The flow of the video seems like it’s jumping from point to point or point to sub point really fast. Is it cuz it’s short form? Or Ai? It comes off unnatural to me.
How the video flows in the beginning i think:
- main point about manosphere being a shame management system and how the audience needs to understand how it operates
- Background info about why men are there. He lists off the process of men feeling humiliation then internalizing the shame.
- sub point talking about how that shame changes to something else like contempt, rage, and a podcast talking about how women are the problem.
- Point about how manosphere is a toxic way of dealing with shame. The manopsphere is compared to a method that dismantles shame. That method was created by an author called Brene Brown
- sub point about how the first step of dismantling shame is done in the manosphere but in their own “toxic” way. Examples are listed as taking the redpill, or newcomers being told they’ve been lied to, or that their pain is real, or that they can blame women for their pain
From these points I notice a pattern of naming things off in lists. Like, the process of men becoming ashamed, what the shame changes into, and examples listed off when recognizing shame in the manosphere. Is that something that ai does? It looks like the creator wants to illustrate the point so the audience gets what he’s talking about, but is that how it’s normally done?
I was wondering why the video is partly human to me. I remember one of my first thought when watching was that some stuff sounds genuine. Like, it was written by him. I’m not sure which parts tho. That would be good to point out. Actually, I remember thinking that since I didn’t know that something was ai then it’s gotta be human. How do I know if it’s not just actually ai tho?