- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
Big reason why I try to report and shutdown blatantly misandrist shit I see in leftist spaces. It’s not clever, it’s not funny, maybe it feels good for the person saying it but there is no difference in my eyes between a misandrist and a misogynist. Putting people down based upon intrinsic characteristics they cannot change is the exact kind of behavior done by conservatives.
You can hold everything that is in this post true to your heart and still understand the very real fact that misandry doesn’t exist.
changing the defenition of misandry is just as bullshit as changing the definition of antisemitism to include critism of isreal.
misandry doesnt exist for the same reason reverse racism doesnt exist. there is no system of oppression against men, there is no system of oppression against white people. and all misogyny/racism is inherently systemic.
you are confusing a personal prejudice caused by systemic mistreatment with systemic mistreatment. it is an important distinction to make.
men hating women is misogyny because men have societal power over women. women hating men due to discrimination theyve faced is just them hating their oppressors. when men receive lower salaries than women, have lower rights than women, have their bodies policed like women, are treated like objects and property like women, and are raped and murdered like women, then we can say that misandry is a real thing.
not everything is for you, not everything is about you. you can acknowledge that things and behaviors are bad without pretending they are systems of oppression. if you would prefer to quote a dictionary than actually educate yourself then thats fine, but it doesnt make it any more real.
“you being more offended by the mere implication that some of your peers can be bad than by the harm that they actually cause makes you part of the problem”
i already knew of and dismissed this exact argument before you made it. i don’t know why you thought it was a good idea to make the exact same argument and hope for a different outcome
changing the defenition of misandry is just as bullshit as changing the definition of antisemitism to include critism of isreal.
lol it’s not even an argument it is an accepted fact in academia. your misunderstanding of higher level concepts is not a valid argument against it
lol it’s not even an argument it is an accepted fact in academia. your misunderstanding of higher level concepts is not a valid argument against it
This whole exercise of injecting academic terms into common discourse and pretending like they’re the only “correct” definition is at least 15 years old now and has achieved nothing. Where is your victory? If a woman hates all men just for being men she’s engaging in misandry. No matter how many times you explain that a system of oppression against men is required in the definition, all you will be doing is preaching to your ever shrinking choir. That definition is only useful outside academia because certain people want to excuse bigotry, and that’s all.
There were already terms for this - the word “systemic” was already in use. Systemic racism vs racism for example. But this insistence that all of society must accept that racism is actually defined as systemic racism and racism without systemic elements simply doesn’t exist is so absurd and silly that it is has no ability to gain any mass appeal required for systemic change which is why its confined to terminally online leftists (and not even all of them).
It’s not so much a misunderstanding of concepts, it’s people using 2 different definitions.
You must know by now that misandry can both mean “systemic oppression of men” and “bigotry against men” - sorry, “unfairly being mean to men”, just as misogyny or racism can mean different things in a systemic and personal context.
People are complaining about bigotry, or “being meanly treated” if you want to imply dismissiveness, and the word they use for that is misandry/racism/misogyny - that these words imply systemic oppression in an academic context doesn’t matter, we are talking about the other context.
And if you think it should not have this other definition at all, because it makes it harder to talk about the more important systemic issue, or for another reason: don’t be a pedantic prescriptivist on these definitions, language is fluid.
when have men ever been systematically oppressed? misandry doesn’t mean that, because it doesn’t happen.
and what words mean in an acedemic context does matter, because when the academia says one thing and people use it to mean another, it furthers the meabing from reality and science. especially when it’s something like this, when what you’re using as is just something not grounded in facts.
im really just not gonna waste time engaging with bad faith strawman arguments that start with “the dictionary defines this word as”
i hope that life treats you well and that your beliefs take you to great places
This is some LilyOrchard double standard typeshit… is that you Lily?
All your arguments hinge on broad generalizations and so they can be dismissed offhand. You make the mistake of thinking that if Group A has majority power vs Group B, then that means they have absolute power. You completely diminish and cut down any power or leverage that Group B has. Basically doing learned helplessness to justify prejudice. You ignore any cases where your assumption doesn’t hold true or use those instances to justify “well it’s okay if they do it back!”, completely negating your whole point that “doing that thing is bad”.
this is,,,, this is just a “misogyny isnt systemic” argument
broad generalizations such as “men have systemic power over women” and “men get paid more than women”
next will you say black people can be racist towards white people?
If you think that only white straight men have a monopoly on bigotry and hate, you are a lost cause.
if you think that the systemic oppression of women as people for the benefit of men is in any way shape or form comparable to “this girl was mean to me this one time”, you are a lost cause.
the idea of “misandry” has always been weaponized against women in a misogynistic way by denying them even the ability to express anger at their oppression. women who “hate men” would not hate men if men did not systemically oppress them in every aspect of life. you can say “misandry is real its just not systemic” if you want, but its like saying “all lives matter” has a meaning outside of its use as a racist dogwhistle. not a very serious take. additionally, you cant say that while also comparing it to misogyny, which is systemic.
gender essentialism and bioessentialism are bad, we all agree on this! we dont have to silence women talking about actual issues and experiences in order to do so.
if you are a man and you feel the need to say how misandry totally is a real problem, you have to remember first that you are benefiting from patriarchy right now whether you like it or not
like i said to begin with, the line of reasoning that misandry exists is the same line of reasoning that is used to say reverse racism exists. and last i checked we all know that isnt the case.
I love how this is all gen ed level college race and diversity course, and yet the majority of people here still will never even try to understand it. I try to bring this up every time I see a comment about misandry or reverse racism, fully knowing I’ll get downvoted into oblivion. definitely a reminder that the majority of of lemmy skews to priveledged older white male, even those who call themselves leftists.
you guys are the ones who totally miss the colloquial opinion in academia. idk why you keep appealing to that as if academics agree with vapid moralizing anymore than anyone else. besides, that’s not even how… the humanities work? these things are not presented as facts, they’re presented as imperfect and fallible models like any other field of inquiry, because that’s all we have.
not even discussing the argument at hand, you can’t just respond to people disagreeing with you by saying they’re wrong and they don’t understand. it is immature and shows a lack of higher level reasoning.
but either way the whole line of thought here in these downvoted comments is ass-backwards. it’s not that people disagreeing are all priveleged old white men. it’s that the world literally isn’t some black-and-white place. feels like lots of people are mentally either 13 yo blue haired tumblr girls with a just world fallacy or psycho 12 yo boys nowadays, no inbetweens.
also - saying terms like “reverse racism” or the idea that misandry functionally doesn’t exist are at all common or accepted ideas in academic circles and not radical diactems, especially within sociology/philosophy fields that deal with race/diversity, is so insanely disingenuous as to either be an intentional attempt at manipulation or so obtuse and ignorant as to be buffoonery.
prejudice is still bad! misandry/reverse racism doesn’t exist (full stop) but a black person could still be prejudice against white people, or a women could be prejudice again men. that doesn’t excuse it, but words and connotation matter.
What’s race based prejudice if it isn’t racism? You can’t just displace the original meaning and pretend the original never existed
Obviously it’s generally much more harmful in one direction, but acting like people aren’t all just people with the exact same biases, and acting as if which group has power over which isn’t something that has kept changing throughout the history of humanity, and acting as if all of human experience is homogeneous (that all people with the same labels have identical experience), is all nonsensical extremist horseshoe politics stuff.
When you hear people on your own side defend Apartheid but for opposing reasons, you gotta admit those people have gone too far off the deep end. Racist extreme right people push it because they believe people are inherently different and can’t integrate. Delusional extreme left people do it because “people of different status and power can’t mix without abuse” and so they abdicate from the responsibility to support coexistence and mutual understanding, and so they end up helping racists push their policies.
prejudice is still bad! misandry/reverse racism doesn’t exist (full stop) but a black person could still be prejudice against white people, or a women could be prejudice again men. that doesn’t excuse it, but words and connotation matter.
Yes, words and connotations matter which is why the whole exercise of injecting academic terms into common discourse and pretending like they’re the only “correct” definition is so pointless . It is at least 15 years old now and has achieved nothing. Where is your victory? If a woman hates all men just for being men she’s engaging in misandry. No matter how many times you explain that a system of oppression against men is required in the definition, all you will be doing is preaching to your ever shrinking choir. That definition is only useful outside academia because certain people want to excuse bigotry, and that’s all.
There were already terms for this - the word “systemic” was already in use. Systemic racism vs racism for example. But this insistence that all of society must accept that racism is actually defined as systemic racism and racism without systemic elements simply doesn’t exist is so absurd and silly that it is has no ability to gain any mass appeal required for systemic change which is why its confined to terminally online leftists (and not even all of them - like seriously if you can’t even win them over then maybe your strategy sucks?).
It’s all the more tragic because this whole time feminist discourse could have been focusing on the actual problem of systemic misogyny and systemic racism instead of fighting linguistic battles that have all been conclusively lost.
what…
Whenever I mention that the way things get phrased in left spaces matters, I get yelled at that it doesn’t matter. This is why it matters.
I’m an adult, so.im not going to let some Internet Dipshit who can’t practice what they preach chase me right, but there’s plenty of vulnerable kids out there, who do have real problems, that are sick of being told those problems don’t matter because of how they look - which is similar to the people WHO ARE ALSO OPPRESSING THEM.
Stop attacking fellow victims of the system. You are not creating allies
Yes. The left is horrible at messaging, both in terms of word-choice AND in terms of attitude. I fundamentally agree with left-leaning ideals far more than right-leaning ideals, but holy shit there are people who are just dog-shit at the messaging, and somehow that messaging sticks the hardest.
Years ago I argued that misandrist feminist rhetoric (e.g. all men are rapists) was going to wind up creating a misogynistic counter-culture.
These days, I watch it unfold and just feel very very sad as it will ruin lives.
deleted by creator
I’ll pop a little observation in here, as I’ve generally had a woman for my manager for most of my professional career (doesn’t bother me, they’ve all been good managers).
It’s socially acceptable to make a joke about men (you know what men are like lol), it’s a visit to HR if you make the same joke about women (you know what women are like lol). This isn’t a false perception, or over exaggerated bit of right wing propaganda, it’s just working life being a man.
I’ll NEVER forget an inaugural lecture where a professor stated she’d always hire women over men for her research team, and people cheered. She’d have been stripped of her title as a man, possibly sacked.
To be quite frank, there are hundreds of little “adjustments” men live with today. I’m sorry to say that the iniquity men face today is real, and while older men can see how it balances past iniquities (or are indifferent) - younger men just see the iniquity levelled against them and rightly question it because their only crime is being a man.
It isn’t just “a few” - it’s the normality we’ve created. It’s a sad situation, because in the pursuit of justice we’ve created injustice and the predators that shape the manosphere have monopolised it for their own selfish ends.
deleted by creator
I agree the played victim like a soccer player.
one of the main reasons i didnt fall to the right wing bullshit is because motherfuckers bothered talking to me and presenting any alternative at all
Yeah, this shit hadn’t really taken off much when I was that age but I can 100% see it being a problem for me if it had. I was very much socially isolated and angry when I was younger because I was ostracized by basically everyone and couldn’t figure out wtf I was doing wrong (looking back I still don’t really know) and it wasn’t until I got into college that I met people who were kind enough to help me get straightened out. If I hadn’t met those people I think there’s a pretty decent chance that I turned out to be a horrible person. I was certainly heading that way for a while.
God damn this hits hard. I was seriously in danger of falling down that hole as a kid, because kids are stupid and the right talks confidently and ad naseum. Also my father wasn’t exactly a stalwart of progressive ideals. I’m so very thankful for being a Mama’s boy, she is probably the reason I’m not the typical chud I look like.
With that being said, this is also a societal problem when so many parents offload their parenting to the web. And I say societal because it is not often times not the parent’s fault as having to work extended hours or multiple jobs just to provide the necessities.
It’s really a feature, not a flaw, of the right’s long term plan. Stupid people vote for stupid things.
So this is clearly personal to many people in this thread but I’m just going to point out objectively and non judgementally that Vaush and other participants misrepresent the argumemt made by the original poster.
The original poster specifically refers to men. Vaush’s response either intentionally or unintentionally responds to to an argument not made by the original poster by referring to 12 year old boys.
This is actually fairly low level discourse because the entire reply chain is responding to a strawman. If anyone has any further insight I’d be happy to hear it. I think we need to elevate our reading comprehension if we’re going to have meaningful conversations about this.
Young boys see comments directed at men as being directed at themselves as well. The foundations of the things that make a man buy into this shit are laid when he’s young. I think it’s quite valid to bring this up.
An adult man doesn’t just join the Andrew Tate crowd. The foundations for agreeing with his misogyny were laid while he was a teenager (or even younger). The people who are alienated by this sort of rhetoric aren’t adults, they’re teenagers who haven’t formed a political identity yet, who can yet be turned away from that self-destructive ideology and it is them who are turned away by such rhetoric.
The term “man” may by all of us be seen only to refer to males over the age of 18, but a teenage boy will already identify with it, will thinks of himself as cool, independent, grown-up. He will see an attack on “men” as an attack on himself.
While the targeted group may have been adult men, the actual targets will have been the twelve y/o Vaush spoke off and they will be driven further away from the principles of democracy and equality and into the hands of waiting fascists.
Post Scriptum
This isn’t supposed to be a defence of Vaush btw, I don’t really like him myself.
I figure that the assumption being made is that the alt-right social media pipeline is generally accepted to refer to the online ecosystem that was created to court impressionable young boys from the ages of 12-25 into the rightwing and then extreme rightwing ecosystem. And though Men’s Rights Activists is more broad and could be considered a choice, it is the younger demographic that are the ones “falling in”, and that’s where I imagine Vaush clarified that with saying “12 y.o.s”.
Older folks entering involuntarily, would have been through other media like Rush Limbaugh-style AM radio, Fox News or other Republican campaigns directly like Project Redmap in 2010, then those Republican groups shifted even further right over the last 15 years.
Perhaps the correlation that 12 year olds are the ones falling in even if others are doing it by choice, should have been explained by Vaush before jumping directly to the conclusion.
Sidenote: The problem is caused by the difficulty to have nuanced arguments within 150 characters. (The first two Twitter screencaps)
Yeah, the next step in the conversation is acknowledging that the same applies to a LOT of adult men. Not the majority, by far. But certainly enough to make a significant difference.
A lotta guys out there are participating in the patriarchy simply because it’s how they were raised, or because they were in a bad spot and the right made a better pitch to them when they asked for help. Or the only pitch. They haven’t thought it all the way through yet, and are just working with the information they have.
Every day at every age, there are some men out there collapsing the cognitive dissonance between patriarchy and basic human decency. Men who could be good people if they discard the right belief when the two finally become irreconcilable. When talking about effective outreach, these guys are important to reach. I’d say not as urgent as reaching out to the malleable kids before Dennis Prager sticks his oily little fingers in their brains or something of the like. But still a very worthwhile demographic to reach out to.
As someone raised as a white Christian male: no, I have never felt like people were calling me evil, shunning me, or pushing me away because I am white, Christian, or male. That is such a bullshit take and people need to not tolerate that persecution complex nonsense.
Assholes get called assholes for being assholes, and instead of any sort of introspection they blame it on them being “white” or “male,” because to them being a white male means they get to be an asshole and everyone else just has to accept it.
Isn’t it nice how of all the people commenting ITT you’re the only one whose personal experience can be generalized to an entire race+gender of people? You’re very lucky.
So we agree it is not a universal experience that all white males are vilified for being white males?
The post never claims all white males are being vilified, just that enough are being vilified or at least ignored in leftist spaces to push them away and into far-right / alt-right spaces.
enough are being vilified or at least ignored in leftist spaces
Which I have never encountered. I see no data supporting that claim. Why is there anecdote more valuable than mine? Are you ignoring me because I’m a white male?
I’m gonna be real bro this is a real midwit argument. Can you understand that this is happening enough to be noticed as a trend and an issue that must be addressed?
As for a source, there are countless examples of both your experience and the experience of men who fell into the pipeline after being shunned and finding there way out.
I’m not arguing they should be shunned, I’m saying people need to not feed into this “white male” persecution complex bs.
Absolutely having gentle conversations with them helps. And sometimes that gentle conversation is “they’re not treating you this way because you’re white, they’re treating you this way because of how you act.”
A big part of this is that parts of the Democrat base loves to actively sabotage any Democrat outreach efforts, because they are more interested in smug fart sniffing than strategic pragmatism.
more interested in smug fart sniffing than strategic pragmatism.
exactly.
For example: see the commenters in this thread
See how nice tumblr is?
Can someone please steal Twitter’s url and redirect it there?
I feel like “the right is willing to use manipulation, misinformation, and coercion on children while the left isn’t” is not quite the argument these users think it is. Certainly we shouldn’t be demonizing young white boys but tbh I’ve seen very little if any of that behavior. If a person gets censored and banned from communities because they shared the funny nazi emoji then that should be a learning moment for them, I don’t think it should be in the hands of the minorities, which those children are actively harassing on public platforms, to be the Daryl Davis in their lives.
I like anarchy because I can trace a short line to a systemic failure in any instance
Okay sure but Vaush is an asshole. He says the r slur in almost every stream and the only one i watched [live] he went on for like 5 minutes about how he doesnt like to be in poor neighborhoods because “the layabouts make me uncomfortable and sad”
Lying about Vaush is a very respectable tradition on the internet, and you’re doing it a good service.
They’re telling the truth about the horsefucker and you know it
Lol okay
Be nice and encouraging when talking about people. Saying mean-sounding things puts people off. Yes, even when it’s really important people get the severity of something. Talk about the people who are suffering and the people who are actively doing it. Encourage people to think about how they might end up doing terrible things and how to prevent that. I know it feels so fucking wrong to be a politician about your most basic values, but there’s a reason politicians are the way they are: they get shit done that way.
This is a civil discussion on the internet. It is possible it seems.
Not here though
How dare you say we can’t be civil?! The fucking nerve!
(very, VERY big /S)
What is hidden here is the minimum age to use Twitch is 13.
It isn’t important because it needs enforcement or something, but it does gesture towards the notion your generalized average 12 year olds are still too much of a child to be roaming Twitch.
It isn’t the early days of the internet anymore. Safety is not guaranteed.
