Another thing, if you try and live with other people, especially strangers, and tell them you don't watch TV, and thus don't want to pay for it (i.e. support all the feminist bullshit on it), they will think you're a huge weirdo and super cheap.
What's up with American television?
- Thread starter Roosh
- Start date
- Status
I do own a television, but no service--it exists purely for rented movies and the occasional game. However, I've just moved, my stuff hasn't gotten here, and occasionally I'm tired enough after work and hours of walking to explore that I try TV...
...with the same observations, over here in the UK; TV shows are about weak men and too-smart-for-them women, advertisements are about clueless men being shown up by their wives and/or children. I'm going to be very glad to have my computer and workshop back and lose access to this. Interesting reexposure to it, though.
Does have the perverse effect of making me really miss my LTR woman I just left, though--feminine, caring, and absolutely hated TV. Good woman, that.
...with the same observations, over here in the UK; TV shows are about weak men and too-smart-for-them women, advertisements are about clueless men being shown up by their wives and/or children. I'm going to be very glad to have my computer and workshop back and lose access to this. Interesting reexposure to it, though.
Does have the perverse effect of making me really miss my LTR woman I just left, though--feminine, caring, and absolutely hated TV. Good woman, that.
Timoteo
Crow
HiFlo said:
This is all I watch. I haven't followed a "network" series since "Homicide: Life on the Streets" was cancelled. I also like "The Unit" and "24" and picked them up on DVD. I watch cable series and sports, along with travel and nature shows. Otherwise, tv and commercials are a joke.
porscheguy
Ostrich
Need we go any farther than "Here Comes Honey Boo Boo?"
Neil Skywalker said:
For you guys, you can't watch something if it isn't realistic. I'm the same way. I suspect that this trait is much more common among men who patronize these forums, and others like it.
I tell people I can't 'suspend disbelief,' that these shows are so unrealistic I can't enjoy them. They look at me funny - even if they agree with me, as to why the show is not realistic. They think "well, I don't see why that should *deter* you from watching the show." It's just unsettling, irritating even, for us to watch bullshit propaganda as HeyPete described, but most people don't seem to care.
Every time I go to the gym they're always showing the same episode of the same show, and it's just horrible. It's some kind of real-estate thing where a gay man in his 30s tries to sell the wife of the guy who fronted the band Styx on tens of thousands of dollars in upgrades to her shoe closet. I couldn't parody that shit if I tried.
What really shocks me is that people will pay like 100$ a month for this stuff.
What really shocks me is that people will pay like 100$ a month for this stuff.
sucio44 said:
More like:
"No more government funding for PBS if Romney becomes President. Sorry Big Bird."
PBS can exist without government funding. I know well one PBS station and you wouldn't believe the huge amount of waste, way too many employees, management earning $150k a year doing nothing, etc. PBS can survive, they just need to cut like all the other stations have already done and ramp up donations and sponsorships.
I own a TV strictly for video game usage. Most of my TV watching is for sports anyway, and I can see those on demand online at no cost. Same for the handful of TV shows (all of which are on cable only) I still bother to follow.
Here are the facts:
-Women control the majority of household spending.
-Women account for 85% of all consumer purchases.
-Women buy more than half of the new cars in the U.S., and influence up to 80% of all car purchases.
-Women control more than 60% of all personal wealth in the U.S.
-Boomer women born between the years 1946 and 1964 (the women most likely to sympathize with the whole "cougar" phenomenon you see constantly paraded on TV) control net worth of $19 trillion and own the majority of the nation’s financial wealth. In the coming decades, they will inherit much more (thanks to the passing of their husbands and parents).
-There is evidence that women are more susceptible to advertising.
Now, considering all of the above, why are we surprised to learn that our television industry (which depends to a large extent on the advertising industry, which in turn depends on its ability to attract consumers willing to spend) caters to women?
Women spend more, and America is all about spending. The consumer is king today and thus, by extension, women are the queens. They get what they want, and you see the results on TV. What they want, of course, is often in direct contrast to what men (particularly men like us) are really interested in, but our saving and spending habits render us somewhat irrelevant in all of this. One can afford to pay token attention to male interests and expect to actually make more money today.
Like I keep saying: just follow the money. 90% of the time, you'll get a clear answer to the issue you're seeking clarity on, especially in America. It is simply more profitable at all levels (small business, big business, the economy as a whole, etc) to cater to the interests of women.
Close. TV's job is to elevate the ideal of radical egalitarianism in support of free market capitalism. Egalitarianism for its own sake is not profitable.
This is why white women, specifically, have probably seen the greatest benefit since the civil rights movement of any group (including groups like hispanics, blacks, and native americans of both genders who, historically, probably have a bit more to complain about). They're the least "oppressed" of the "oppressed", but it is far more profitable to pretend otherwise, so just about everyone does.
Here are the facts:
-Women control the majority of household spending.
-Women account for 85% of all consumer purchases.
-Women buy more than half of the new cars in the U.S., and influence up to 80% of all car purchases.
-Women control more than 60% of all personal wealth in the U.S.
-Boomer women born between the years 1946 and 1964 (the women most likely to sympathize with the whole "cougar" phenomenon you see constantly paraded on TV) control net worth of $19 trillion and own the majority of the nation’s financial wealth. In the coming decades, they will inherit much more (thanks to the passing of their husbands and parents).
-There is evidence that women are more susceptible to advertising.
Now, considering all of the above, why are we surprised to learn that our television industry (which depends to a large extent on the advertising industry, which in turn depends on its ability to attract consumers willing to spend) caters to women?
Women spend more, and America is all about spending. The consumer is king today and thus, by extension, women are the queens. They get what they want, and you see the results on TV. What they want, of course, is often in direct contrast to what men (particularly men like us) are really interested in, but our saving and spending habits render us somewhat irrelevant in all of this. One can afford to pay token attention to male interests and expect to actually make more money today.
Like I keep saying: just follow the money. 90% of the time, you'll get a clear answer to the issue you're seeking clarity on, especially in America. It is simply more profitable at all levels (small business, big business, the economy as a whole, etc) to cater to the interests of women.
basilransom said:
Close. TV's job is to elevate the ideal of radical egalitarianism in support of free market capitalism. Egalitarianism for its own sake is not profitable.
This is why white women, specifically, have probably seen the greatest benefit since the civil rights movement of any group (including groups like hispanics, blacks, and native americans of both genders who, historically, probably have a bit more to complain about). They're the least "oppressed" of the "oppressed", but it is far more profitable to pretend otherwise, so just about everyone does.
[Draft post removed by moderator.]
All or Nothing
Pelican
I still believe there are some good T.V. shows around. I usually watch Netflix because I don't like commercials, and I can watch the episodes of a T.V. show in succession. The most recent show that I have been watching is Parks and Recreation, and I personally like the show. It features a "strong woman" type, but it also has a cast of characters that bring in a large spectrum of the thoughts and ideas that float around the U.S.
My favorite being Ron Swanson, who I think would appeal to some of the members on this forum:
My favorite being Ron Swanson, who I think would appeal to some of the members on this forum:
All or Nothing said:
Swanson is a caricature of masculinity. TV and movies are so bereft of genuine, balanced, manly men that you can't see Swanson for what he is, a pathetic cartoon. He may be funny, sure, but nothing more. Definitely not a man you'd pick to represent your cause. Unless you like playing the fool.
Come to think of it, male characters on TV nowadays have no breadth. They occupy these distinct roles in the status hierarchy, and they rarely change. The high status characters rarely assume a low status, or vice versa. You don't really see men transforming for the better, advancing beyond their station. It's boring. It's like an explanation given for why some women hate 'game.' They are mortified by the possibility that status can be 'faked,' that some guy who is supposedly 'deep down' a nerd, can unlock that pussy. Game is like counterfeit money to them, they don't want to be duped and left holding the bag. 'You either have it or you don't.' And when you do see men doing this, especially together as men, women *hate* it - see Entourage.
Enfant_Terrible
Kingfisher
Thanks to boredom and my dad's iPad + Netflix account, I got into TV shows again after years of not regularly watching TV since the late 90's-early 2000's.
Right now, I'm limiting my shows to "Breaking Bad" and "The Walking Dead" and as of last night I'm caught up with the episodes... I still value the time I want to give to other things.
I appreciated the good writing, stories, and acting on the shows above despite some blue-pill content which might bother some people here. The thing to understand is that the rest of the world is blue-pill and the writers come from this world. They write what they know of their world and reflect this reality on their stories. But not everybody will agree with their reality, so it's good to filter your viewing through what you know, believe, and value.
I view these shows from an artistic point of view and open myself up to be moved, but at the same time I'm also vigilant about the messages being sent to me.
Right now, I'm limiting my shows to "Breaking Bad" and "The Walking Dead" and as of last night I'm caught up with the episodes... I still value the time I want to give to other things.
I appreciated the good writing, stories, and acting on the shows above despite some blue-pill content which might bother some people here. The thing to understand is that the rest of the world is blue-pill and the writers come from this world. They write what they know of their world and reflect this reality on their stories. But not everybody will agree with their reality, so it's good to filter your viewing through what you know, believe, and value.
I view these shows from an artistic point of view and open myself up to be moved, but at the same time I'm also vigilant about the messages being sent to me.
- Status