “Hope” is the thing with feathers. Read by Claire Danes and signed by Rachel, age 9.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/video/77372/hope-is-the-thing-with-feathers

***

In today's situation, I think that people such as yourself committed to a cause and willing to show up and fight for it have courage and also hope. Hope for a better future. Hope to persuade others.
Showing how Democratic values are different, better than those of hard-right Republicans.

It will need more of this hope and courage in the days to come.

Courage, mon ami :strong: :pray:

Sure, but I perceive no shortage of writers exploring the deepest, darkest crannies, describing the vilest acts in the most graphic terms. They don't need any help from me. I'm more interested in the small, everyday pleasures and pains, loyalties and betrayals, courageous and craven acts or ordinary people. Lately, I've been exploring how someone decides which side to take in a conflict. If my protagonists end up with the forces of light, I'm in no position to fault them. — Vera Mont

Hey. Steady on Vera!
I wasn't asking you to go deep, deep down into depravity or its torture chambers.
It was about you stopping at Chapter 3 because you couldn't keep your nasty character from turning nice. What's wrong with keeping complex and contradictory aspects of a character? Doesn't that make her richer with hidden depths?

Interesting to explore side-taking in conflict. How recent events can split families right down the middle.
How to heal that wound, if ever we can...

I sniff around the word 'humane' like a poodle at the corner lamp-post. — Vera Mont

Love it! :cool:

What's wrong with keeping complex and contradictory aspects of a character? Doesn't that make her richer with hidden depths? — Amity

Yes. But it wouldn't be a Gothic novel then; it would be literary fiction and I hadn't signed up for that much effort.* Even the one that I intended as a kind of spoof of historical romance turned itself into a subversive social commentary. Damn things just won't stay where I tell them to sit.
*Though, come to think of it.... I wonder where I put all those notes... Probably in the storage room, in a mouldy binder, yellowing...

I don't have a full understanding of this and what it means for you. This conception of 'courage sans hope'. — Amity

Consider again the sections featuring Aristotle, Spinoza & Camus in the SEP article on Hope –

e.g. "Sisyphus" endlessly rolling his philosopher's stone; casualties making love in the trenches and raising children in foxholes; the homeless singing the blues to momentarily chase away blue devils...

"You must go on. I can't go on. I'll go on."

"Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better."

:fire:

Interesting to explore side-taking in conflict. — Amity

I didn't get into the big picture, just individuals: How their minds changed and what events brought that change about.

You've both given me much to think about :flower:
I have a few things I'd like to consider and question. Mostly, concerning hope and creativity. Later...

Before I go out, I have this article to share re global gender issues in politics. With stats:

What’s behind the global political divide between young men and women?
Trump’s victory in the US shone a light on the growing political polarisation between between young male and female voters happening all over the world

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/14/us-election-donald-trump-voters-gender-race-data

Sounds to me like the eternal social tension: competition vs co-operation, between vertical and horizontal society. In a vertical society, there are clear distinctions in status, in privileges and duties, in social and familial roles. While men are dominated by rulers and bosses, they have little control of their lives. If they lose superiority over an even lower caste of men, and then control of their household, what status, what source of pride do they have left? How they feel about that, we've been aware of the backlash for years, the bitter recriminations against women and minorities, the anxiety disguised as bravado. Moreover, with dwindling resources and growing population, the competition for the last of everything grows more fierce every day.
They want the middle ages back, because they cannot imagine anything better than having someone to kick down at while their masters give them attaboys.

They want the middle ages back, because they cannot imagine anything better than having someone to kick down at while their masters give them attaboys. — Vera Mont

May the pox be upon them in the new Golden Age of MAHA. Make America Healthy Again. Really?!

Robert F Kennedy Jr has been nominated to lead the Health and Human Services department. This man is someone who is anti-vaccinations.
If that becomes policy, it dangerous to the population and anti-choice.
So much for freedom.

I've had enough of this. Turning to hope. I find that I already explored this!
Way back when I felt up to starting threads...2 years ago. Reading it now, I feel quite amazed...

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13686/questions-of-hope-love-and-peace/p1

I read the SEP article again, as if for the first time. Notes:

I was surprised by Kant and his question 'For what may I hope?' as one fundamental to philosophy. The 3 objects of hope: 1. own happiness 2. moral progress 3. moral improvement of the human race.

Camus' apparent negative view of hope comes from the idea that human existence is absurd. I don't see this as having anything to do with courage. Also it is specific to religious hope for life after death or a social utopia. The image of Sisyphus is one of perseverance but to what end? And why would lack of hope for a better future make him 'happy' ? Indeed, there is a suggestion that Camus allows for a 'strange hope'. He called 'The Rebel' a book of hope.

So many definitions of hope, its role and function in analytical philosophy...

'Radical hope' (Lear) catches my eye. Where positive hope is an active response to political injustice. (It seems to tie in with literature's 'hopepunk' ? Still to be discussed.)

When it comes to climate change, some philosophers see hope as having instrumental value. It 'sustains action where the attainment of the ultimate goal - managing climate change - is uncertain.' (McKinnon 2014, Roser 2019).

But, this is where I must stop. We are in the Lounge. A place to chat about kittens. Over to you, Vera!

PS I was also rather taken by the thoughts of Ernst Bloch. Wondering about him, I searched and found:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13030/ernst-bloch-and-the-philosophy-of-hope/p1

@180 Proof's
'Hope' is just lipstick on a nightmare.

Yes. But it wouldn't be a Gothic novel then; it would be literary fiction and I hadn't signed up for that much effort.* Even the one that I intended as a kind of spoof of historical romance turned itself into a subversive social commentary. Damn — Vera Mont

This started me wondering about genres, subgenre and how certain kinds of writing are classified. How they might limit the writer by having a need to keep to criteria. Why can't a nasty Gothic character have nice elements?

I am bemused by the 'hopepunk' sandwich. A genre/subgenre between 'grimdark' and 'noblebright'.

Initially describing a subgenre, its use has extended to refer to motivations, narrative tone, outlook. The editors of Uncanny Magazine define it as "radical empathy" and "radical kindness", contrasting it to the hopelessness of grimdark.[9] Rowland wrote that "Hopepunk isn’t pristine and spotless. Hopepunk is grubby, because that’s what happens when you fight."[10] Although they may include horrible events, injustice, and inequality, hopepunk stories have characters who choose to act, rejecting pessimism and passivity. Positive human traits and community contribute to solutions.[11
Stories in the hopepunk subgenre reject the fatalism and cynicism of grimdark. Hopepunk characters persevere, believing in the possibility of something better in the face of difficult realities.[12] Hopepunk is an approach in which characters choose to fight to make things better, and are motivated by noble motives.

Wiki has it all.

And then there is Star Trek. Jean-Luc Picard: Starfleet's Hopepunk Captain.
Does he stand as a testament to the power of hope?
https://www.startrek.com/en-un/news/jean-luc-picard-starfleets-hopepunk-captain

Terry Pratchett's Good Omens - Hopepunk?

Hopepunk as a philosophy?

By telling hopepunk stories, we necessarily have to be asking questions like, “How do we care about each other in a world which so aggressively doesn’t care about so many of the people in our communities? Who do we consider community, and is that definition too narrow? How do we fight back against the people who want to make us sit down and shut up?”

By asking ourselves these questions, hopepunk expands from simple “genre” to an entire life philosophy. It sticks in the back of your head and changes you, a little bit.

There is a need for hopepunk because our president is a fascist.

Because there are children dying in concentration camps within our borders. Because Jeff Bezos makes nearly nine million dollars per hour while his warehouse employees risk homelessness. Because we think it’s normal that people should go bankrupt if they get ill and need medical assistance, or that they should get an Uber to the hospital instead of an ambulance. Because climate change is real. Because children have safety drills to practice what to do in case of an armed shooter in their school. Because racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and ableism exist.And there is a need for hopepunk because it reminds us that these dragons can be slain. Because it reminds us that there’s power in a union, that communties banding together can make a difference. Because the moral arc of the universe bends towards justice. We’ve beaten them before, and we can beat them again, and the next time after that. The work is never finished, and the fight is never permanently won. But we keep fighting anyway, because it is the fight itself, not “winning”, that’s the point. — Den of Geek - A Hopepunk Guide - Interview with Alexandra Rowland

NB the interview took place in Nov 2019.

Follow up:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/15/the-boys-in-our-liberal-school-are-different-now-that-trump-has-won

...the beginning of a new wave of male conservatism that was infiltrating our school. Obsession with achieving a more muscular body through excessive exercise and intense dieting fueled by ridiculous social media campaigns fell far outside the realm of healthy self-care. And the desire to socialize only with other boys stood in stark contrast to the co-ed activities we were accustomed to since childhood.

It hadn’t taken long for this focus on machismo to creep into these boys’ mindsets and conversations. Seemingly harmless disrespectful comments with witty undertones toward girls became commonplace, and feelings of traditional male dominance started to sneak back into our friend groups.

While these are just observations within our own high school, we believe that this is happening across the country. Young, well-off white boys from liberal families are being tempted by conservatism simply to protect an archaic idea of masculinity that guarantees them inherent power. It is not as if they are against abortion, or care much about the economy or immigration, or even feel remotely attracted to the rest of conservative dogma. But clearly, a shift back toward traditional gender roles is resonating with them now as progression toward female empowerment threatens their already delicate self esteem.

So how do we address this, going forward? How do we ensure that young boys practice critical thinking instead of falling victim to Trump’s rhetoric with its focus on recommitting to gender stereotypes that we believed had finally been eradicated?

Parents, we urge you to be aware of this growing phenomenon and teach your children about the dangers of calculated political movements designed to further one politician’s agenda. Until we do so, it is likely this pattern will continue. Boys in our school as young as eight are beginning to exhibit these same misogynistic tendencies that we never remember noticing when we were their age. And the most dangerous aspect of this is how little it’s talked about in mainstream media and how easily it has been overlooked in progressive communities. In fact this is an epidemic that will continue to spread rapidly until we start talking about it.

Camus' apparent negative view of hope comes from the idea that human existence is absurd. I don't see this as having anything to do with courage. — Amity

You can be realistic; understand the futility and absurdity of life, and yet have compassion for those who suffer greater hardship or pain. So keep on keeping on, alleviating as much of that pain as you are able. There is little reward and plenty of risk in service, and so it takes more courage than hoping for improvement to come from elsewhere or from the hope of a better afterlife. (Camus had an effect on my teens.)

This started me wondering about genres, subgenre and how certain kinds of writing are classified. How they might limit the writer by having a need to keep to criteria. Why can't a nasty Gothic character have nice elements? — Amity

They can, but the author needs to be very subtle. The average reader of that genre might miss subtlety.
The very popular escapist genres are easy and quick to write, because they're formulaic: plug in the necessary elements in a slightly different order. They're also read only once and quickly discarded. If you're going to mess with the formula, elevate the novel to something approaching literary fiction, it loses most of its fan base and appeals to a smaller, more discerning audience.... or nobody at all.
I read a trilogy by Ray Bradbury that would be loosely classified as psychological thrillers. The first one, Death is a Lonely Business, was wonderful; I reread it twice in later years. The other two were disappointing: the impetus (fond remembrance of a time and place) was absent; the stories had no soul. Yes, Bradbury can miss!
My favourite aunt had a saying for when she learned something that went counter to her assumptions: "A world collapsed inside me."

Actually, I'm not a strict adherent to genres; I just understand why they're helpful to the reader. If there is a zombie or vampire on the cover, I'm gone. If it says young adult, I tiptoe around it, and if it's designated H, I run the other way.

Does he stand as a testament to the power of hope? — Amity

I think Gene Roddenberry did. But that was in the optimistic, expansive, society-improving 60's and 70's. There is nothing grubby about Star Trek NG, even when they have moral dilemmas, or when they're forced to fight.

I hated the cinematic version of Good Omens, perhaps even more than I normally would have, because I like David Tenant and found that over-the-top campy performance embarrassing. The book OTOH, was charming and quietly amusing. The central characters were determined mortal kids, not the supernaturals. Thereafter, I didn't watch American Gods, which is all Gaiman, and therefore much darker. I'm curious, but afraid to find out what the movie people made of that.

Footnote to genres. I think they're like cliches: the original examples were strong literary efforts; once their popularity grew, there rose many inferior imitators. There is only one Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, one Dracula one Rebecca, one monumental Lord of the Rings; there are maybe a dozen very successful - I don't like to say imitators; say rather, stories on the same theme. After that, it becomes predictable, which is what fans are looking for.

As for convergence and subdivision of genres, they're too confusing for me. I prefer to know whether I'm picking up a science fiction story based on actual science, or a fantasy with magic. But whether it's alternative history or speculative or post apocalyptic, I don't really care. I don't really understand about 'punk' in any context. I like William Gibson's stories, whether he's cyber, steam or rust.

Footnote on hope.
When I was in elementary school, they held drills on what to do in case of nuclear attack (duck and cover - I guess it's jut effective against gunmen) and Mr. McCarthy was ruining lives left, left and center. American children pledged allegiance, not to the constitution, but "to the flag and to the republic for which it stands: one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all," while Black people were barred from restaurants, excluded from schools and quite often got sentenced to years of hard labour for loitering.
That nation was, in fact, not merely divisible, but divided from its very inception. Things got better, with a lot of hard work, perseverance and sacrifice. Now they're worse again. The descents are fast; destruction is much easier than construction; destruction can be carried out by an army of drunken orcs, while construction takes vision, co-operation, forbearance, patience and fortitude.
I just don't believe there is time for another long upward slog.

And now, a word from our kittens:
They've discovered that collapsible tube with a window in the side. Even the big cats still play with it from time to time, but for the little guys, it's a whole playground.

I hated the cinematic version of Good Omens, perhaps even more than I normally would have, because I like David Tenant and found that over-the-top campy performance embarrassing. The book OTOH, was charming and quietly amusing. The central characters were determined mortal kids, not the supernaturals. — Vera Mont

No, Vera, just No!! I love Tennant and can't allow this :naughty:

I'm watching series 1 and up to episode 3 'Hard Times'.
The chemistry and dialogue between David Tennant and Michael Sheen - as devil and angel respectively - Wow. They are SO right in their roles - good and evil joining forces to prevent the end of the world. :fire:

As for any 'campness' - yeah, it is full on in parts. They can both vamp it up a little as they have fun.
But not so much that it detracts from the action. A combination of the best and worst human traits, with no absolute 'black and white' division. I suppose this could translate into a 'greyness' but no, we are treated to an extravaganza of vibrant colour.

The angel does stick to conventional white, from head to toe. Tennant goes wild with red hair, in varying styles. The black shades hiding his serpent eyes. But the inked snake still crawls up his neck, replacing Tennant's trademark sideburn. And then there is his snake-hipped slide-walk.

Tennant is instantly recognisable. There were moments when his languid, loucheness reminded me of Bill Nighy, another favourite. He is so channelling the spirit ! Then he struts off, rock-star style...hmmm...who is the most camp Rolling Stone?

There are quick nods to history. You need to be alert to catch some of them.
My ears pricked up at the mention of them both having business in Edinburgh.
And the crucifixion scene where the devil wonders why...

OK. Enough already...
I did listen to the book a while ago. I can't remember how different it is. But, hey, does it matter?
The visuals are so dastardly creative :halo: :cool:

That nation was, in fact, not merely divisible, but divided from its very inception. Things got better, with a lot of hard work, perseverance and sacrifice. Now they're worse again. The descents are fast; destruction is much easier than construction; destruction can be carried out by an army of drunken orcs, while construction takes vision, co-operation, forbearance, patience and fortitude.
I just don't believe there is time for another long upward slog. — Vera Mont

Yes. The quick descent. I once thought of life and its changing patterns as circles. All things must pass and come around again. Now, I think of a downward spiral and I'm not sure if it will spring back...

It all started with the devil Eve, don't you know.
I think we could spend time talking about the religious separation of males and females in places of worship and education. And a whole lot of other factors - feeding into the current narrative.

I wonder if we will ever go beyond our biology as animals. The need for protecting ourselves, family and resources. Even in the midst of cooperation there is competition. So it goes. Love and War.

Where some value the female as Madonna, others vilify her, even if she is acknowledged. (weak)
Where some value the male as God, others vilify him, as Tyrant. (strong)
The truth is the human is more complex with strengths and weaknesses combined.
Most people just get on with life, because there is nothing else for it...

I keep thinking about @180 Proof's quote:

'Hope' is just lipstick on a nightmare.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/703706

It sounds clever, creative and cryptic. What does it mean? @180 Proof :chin:

They've discovered that collapsible tube with a window in the side. Even the big cats still play with it from time to time, but for the little guys, it's a whole playground. — Vera Mont

See bolded. What is that, pray tell?!
Your kittens have the best story...having fun. Playing around. Hope to read more soon :flower:

I realise that my earlier copy and paste from the Guardian was lazy.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/947531
I'm also in danger of being seen as 'Ms Guardianista' :monkey: I know that it is better to read from a variety of sources and I have and still do. However, I only have time for one morning read and this usually provides balance with comments BTL.

I'm reading this part again and wondering...written by an anonymous High School student?

But clearly, a shift back toward traditional gender roles is resonating with them now as progression toward female empowerment threatens their already delicate self esteem.

So how do we address this, going forward? How do we ensure that young boys practice critical thinking instead of falling victim to Trump’s rhetoric with its focus on recommitting to gender stereotypes that we believed had finally been eradicated?

Parents, we urge you to be aware of this growing phenomenon and teach your children about the dangers of calculated political movements designed to further one politician’s agenda...

In fact this is an epidemic that will continue to spread rapidly until we start talking about it.

Perhaps I missed it but there seems to be a lack of interaction with the 'young boys' themselves. Either in a mixed group debate, an intervention by the teachers or informally face to face.
No interpersonal connection?

This is a one-sided view. I hope the guys are given an opportunity to speak their minds. And that there is not just a 'talking about it' but a careful listening. On all sides. Communicate.

*connecting, connecting*
Ms Guardianista at your service. I won't say a word...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/nov/16/zombie-apocalypse-dangerously-disconnected-world-rebecca-solnit