It’s that there are a small amount of men in the modern world who need a warrior ethos and the ‘tempering fires of warfare’ and other such cringe imagery employed by those pushing hypermasculine ideology.
The majority of men don’t need to be ‘redeemed through violence’ and, like the proverbial middle manager, probably just need someone to tell them they aren’t alone and things will be OK in due course, or whatever a therapist does.
And yet the manufactured adversity industry is booming. Look at all the marathons and triathlons and iron mans and spartan races and ninja warriors and all the other nonsense we’ve invented just to scratch this itch for men and women alike.
Humans _need_ something to fight against. If there’s nothing, they’ll make something up.
I'm curious why you think it's nonsense though. Those activities can be fun, safe and encourage discipline.
I haven't met anyone who was actually competitive about it in terms of wanting to be the fastest or whatever. I suspect it is a minority of the group, who in turn are also a minority of society.
If we are making generalizations about what humans need, I wouldn't consider "fighting against something". Perhaps "being right on the internet" would fit more people.
No one is pushing that, other than those that push that as a strawman.
> The majority of men don’t need to be ‘redeemed through violence’
You are so far off the mark that you're crossing over into speculative fiction at this point.
Ever heard of testosterone? Do you know what the effects are?
Okay, sure, it doesn't result in a bloodlust, but it is largely responsible for active aggression. As a society we channel this aggression into sports where it can be safely bled with limited violence.