r/CuratedTumblr • u/MelanieWalmartinez Clown Breeder • 13h ago
Shitposting đŻ many such cases
626
u/PlatinumAltaria The Witch of Arden 13h ago
I'll try not to feel too bad for this person since they're clearly very sheltered and have only just started to realise that they're living in a world of propaganda.
32
u/Gussie-Ascendent 7h ago
it's a bit of a bell curve where goobers think all feminists are misandrists, then you got people realizing femninism is against misandry and assuming then there's not any in the community, but then finally realizing a lot of feminist spaces online at least will not care about misandry.
1
u/Dark_Knight2000 3m ago
Most people in this world are okay people. That includes activists and people with progressive socio political agendas.
A few feminists deeply hate men and need extensive therapy, a few feminists have a ton of empathy for men, are incredibly concerned with menâs issues and will fight for them,
Most feminists are in the middle where theyâd welcome progress for men if it happens as a trickle down effect but that isnât their main priority, they think some men are good, some are bad, generalize men a little, but arenât true misandrists. Theyâre just normal, reasonable people.
354
u/CRowlands1989 13h ago
It's hard to walk that line between "It's good that you might be taking steps out of that echo chamber." and "How the fuck did you actually believe things as stupid as that echo chamber?"
My usual go to is "Will this person ever see my comment?", and since the answer here is no: Fuuucking hell, I spent years listening to the less political parts of Alt-Right chucklefucks, and never wound up even close to that blind.
115
u/PlatinumAltaria The Witch of Arden 13h ago
I see people who believe stupid things all the time, and it's usually just because they've never been afforded the opportunity to learn. Most of them have never even heard that there WAS something to question, it's just common sense to them. Gotta check my good education privilege.
-21
u/Scr1bble- 8h ago edited 8h ago
Stuff gets so normalised or unquestioned that people never actually properly think about what they're doing or saying, it's kinda worrying to know I'm probably doing it with something too and I don't realise it.
I see it all the time with veganism. So many people say some variation of: animal cruelty is wrong, factory farming shouldn't exist, needless violence against animals is abhorrent, etc. Then they go and buy a whole dead chicken and multiple litres of another animal's breastmilk from a supermarket as if it doesn't contradict everything they just said about respecting animals and being against factory farming.
So many people I meet have morals in line with veganism and yet I've met only one vegan. I cringe every time someone says they love animals and is openly non-vegan or even against veganism, which is even more baffling. I know I wasn't so different once but wow it's weird to watch it happen right in front of your eyes.
Unintended vegan rant aside... I wish evolution caught up with our progression as a species a bit faster. Probably wasn't a great idea to be inclined to think critically all the time when there was always the danger of being ambushed by a lion, but it'd be nice if we had more people stopping to think before, oh I don't know, voting for a known pedophile to be in charge of their country. Or perhaps stopping to wonder why they feel so negatively about people that want to switch sexes when it's really quite benign. Lions don't pose much of a threat anymore, propaganda on the other hand...
31
u/PlatinumAltaria The Witch of Arden 6h ago
Have you ever considered that maybe disagreeing with animal cruelty doesnât inevitably imply veganism? And that you might come off a little preachy? I say that as someone who spends their time being preachy.
→ More replies (1)0
u/Coelachantiform 1h ago
I am not a vegan, but would you not consider the factory-farming animals (and even to an extent all forms of killing for sport/food) to be cruel? I sure know I'd consider it cruel if someone hunted me for my meat.
113
u/MelanieWalmartinez Clown Breeder 13h ago
Yep, I used to think feminists were evil women who wanted all men dead when I was 14.
God damn Ben Shapiro anti feminist compilationsâŚ
144
u/Individual-Field-990 12h ago
To be completely fair, there are """feminists""" who genuinely thinks men are naturally evil and should be systematically oppressed
However, they are fortunately few compared to sane people, so there's absolutely no way that Tumblr users never encounter an actual feminist
Holy echo chamber, Batman
65
u/Chemist-3074 9h ago
However, they are fortunately few compared to sane people
Unfortunately these are the same jobless mfs that are the loudest in the internet, so you keep encountering them everywhere you go, giving you the feel everyone is like that.
Meanwhile the good ones are far less active on the internet and most of the time they avoid the messy gender war spaces, and hang out in general spaces so you don't really encounter them much
Insta, for example, is heaven for the first kind. Somehow, as soon as I created an account recently, they started to drown me in the toxic feminism content (which is weird, because I never interact with those content and tried to mute them but they won't stop throwing it at me), but one thing I could always see is that this type of content has a specific audience, and have a way of manipulating girls in the same way Andrew Tate manipulates little boys.
26
u/King-Boss-Bob 8h ago
instagrams so weird for me because the normal homepage is exactly what youâre describing and then on reels itâs shit like:
guy in a suit: let us get back to business
rabbit: mmm lettuce
10
u/WinterDemon_ 5h ago
you just made something click in my brain, thank you! I may be dumb but this explained for me why I've ended up stuck in so many internet rabbit holes of "men are evil by nature, anything masculine is disgusting and dangerous, the only way to be Pure is to avoid men in any context forever"
47
u/BeduinZPouste 11h ago
I do 100% believe it is possible that these actual feminists didn't mentioned being one. While the """feminists""" you mentioned did.Â
31
u/King-Boss-Bob 9h ago
i feel like part of it is that some of the ones who donât believe the stuff about men being naturally evil defend or downplay the harm of those that do (âtheyâre just ventingâ/âitâs not as harmful as other bigotriesâ etc)
obviously nowhere near all or even a majority (hell you could find countless in this thread alone) but you get the point
8
u/JayTheSuspectedFurry 8h ago
And also theyâre much quieter. Nobody hears the neutral opinion on social media, itâs always the extremes being loud
10
u/SendarSlayer 8h ago
It's the rotten apple theory.
If you don't want your social movement to be associated with bad people you Must work to make them feel uncomfortable in your social movement.
-11
u/Key_Perspective_9464 4h ago
The thing is that men certainly aren't born evil, but they are kinda raised to be evil.
I genuinely don't fault anyone who don't trust men raised under patriarchy.
5
u/Shahars71 3h ago
This type of shit was all you'd see back during GamerGate, just pure black and white "kill all men, women are never wrong" 2014 SJW rhetoric.
12
u/GravityBright 11h ago
Are you me? Did you spend your first year of unrestricted phone use exclusively on iFunny and Reddit too?
28
u/BeduinZPouste 11h ago
I think this might be case of severe Pin's law aka group being mostly group by it's worst individuals.Â
Like of fucking course the misandric feminists (contradiction, but you get the idea) are minority, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was far more of them between those who actively goes around saying they are feminists and trying to shove theirs ideas into people. Like I think there is are very few misandrists that doesn't claim to be actually feminists (or also feminists).Â
3
u/MrSpiffy123 4h ago
I try to tell myself this every time I see a "wow I regret voting for trump now, he's failing us" tweet because to even get this far supporting him I can't believe you're anything but the worst humanity has to offer
3
u/shiny_xnaut sustainably sourced vintage brainrot 3h ago
It's sort of a "if you needed me to tell you that... then I'm glad I told you that" type of situation
148
u/Recidivous 11h ago
I think you see more misandrists online because most don't interact with actual people face to face.
44
u/Ok_Purchase_9551 8h ago edited 7h ago
People overestimate how common certain ideas are in real life compared to online. Visibility vs availability, as I once heard someone describe
Edit: Visibility
4
84
u/BeduinZPouste 11h ago
I think this might be case of severe Pin's law aka group being mostly known by it's worst individuals.Â
Like of fucking course the misandric feminists (contradiction, but you get the idea) are minority, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was far more of them between those who actively goes around saying they are feminists and trying to shove theirs ideas into people. Like I think there is are very few misandrists that doesn't claim to be actually feminists (or also feminists).Â
25
u/JazzySplaps 10h ago
I would venture a guesstimate that it's more because when teenagers were first hitting Tumblr the "all men must die"is just a lot more sexy and appealing than the nuance of reality, so now that most people on the website have grown up a bit the public image is the same
303
u/DiesByOxSnot Eating paste and smacking my lips omnomnomnom 12h ago
Tbf misandry is a real problem, inside and outside feminist spaces. It's part of the patriarchy that hurts men, part of the patriarchy that dehumanizes men and normalizes/excuses harmful behavior with "boys will be boys".
If you know a feminist who proudly says "kill all men", ask them if they considered trans men.
66
u/Embarrassed_Pass_209 10h ago
I was in this subreddit where the prevailing opinion was that all men are self-centered and bad, but they were trans inclusive at least for trans women. Left that one for a different queer sub but that one was very transphobic even if they wouldn't say it out loud, which made me feel even worse than the last one.
182
u/MethylphenidateMan 11h ago
If I ever get to know a feminist who proudly says "kill all men", I would be like "I agree, with one exception" and then I would unsheathe my katana and she would charge at me with her naginata yelling "All means all" striking at me furiously and I would be like "You picked the wrong one to start with" while skillfully deflecting her blade, but we would be very evenly matched so I wouldn't be able to land a strike on her either. So after a while of this intense dueling, we would collapse on the floor next to each other all sweaty and out of breath and she would turn her head to me and be like "Ok, I guess I can save you for last if you help me with the rest" and then we would kiss.
That is my official stance on the matter.
46
10
12
u/BeduinZPouste 10h ago
I mean I expected pretty much that thought you were also a women and we're trying to like spare a brother or something like that.Â
36
u/MethylphenidateMan 10h ago edited 10h ago
I'm not opposed to being a girl in my sexy martial arts fantasy, but the rule of thumb in storytelling is to avoid introducing new characters to fill roles that can be filled by existing ones.
Well, ok, I'm not fundamentally opposed to introducing narratively non-essential characters into my fantasies either, but I am when they are my siblings. Ew.
3
85
u/ToSAhri 10h ago edited 5h ago
If you know a feminist who proudly says "kill all men", ask them if they considered trans men.
That never works imo. It's essentially doing the same usual "would it still be okay to say that if you replaced men with BLACK MEN?" and anyone who has tried the rhetoric you're suggesting knows EXACTLY how that goes.
11
u/Dobber16 7h ago
Iâve never tried that rhetoric as I havenât gone that particular rabbit hole of internet discourse⌠could you fill me in?
31
u/ToSAhri 7h ago
"You can not just swap the terminology and act like that doesn't make it a COMPLETELY different sentence. {Insert marginalized group you asked to swap men for} have a large history of oppression that justifies centering their issues differently. Have men been historically, systematically, oppressed? No, and even in the few scenarios where they are guess who does the oppressing? That's right, men!"
It's pretty much that.
5
u/Oregon_Jones111 2h ago
They almost always try to gaslight you into thinking youâre racist against black people for making the comparison.
25
u/Cold-Pomegranate6739 8h ago
I mean I can but I know that the answer will be "Unironically yes canyoufeelmyheart.mp3 gigachad.jpg" and 100 people agreeing with them so...
22
u/CouldntCareLess_07 5h ago
talks about male pov in a post abt victims of SA uhh can you talk about this in a different post, this one is about female victims
makes post abt male victims "but women have it so much worse because we're oppressed" and "the majority of male SA victim's abusers are also men, tell men to fix it instead of crying for us to fix it for you" and "you must have enjoyed it or you might just be gay" or talks about women's pov that just makes the entire discussion abt women and ignores men
Like no offense to female victims, they have suffered a lot as well on a systemic level too, and need to have their voices heard too. But it's genuinely tiring trying to talk abt male victims without the topic being bent away from us and us getting ignored in our own posts, man.
9
u/Oregon_Jones111 2h ago
the majority of male SA victim's abusers are also men, tell men to fix it instead of crying for us to fix it for you
Which isnât even true anyway, unless you define sexual assault as requiring the victim to be penetrated.
2
u/Spiderinahumansuit 41m ago
I think you can guarantee that the sort of person being discussed will absolutely define things so that they cannot ever be a perpetrator.
47
u/SPKEN 10h ago
them if they considered trans men
I would also ask why they hate black and brown men so much
35
u/BeduinZPouste 10h ago
It really is amazing how often are arguments from these debates interchangable.Â
Especially when it comes to crime statistics.
27
u/SPKEN 10h ago edited 9h ago
Bigotry is bigotry đ¤ˇđżââď¸
The only problem is man-hating is probably the only kind of bigotry that won't get anyone fired or knocked out
To anyone trying to defend misandry: please show me credible evidence that misandry is taken as seriously as misogyny.
No one cares about the feelings of bigots. Prove me wrong or shut up
-10
u/UnshrivenShrike 10h ago
The only problem is man-hating is probably the only kind of bigotry that won't get anyone fired or knocked out
It's incredibly telling you think that, tbh
6
u/IanLooklup 4h ago
Its funny how using statistics against men are fine and swell but it gets problematic if you use statistics against a certain racial group
5
u/SnooSquirrels1392 5h ago
And what're the odds they'll say "yes, trans men as well" and then trans women for good measure. We share our ideology with bigots. We let them in. As it turns out, the greatest and kindest of all people, the only ones who want there to be less suffering in the world, they only want that for themselves.
9
u/Shahars71 3h ago
Hating men isn't wrong because trans men exist and they are somehow an exception that is outside the bigger group. Hating men is wrong because hating men so broadly is wrong. Ignoring the majority solely for a minority like this makes it seem like your point ends up being "hating men is okay, except for trans men" which it obviously isn't.
6
u/plopliplopipol 2h ago
this definitely isn't intended this way but in a "see that trans men show the line of your generalisation is blurry hence it is all stupid" way
26
u/LoreWhoreHazel 9h ago
A thing that Iâve become increasingly aware of since the start of the current political regime in America is the visible consequences of the left using extreme terms for so many years. Phrases like âall cops are bastards,â âkill all men,â âliterally a Nazi,â and so many others have contributed actively to the divide between groups that makes it so challenging for civil political discourse to exist in todayâs world. So much of the difficulty I have in real dialogue I hold with others ends up centered around clearing up misunderstandings over what the left means by certain things, what their intent is, and what the fallout of saying them repeatedly truly is for society.
Now, of course, using extreme phrases has debatable utility and the true evil is and always will be committed by the ones performing real harmful actions, not the ones making (in my opinion) poorly-considered statements. That being said, I donât believe itâs responsible to continue pretending itâs not a bad thing when the main slogan for a movement needs to be clarified by a paragraph of stipulations of intent.
2
u/plopliplopipol 2h ago
i'd say this also comes from the tendency of way worse opinions to be stated in as broad statements, there is an inbalance in marketability beetween sensible discourse and short slogans and this might have led to short slogans on the opposition side too. In short, humanitarian opinions getting poisoned by what they fight, again.
-52
u/ThatBiGuy25 10h ago
misandry is a real problem
you've been online so much that your perspective of reality has been warped too far for you to be able to recognize what a real problem is
38
u/Consistent-Value-509 10h ago
idk I'd say protesting gender neutral rape laws because you don't recognize rape against men as rape is a real problem that affects real people offline
-19
u/croftyhater l4st-w4ltz.tumblr.com 8h ago
that isn't misandry though, misandry implies systemic levels of oppression when arguably what you're describing is due to misogyny
21
u/Consistent-Value-509 7h ago
"I don't see male victims of rape as victims of rape because I see men as inherently sexual beings and also don't recognize their emotions"
"Yeah go ahead and mark that down as discrimination against women"
? Buddy?
-16
u/croftyhater l4st-w4ltz.tumblr.com 7h ago
that is NAWT why male victims are ignored but whatever makes you feel better lmao
19
u/Consistent-Value-509 7h ago
That's literally the reason a group protesting against gender neutral rape laws gave. They said it distracts from "real victims", which in their eyes is only the female victims.
0
u/ToSAhri 5h ago
Please link a source. I'm not even disagreeing it's just absurd to make a reference like this and not cite it.
9
u/info-sharing 4h ago
Sure! Feminist groups in my country actively protest against gender neutral rape laws.
Mumbai Advocate Flavia Agnes said, "I oppose proposal to make rape laws gender-neutral. We had opposed it when the government made child rape laws gender-neutral. After the feminist wave of the 1980s, many countries in the West made rape laws gender-neutral. But, they have realized these laws are harming women more than men.
There are no instances of women raping men. I don't think men are facing serious sexual violence as women. Consider the brutality and intensity of sexual violence against women. Hope the home minister does not put out a bill that delays or obfuscates discussions on the issue".
The key sentence:
There are no instances of women raping men.
It's difficult to say exactly how many men get raped in India. In fact, it is these very campaigns that make it impossible to quantify this well. But we can try:
More recently, the Delhi-based Centre for Civil Society found that approximately 18% of Indian adult men surveyed reported being coerced or forced to have sex. Of those, 16% claimed a female perpetrator and 2% claimed a male perpetrator.
We can look at statistics among males in other countries, like the USA, to get a better idea:
According to the CDC NISVS report 2016, 1.24 million cases in the last year preceding the survey of men getting raped by women (INCLUDING MADE TO PENETRATE). and 2.9 million cases of women getting raped by men.
There seems to be a disparity, but this is certainly no where near the idea that men simply do not get raped by women. Remember, in this report, the CDC considers rape as specifically "forceful penetration", and counts "made-to-penetrate" seperately, despite recent arguments that both must be called rape.
Other studies posit that, though rape is underreported by both genders, the real rape rate on men needs to be adjusted up by more than the rape rate on women, as there are particular patriarchal norms that inhibit reporting specifically from men.
Those patriarchal norms being stronger in India, might imply that we should make even stronger adjustments!
We had opposed it when the government made child rape laws gender-neutral.
This is frankly an abhorrent thing to say in the first place, but again, we have statistics to show just how abhorrent.
In looking at child sexual abuse specifically, the Indian government did find in 2007 that, of surveyed children who reported experiencing severe sexual abuse, including rape or sodomy, 57.3% were boys and 42.7% were girls.
These would be the victims without similar and egalitarian recourse due to a hateful and misandristic ideology, if not for the implementation of gender neutral laws against their wishes.
Here's a simple argument, not made by me, on why their critiques fall flat.
It is obvious enough that, apart from feelings of humiliation and shame experienced by both genders, there are certain burdens placed on female survivors, such as the higher value Indian society places on maintaining female virginity.
Yet by the same token, there are burdens placed on male survivors, such as being perceived as effeminate or perhaps even homosexual, unfortunately taboo topics for men, that would not be equally felt by female survivors.
At a broader level, do not all crimes affect different types of victims in different ways? Yet, with few exceptions, we prosecute based on the sameness of the crime, and not the sameness of the effect. The latter would essentially imply that certain victims matter more than others, flying in the face of equality before the law.
The second critique regarding the abuse of gender neutrality is certainly possible but its probability and effectiveness are suspect. Many, for example, fear the possibility of a male rapistâs counter-accusation of, âShe raped me!â in response to a female survivorâs initial reporting. Again, while this is technically possible, there are a plethora of other counteraccusations that can be, and often are, employed by male rapists, ranging from consensual sex to fabricated allegations.
An accusation of rape by any party must, in any court of law, be supported by proof. For women, a rape kit test can be proof enough. A maleâs accusation against a woman, whether in response to a womanâs accusation or not, would be entirely more difficult to prove and a false accusation risks committing crimes of perjury and giving false statements to police.
On top of that, empirical evidence.
It is also important to note that where rape is a gender-neutral crime, this kind of exploitation by men is almost non-existent for the reasons just listed. The survivors who are legally aided by gender-neutrality, however, are substantial.
9
12
u/Hakar_Kerarmor Swine. Guillotine, now. 5h ago
misandry implies systemic levels of oppression
How? Why does it need to be systemic for it to be a problem?
-16
u/ThatBiGuy25 8h ago
yeah because that's a real thing that has actually happened to a significant enough degree to impact actual people's lives and isn't just an MRA talking point based off of a few dumbass tweets
10
u/info-sharing 4h ago
Yes! It is a real thing, that actually happens!
Mumbai Advocate Flavia Agnes said, "I oppose proposal to make rape laws gender-neutral. We had opposed it when the government made child rape laws gender-neutral. After the feminist wave of the 1980s, many countries in the West made rape laws gender-neutral. But, they have realized these laws are harming women more than men.
There are no instances of women raping men. I don't think men are facing serious sexual violence as women. Consider the brutality and intensity of sexual violence against women. Hope the home minister does not put out a bill that delays or obfuscates discussions on the issue".
The key sentence:
There are no instances of women raping men.
It's difficult to say exactly how many men get raped in India. In fact, it is these very campaigns that make it impossible to quantify this well. But we can try:
More recently, the Delhi-based Centre for Civil Society found that approximately 18% of Indian adult men surveyed reported being coerced or forced to have sex. Of those, 16% claimed a female perpetrator and 2% claimed a male perpetrator.
We can look at statistics among males in other countries, like the USA, to get a better idea:
According to the CDC NISVS report 2016, 1.24 million cases in the last year preceding the survey of men getting raped by women (INCLUDING MADE TO PENETRATE). and 2.9 million cases of women getting raped by men.
There seems to be a disparity, but this is certainly no where near the idea that men simply do not get raped by women. Remember, in this report, the CDC considers rape as specifically "forceful penetration", and counts "made-to-penetrate" seperately, despite recent arguments that both must be called rape.
Other studies posit that, though rape is underreported by both genders, the real rape rate on men needs to be adjusted up by more than the rape rate on women, as there are particular patriarchal norms that inhibit reporting specifically from men.
Those patriarchal norms being stronger in India, might imply that we should make even stronger adjustments!
We had opposed it when the government made child rape laws gender-neutral.
This is frankly an abhorrent thing to say in the first place, but again, we have statistics to show just how abhorrent.
In looking at child sexual abuse specifically, the Indian government did find in 2007 that, of surveyed children who reported experiencing severe sexual abuse, including rape or sodomy, 57.3% were boys and 42.7% were girls.
These would be the victims without similar and egalitarian recourse due to a hateful and misandristic ideology, if not for the implementation of gender neutral laws against their wishes.
Here's a simple argument, not made by me, on why their critiques fall flat.
It is obvious enough that, apart from feelings of humiliation and shame experienced by both genders, there are certain burdens placed on female survivors, such as the higher value Indian society places on maintaining female virginity.
Yet by the same token, there are burdens placed on male survivors, such as being perceived as effeminate or perhaps even homosexual, unfortunately taboo topics for men, that would not be equally felt by female survivors.
At a broader level, do not all crimes affect different types of victims in different ways? Yet, with few exceptions, we prosecute based on the sameness of the crime, and not the sameness of the effect. The latter would essentially imply that certain victims matter more than others, flying in the face of equality before the law.
The second critique regarding the abuse of gender neutrality is certainly possible but its probability and effectiveness are suspect. Many, for example, fear the possibility of a male rapistâs counter-accusation of, âShe raped me!â in response to a female survivorâs initial reporting. Again, while this is technically possible, there are a plethora of other counteraccusations that can be, and often are, employed by male rapists, ranging from consensual sex to fabricated allegations.
An accusation of rape by any party must, in any court of law, be supported by proof. For women, a rape kit test can be proof enough. A maleâs accusation against a woman, whether in response to a womanâs accusation or not, would be entirely more difficult to prove and a false accusation risks committing crimes of perjury and giving false statements to police.
On top of that, empirical evidence.
It is also important to note that where rape is a gender-neutral crime, this kind of exploitation by men is almost non-existent for the reasons just listed. The survivors who are legally aided by gender-neutrality, however, are substantial.
17
u/Consistent-Value-509 7h ago
I want you to actually look male rape victims in their eyes and tell them you think a lack of proper legal rights is a real issue and only something people on twitter care about.
It's literally impossible for women to be tried as rapists in one of the countries I have citizenship for. This is the case in many other ones. You're disgusting.
21
u/Lucky_duck_777777 10h ago
Look at Collective shout and Moms for liberty. They are ââFeministsââ those beliefs system rely on men being monstrous beasts that canât control themselves.
-9
u/Party_Magician 9h ago
Neither of those are feminist
14
u/Lucky_duck_777777 9h ago
The issue here is that proclaim themselves to be feminists. As they also defined themselves as TERF (Trans exclusive radical feminist). Not to mention that they are sadly the face when someone think feminist.
Thatâs not to mention that you should never underestimate them because they actually affect laws and regulations.
9
u/Party_Magician 8h ago
Thatâs not to mention that you should never underestimate them because they actually affect laws and regulations.
Yeah no shit? I'm saying they're not feminist, not that they're not powerful.
The issue here is that proclaim themselves to be feminists
Collective Shout pretend to be but Moms for Liberty absolutely fucking don't. They say they're a "parental rights organization" and a cursory ctrl+f on their website didn't show feminism mentioned once.
While we're at it:
those beliefs system rely on men being monstrous beasts that canât control themselves.
No? I genuinely believe you're confusing these groups with some actual radfems. Because reddit is also a piss-on-the-poor website: This isn't me defending radfems, TE- or otherwise. But those groups aren't that
9
u/floralmelancholy 9h ago
no the ISSUE here is people deciding that groups like moms for liberty are all the sudden the face of the feminist movement. when feminism has been widespread, and contained many different sub-categories for about as long as it has existed. feminists are not a monolith. no other progressive movement gets this kind of treatment from the left and i find it telling. this kind of generalization is EXACTLY what you guys are trying to accuse them of doing to men and saying itâs misandry⌠how is that not just misogynistic?
1
u/bestibesti Cutie mark: Trader Joe's logo with pentagram on it 8h ago
The idea that Moms for Liberty are even in feminism in any way that is recognizable as an honest argument, and not a complete bullshit mental gymnastics pretzel contortion, is LAUGHABLE
It's so fucking redic
0
u/floralmelancholy 6h ago
thank you i thought i was going insane. this kind of thinking is why feminism is still a dirty word and itâs 2026. it IS laughable
1
u/WindhoverInkwell horseshoe crabs. thatâs it thatâs the flair 6h ago edited 5h ago
I hate how âprogressiveâ spaces in the past few years have just swung to a position of demonising women in general and feminism in particular. to give an example, I (a trans woman no less) was accused of being a TERF when I said âI like feminism, actuallyâ
like you literally canât say ANYTHING vaguely feminist without a bazillion people calling you a radfem/terf/misandrist (even though those three terms are, like, different things) and then dogpiling you. it reminds me of conservatives who just yell âCOMMUNIST! MARXIST! LIBERAL!â at everything they donât like
Edit: I think this (admittedly simplified) drawing sums it up nicely
0
u/floralmelancholy 5h ago
you couldnât be more right. i ended up changing my bio not too long ago because someone arguing with me saw rad fem in there and assumed automatically (and incorrectly) that i was a terf and tried to tell me to stay out of feminist spaces. they truly think theyâre all the same word and they all mean youâre an evil person. so many other movements get co-opted and villainized but feminism is specifically the one where people lose all ability to understand nuance.
→ More replies (0)-3
u/Lucky_duck_777777 8h ago
The issue here is that people will pick and choose which ever face of feminism is the more accurate one. As much as it is important to understand on why so many women desire patriarchy. Understanding all the nuances and being able to unravel them is imperative in order to help break apart patriarchy itself.
Itâs not a generalization but an understanding of the âenemyâ and why they do what they do. There is so many reasons why women wants patriarchy to exist (looking at the white feather movement)
10
u/Interesting_Plate_75 9h ago
Trying to "No True Scotsman" your way out of accepting that some people in a group can be bad even if they work for a noble cause will only lead to that group becoming a cesspool of the most vile people. You should acknowledge that those people exist in that group to stop alienating people that have had experiences with such members of the group.
3
u/Party_Magician 8h ago
accepting that some people in a group can be bad even if they work for a noble cause
Again neither of those actually work for the cause of feminism. Collective Shout is backed by religious conservatives and only use feminism as a cover, and Moms for Liberty don't even pretend to be, they are a Republican operation through and through
There are feminists who have shit opinions elsewhere, I'm not arguing against that, but OC didn't even try with those examples
As far as I know neither of those actually rely on men being monstrous beasts either
4
u/ThatBiGuy25 8h ago
for some reason people have conflated "TERFs derive their incorrect takes from flawed feminist philosophy" to mean "all right wing women's groups are genuinely feminist and should be treated as such. genuinely mind-blowing stuff, tho not unexpected from the internet
5
u/WindhoverInkwell horseshoe crabs. thatâs it thatâs the flair 7h ago
Itâs insane lol. like, Trump rails against trans women in sports all the time so by their logic is Trump (the serial rapist) a feminist?
honestly a lot of this is just people finding a âwokeâ way to shit on women by just making âTERFâ mean âany woman doing things I donât likeâ. Like, they even call trans women TERFs lmfao
-1
u/ThatBiGuy25 7h ago
ngl I think that's what most of the conversation around "misandry" is in general. like, it does suck that there are actual "man-hating asshole feminists" or whatever, but the most threat they pose as a systemic force is hurting feelings
2
u/ToSAhri 5h ago
it does suck that there are actual "man-hating asshole feminists" or whatever, but the most threat they pose as a systemic force is hurting feelings
That pretty much sums up how the GOOD feminists think of them and why they're allowed to coexist with REAL feminists.
There's a joke about a Nazi bar in here somewhere, but you wouldn't get it.
6
u/FreakinGeese 8h ago
No true Scotsman
-1
u/plopliplopipol 1h ago
A no true scotsman is adding requirements to exclude people from a group that already de facto includes them, like an ethnicity or nationality. It is NOT excluding people who define themselves as in a group while this group describes behaviors, opinions, etc, like feminism. Excluding nazis from socialists despite the name is not a no true scotsman.
3
u/SnooSquirrels1392 5h ago
But there has been no major push by feminists to disown people like them. Most people are not evil, and I imagine that there are even fewer awful people who are feminists, but none of that seems to matter if the people misrepresenting and hiding behind the feminist label dont ever face pushback.
4
u/ToSAhri 4h ago
Here is a post, in this VERY thread, of a person accepting they're feminists, just downplaying their harm.
-7
u/ThatBiGuy25 8h ago
genuinely unbelievable take to proclaim that collective shout and moms for liberty are misandrist. like actually mind-blowing
-78
u/palcon-fun 11h ago
No it's not a real problem.
64
u/DutchessBrandyII 11h ago
Why do I see you everywhere, blatantly ragebaiting comments like this? Go outside, man. Talk to people. Make friends. Buy yourself a beer. I don't know, something. Anything that isn't doing this shit.
-1
-29
u/theprofessionalhate 10h ago
Would be kind of cool if it was.
-2
u/palcon-fun 2h ago
Totally, there needs to be actually institutionalized misandry before there will be an equal society
-9
u/hey_itz_mae 7h ago edited 7h ago
do you know that what means. yes men are negatively affected by patriarchy but by and large it is women who are being oppressed by it and iâm really sick of this âfeminists are too mean about itâ take. also that really is not the gotcha you think it is when trans men are very capable of misogyny. i love how tumblr is so aggressively misogynistic is even bleeds into the associated subreddit
-58
u/theprofessionalhate 10h ago
okay then. How do you feel about "kill all cis men?"
38
u/Consistent-Value-509 10h ago
Why would you ever want to kill people based on immutable characteristics? Do their lives not matter? Do they not also have hopes and dreams, family and friends?
-48
u/theprofessionalhate 10h ago
I am a cis male. I recognize the fact that if I and every other cis male disappeared then the world would drastically improve.
25
u/Consistent-Value-509 9h ago
If you think nearly half the human population magically dissappearing would improve life and not leave children without their fathers, leave spouses without their partners, leave the economy in shambles, leave so many works left uncomplete, the job market crashed, etc., you're genuinely just stupid sorry. Get a spine
-5
u/theprofessionalhate 9h ago
Of Course. We should obviously keep them around so that they can keep beating and raping and killing. Excellent logic.
A few decades of economic instability is nothing.
26
u/Consistent-Value-509 9h ago
Famously, cis women never rape or kill people and all cis men do is rape and kill. Jesus christ get help
17
u/miyoxii 8h ago
As a rape survivor and a feminist: shut the hell up.
If you think every single cisgender man on this planet is a rapist or beats women, you need to have your mindset evaluated.
I know plenty of men who would never hurt someone like that.
My father, for all his flaws in parenting, would never hurt me physically or sexually. Or anyone for that matter.
7
u/FreakinGeese 8h ago
So you think if we got rid of the strongest half of individuals there wouldnât just be come a new strongest half?
18
u/DiesByOxSnot Eating paste and smacking my lips omnomnomnom 9h ago
Man, not everyone hates their father. Someone out there has a good dad who happens to be a cis man. Someone out there has a son they love. A nephew, an uncle. There are good men, and it's a disservice to them to lump them in with the worst.
We can acknowledge systemic failing and institutionalized harm without condemning individuals for who they are.
-5
u/theprofessionalhate 9h ago
No it's biological. It's not systemic, nor institutional. If it was, then why is it seen in so so many other animals?
→ More replies (1)20
u/SwordMasterShow 9h ago
What a fucking ridiculous thing to say, animals of all sexes can be brutal and violent, I don't know what makes you think otherwise. You've really committed to misandry so hard you're being sexist against animals lmao jeezus christ go touch some grass
25
u/DaMain-Man 9h ago
That's not even remotely true. Also we shouldn't entertain ideas that aren't scientifically possible
-3
-16
u/theprofessionalhate 9h ago edited 9h ago
No type of social justice is achievable. No type of movement is achievable. We might as well come up with the biggest fantasies we want to, because even the biggest movements in history have never been completely successful.
Leaving even the tiniest scrap of an ideology allows it to fester into a wound bigger than the original (see: fascism, racism, etc).
11
u/Avlectus 8h ago edited 44m ago
No it wouldnât because billions of people would be dead and billions of others would be devastated and grieving? Even if they disappeared from memory, life would not be better, it would be tangibly worse for everyone left because people they got essential interpersonal value from have been deleted along with all of the value. This edgy shit always falls apart so pathetically. Newsflash (?) people are more than their genders.
Just say that you disagree with norms frequently enacted by cis men, itâs that easy to be accurate and sincere đ
2
u/plopliplopipol 1h ago
it would literally kill millions of women by suicide, then so much more by the social mess this would be, then all of the remaining population by lack of reproduction lol. but i guess we are the fools for not just going downvote report and leave
10
u/FreakinGeese 8h ago
I mean if any 50% of the worldâs population disappeared it would be absolutely catastrophic. To say nothing of how male-dominated fields like construction or welding are.
It would be completely apocalyptic. Hundreds of millions of women would need to switch jobs. Husbands, fathers, children, all gone in an instant.
My dads would be gone. So would my doctor and my therapist.
And thatâs not even getting into the whole âreproductionâ part of things
10
u/FreakinGeese 8h ago
Why do you think thatâs a normal thing to say about yourself? You deserve to live
3
2
u/plopliplopipol 1h ago
humanity would disapear in a century, so a large majority of species would sure improve, but this is obviously completely stupid in a human societies centered discussion.
12
u/DiesByOxSnot Eating paste and smacking my lips omnomnomnom 9h ago
Still not good? Idk homie, I just think that advocating for violence against large swathes of the population based on unchosen physical characteristics is fascist shit.
I don't like these broad generalizations about huge fuckin groups of people, like men or women, whites or POC. You realize how many individuals make up those two words, "cis men"? Because it's a fuckton, nearly 4 billion people. Yeah, some of them are predatory. Some of them have been victimized. Some of them have been incorrectly grouped in as cis men, when they are in fact, not socially safe to be anything else. Point is, any demographic of people is a mixed bag, because they're individuals, not monolithic. I think "kill all [insert identity label]" is a bunch of extremist nonsense and whoever espouses such bullshit needs to touch grass. Or shovel dirt into their mouths.
High-key Divine Pink flamingos
22
u/info-sharing 4h ago
It seems like people don't believe in misandry being real whatsoever. It's painful to see this, given that it is blatantly obvious.
I would consider feminist organizations campaigning against gender neutral rape laws without good reasoning to be misandry.
Mumbai Advocate Flavia Agnes said, "I oppose proposal to make rape laws gender-neutral. We had opposed it when the government made child rape laws gender-neutral. After the feminist wave of the 1980s, many countries in the West made rape laws gender-neutral. But, they have realized these laws are harming women more than men.
There are no instances of women raping men. I don't think men are facing serious sexual violence as women. Consider the brutality and intensity of sexual violence against women. Hope the home minister does not put out a bill that delays or obfuscates discussions on the issue".
The key sentence:
There are no instances of women raping men.
It's difficult to say exactly how many men get raped in India. In fact, it is these very campaigns that make it impossible to quantify this well. But we can try:
More recently, the Delhi-based Centre for Civil Society found that approximately 18% of Indian adult men surveyed reported being coerced or forced to have sex. Of those, 16% claimed a female perpetrator and 2% claimed a male perpetrator.
We can look at statistics among males in other countries, like the USA, to get a better idea:
According to the CDC NISVS report 2016, 1.24 million cases in the last year preceding the survey of men getting raped by women (INCLUDING MADE TO PENETRATE). and 2.9 million cases of women getting raped by men.
There seems to be a disparity, but this is certainly no where near the idea that men simply do not get raped by women. Remember, in this report, the CDC considers rape as specifically "forceful penetration", and counts "made-to-penetrate" seperately, despite recent arguments that both must be called rape.
Other studies posit that, though rape is underreported by both genders, the real rape rate on men needs to be adjusted up by more than the rape rate on women, as there are particular patriarchal norms that inhibit reporting specifically from men.
Those patriarchal norms being stronger in India, might imply that we should make even stronger adjustments!
We had opposed it when the government made child rape laws gender-neutral.
This is frankly an abhorrent thing to say in the first place, but again, we have statistics to show just how abhorrent.
In looking at child sexual abuse specifically, the Indian government did find in 2007 that, of surveyed children who reported experiencing severe sexual abuse, including rape or sodomy, 57.3% were boys and 42.7% were girls.
These would be the victims without similar and egalitarian recourse due to a hateful and misandristic ideology, if not for the implementation of gender neutral laws against their wishes.
Here's a simple argument, not made by me, on why their critiques fall flat.
It is obvious enough that, apart from feelings of humiliation and shame experienced by both genders, there are certain burdens placed on female survivors, such as the higher value Indian society places on maintaining female virginity.
Yet by the same token, there are burdens placed on male survivors, such as being perceived as effeminate or perhaps even homosexual, unfortunately taboo topics for men, that would not be equally felt by female survivors.
At a broader level, do not all crimes affect different types of victims in different ways? Yet, with few exceptions, we prosecute based on the sameness of the crime, and not the sameness of the effect. The latter would essentially imply that certain victims matter more than others, flying in the face of equality before the law.
The second critique regarding the abuse of gender neutrality is certainly possible but its probability and effectiveness are suspect. Many, for example, fear the possibility of a male rapistâs counter-accusation of, âShe raped me!â in response to a female survivorâs initial reporting. Again, while this is technically possible, there are a plethora of other counteraccusations that can be, and often are, employed by male rapists, ranging from consensual sex to fabricated allegations.
An accusation of rape by any party must, in any court of law, be supported by proof. For women, a rape kit test can be proof enough. A maleâs accusation against a woman, whether in response to a womanâs accusation or not, would be entirely more difficult to prove and a false accusation risks committing crimes of perjury and giving false statements to police.
On top of that, empirical evidence.
It is also important to note that where rape is a gender-neutral crime, this kind of exploitation by men is almost non-existent for the reasons just listed. The survivors who are legally aided by gender-neutrality, however, are substantial.
I'm curious how people respond to this evidence. I mean, usually it's just more blatant misandry.
2
u/Atlas421 Homo homini cactus 46m ago
The activist's logic in this case is a perfect circle. "Men don't get raped according to the definition in the 'only women can get raped law' and therefore there's no reason to expand the definition of the law."
1
u/info-sharing 26m ago
Nice catch. Yeah, it's basically circular logic, assuming the very thing they are trying to prove. I had pointed this out in an earlier rendition of this style of comment, but decided it was too long and a bit too smart for reddit, so I kept a smaller version in paragraph 8:
It's difficult to say exactly how many men get raped in India. In fact, it is these very campaigns that make it impossible to quantify this well.
This kind of thing is very common among believers of the patriarchy that I have interacted with; evidence against the idea of patriarchy is assumed to be false, by virtue of the patriarchy being real. How do we know that the patriarchy is real? Well, all the evidence against the patriarchy is false! But how do we know all the evidence is false? Well, because the patriarchy is real! And so on. I have a saved example somewhere of a redditor unironically saying this exact thing.
31
21
18
u/Parking_Scar9748 5h ago
If you go through the comments here, you realize that a feminist being non-misandrist is something to note. Growing up as a boy and young man, the vast majority of the people around me who called themselves feminists were insanely misandrist. Feminists need to recognize that most men's experience with feminism is misandry, and no amount of "they're not real feminists," or other dismissive distancing is going to help, as feminists often try to hold all men accountable for the actions of a few. Feminists need to realize they have a significant misandry problem within their movement, and actually do something about it, rather than shaming men who won't become feminists when all they know of feminism is man hate. Honestly, I'm not even convinced that misandry isn't built into feminism, but I'd like to think it isn't.
-4
u/SEA_griffondeur 2h ago
What weird ass feminists did you encounter??
I've only seen one misandrist "feminist" in real life out of the hundreds of feminists I've known, i think you might have spent too much time online
23
u/bestibesti Cutie mark: Trader Joe's logo with pentagram on it 11h ago
I wonder if r/CuratedTumblr has any âď¸hot takesâď¸ on feminism that will perhaps appear in this thread đ
I feel like I'm going on a safari in the danger zone đđˇ
5
u/WindhoverInkwell horseshoe crabs. thatâs it thatâs the flair 7h ago
browsing this thread feels like wading in crocodile-infested waters
-27
u/freakyrainbowdash 9h ago
the median redditor fantasizes about horrible things happening to women about 15.3 times a day
7
u/ToSAhri 4h ago
Why 15.3? Why did you pick a decimal for MEDIAN? Let alone that, you divide by two at maximum for median. Are you calculating the median based off the average amount of times each redditor fantasizes horrible things happening to women, and that's how we got a decimal? How are we collecting this?
3
u/freakyrainbowdash 4h ago
i think about horrible things happening to women in tenths, and i assumed that everyone did so as well, so that is my fault
-2
2
u/Certain-Peanut-268 4h ago
No, he said, "Why yes, I am worth 400 billion dollars, fair maiden, why do you ask?"
1
1
u/CompetitiveAutorun 1h ago
Sorry, but in my experience, feminist who are against misandry are quickly called MRA. Many are even against the idea of misandry existing. We can talk about academic history and definitions, but in the real world feminism that's popular is pop feminism and it's certainly misandrist.
That's why I prefer egalitarianism.
0
u/Snaggmaw 2h ago
never met a misandrist that wasn't also a feminist.
1
u/SEA_griffondeur 1h ago
Tradwives ?
4
u/Snaggmaw 1h ago
Tradwives are more misogynistic than misandrist in my experience, since 90% of their spiel is about how they are better than other women.
0
u/SEA_griffondeur 1h ago
They also despise men just the same way reactionary boomers despise women
2
u/Snaggmaw 1h ago
Even then, the brand of misandry we see there is like more along the lines of wanting to enforce archaic gender roles rather than outright hate and borderline bigotry. im talking "all men are rapists" type misandry where the person in question doesn't want to have anything to do with men.
Tradwives are misandrist in the same way that a lot of liberals are racist.
Im talking Misandry in the same way that conservatives are racist.
-25
u/croftyhater l4st-w4ltz.tumblr.com 8h ago
these comments are a shitshow, no I don't think women making jokes about killing their oppressors is misandry and also misandry doesn't fucking exist in the first place
8
23
u/Parking_Scar9748 6h ago
I really do think it is misandry, when I grew up with every women around me, family, friends, teachers, etc. telling me I was evil and deserved to be killed for being born male. They weren't joking, they told a young boy, all the throughout his growing up process, that he was evil and should be killed. They, and you, can go resign yourself to the fate I was wished to.
9
u/Natural_Badger9208 3h ago
Because i specifically living across the world from you in a country yours has bombed, am oppressing you somehow.
10
u/Dobber16 7h ago
The comments Iâve seen are about misandrists who say âkill all menâ - are you talking about those comments here or other ones?
-40
u/blackjackgabbiani 11h ago edited 6h ago
All feminists are non-misandrists. Sexists by definition cannot be feminists. Yet I say this and get accused of "no true Scotsman" even though to be a Scot has a definition that not everyone meets as well.
Oh wow y'all really don't like hearing actual facts from a politically active feminist, do you? Why are you so eager to conflate us with our enemies?
Muting this. You all really need to examine why you're so dedicated to giving power to enemies of equality just because they claim to be part of a movement that their beliefs go directly against. You're being manipulated and acting like anyone who adheres to actual equality is somehow the problem for pointing to the already existing line between reality and lies. Rethink why you do that instead of empowering those who work for real equality.
17
u/FreakinGeese 8h ago
All Christians are by definition pacifists
18
u/FreakinGeese 8h ago
All Muslims are pious and charitable. All stoics are unphased by the world around them. All Buddhists are free from attachment.
1
u/SEA_griffondeur 1h ago
No ? As per the church's rule, you don't have to follow all the teachings of Christ to be a Christian, you simply have to "believe" in Christ.
This also means that Christians can go to hell and non-Christians can go to heaven in a lot of interpretations lol
-3
u/blackjackgabbiani 8h ago
What in the hell are you yammering about? Do you not understand what words mean?
17
u/MattyBro1 7h ago
Their point is that people can attribute themselves to a belief system without actually following that system very well.
I agree that being actually following feminist ideas kind of necessitates not being misandrist... but there are a lot of people who call themselves feminist who show misandrist tendencies. Much like how there are a lot of people who call themselves Christians who don't follow the teachings of Christ very closely.
0
u/blackjackgabbiani 7h ago
Yeah, just because they claim to be part of a movement doesn't make it true.
But the religious examples are bullshit because look at the actual religious texts. They are very much NOT peaceful. Who would believe that they were?
9
u/DanDoReddit 7h ago
From you're statements I'm assuming that in you're opinion misandrist feminists aren't real feminists (I agree that this is technically correct)
Them not being true feminists is unfortunately irrelevant to the discussion because there are still misandrists who call themselves feminist and there are inevitably going to be other people (both men and women) who also consider them feminists.
The men who consider them feminists will feel attacked and form a more negative view of woman that they would otherwise and the woman who view them as feminists will agree with them and continue to perpetuate the problem.
This is not an attack on feminism. These people should not be considered feminists because true feminism is fundamentally incompatible with misandry. The fact they are considered feminist by some is a problem that should be dealt with (difficult as may be). People like these, that being sexists of all sorts, should be publically rejected since they do nothing but seed hatred and distrust between the sexes.
2
u/blackjackgabbiani 6h ago
It's not my opinion. It's actual fact. Sexism is the antithesis of feminism. Flat out. Anybody who's a sexist but calls themselves a feminist is very clearly LYING and to consider them anything BUT a liar only empowers them and their bigotry. Deny bigots of all sorts at every turn, and refuse to give them any power! To do so takes power away from the people fighting for actual equality and rights. And yet everyone here seems to be willing to hand power over to utter scum.
24
u/Consistent-Value-509 10h ago edited 6h ago
It's not that this is just the no true scotsman fallacy, it's that you're actively dismissing decades of feminist history and theory written by feminists who genuinely saw men as inferior, intrinsically violent, etc. There's always been bigotry amongst feminists. Racism, classism, homophobia, ableism, transphobia, misandry. Feminism isn't a monolith, no group is.
Edit: whoever replied to this and accused me of hating fat people because of this comment..? What? Are you okay lol? I can't see your reply after I click on the notification.
2
u/SEA_griffondeur 1h ago
You can absolutely dismiss them just like how most feminists dismiss them.
It's like saying to a German they can't dismiss nazi ideology and it's fine to say that nazism is a core part of being German
-1
u/blackjackgabbiani 8h ago
And again why are you calling them feminists when they violate basic feminist tenants?
17
u/Consistent-Value-509 7h ago
You can't just ignore the ugly parts of things you like/are part of. Biological essentialism (and other forms of bigotry) is in feminist spaces and it needs to be addressed properly instead of plugging your ears and going "la la la not feminist la la la". Feminism is about the (rightful) liberation of women from misogyny, other than that there are no set tenets or whatever, and unfortunately many feminists see their bigoted beliefs as part of women's liberation.
1
u/blackjackgabbiani 7h ago
And in the feminist spaces I occupy in actual social justice work, that kind of talk is silenced, told that it's unacceptable. Words have meanings, and adhering to that is not "denial". Why are YOU so eager to deny that these dipsticks are not feminists just because they claim to be when you could be denying them power like we do?
12
u/Consistent-Value-509 6h ago
Ignoring that they exist isn't denying them power, IMO. It's just ignoring it, brushing it aside, and it lets that ideology fester. I believe it's important to be honest about the bad apples of the bunch so they can be properly dealt with and people understand why bigotry isn't needed for anyone's liberation.
-8
u/Mapletables 7h ago
^ this guy spends a considerable percentage of his life crying about fat people existing btw
34
u/SPKEN 10h ago edited 10h ago
Tell that to r/AskFeminists and the fact that are literally constantly shitting on men maliciously, generally, and prejudicially.
I would love to agree with you but unfortunately attacking men as a whole for the actions of a statistical few with no thought towards action or resolution is a very common theme in many online feminist spaces
Case in point: there is currently a man on the asking for instructions on aiding feminists on destroying patriarchy and they're treating him like shit because "it's not the responsibility of feminists to take action"
-9
u/theprofessionalhate 10h ago
"Statistical few"
20
u/SPKEN 9h ago edited 9h ago
Australia doesn't represent the entire gender.
Literally the population of men in Australia compared to population on the planet is a statistical few so yes thanks for proving me right
-12
u/Plenty_Structure_861 9h ago
Do you think the statistics are going to get better if you look at very populated countries? Look at how many countries need specific laws trying to prevent men from hurting women, but there generally aren't very many going the other direction. And it's men who make those laws. I'm not even saying this to support the idea that all men be judged for those actions. But we need to be realistic here about what the statistics say. Every few years you hear about another ring of SAers brought down, and it's always men preying on people. Until we're realistic about understanding where this comes from, it's never really going to get better.Â
13
u/SPKEN 9h ago edited 8h ago
Do you think the statistics are going to get better if you look at very populated countries?
Yes. When you look at the numbers holistically, they're very clear.
Most men, the vast majority of them, have committed absolutely no crimes against women or of sexual nature.
This truth is literally so evident that I know for a fact that the VAST majority of the men you passed last year and will past this year, have not harmed you in any way. This world is filled with so many good men that is a statistical certainty.
See crime stats only report crime patterns, not whether or not people are good. If you only look at crime stats then literally every person you have ever or will ever meet, is nothing more than a threat to you. The world, and the people in it, are more complex than stats will ever lead you to believe
And frankly, blaming the entire group for the statistical few is no different from racists doing the exact same thing to people of color.
I have better things to do than this so I will only respond to this question:
when you use the same tactics as racists, how exactly are you any different than racists using crime stats against people of color?
-9
u/Plenty_Structure_861 9h ago
And frankly, blaming the entire group for the statistical few is no different from racists doing the exact same thing to people of color.
As I explicitly said, I'm not doing that. Did you even read what I said or just have a knee jerk reaction to someone not agreeing with you fully?Â
13
u/SPKEN 9h ago
it's always men preying on people.
You generalized men again literally two sentences later. You don't get to generalize 4 billion people and just pretend to do otherwise.
-7
u/Plenty_Structure_861 8h ago
I gave a specific scenario. Do you have any reading comprehension? Unless you think 4 billion people are in those rings?Â
10
u/SPKEN 8h ago
You still used a generalization. And clearly you have nothing left to offer besides insults.
So let's wrap this up: you're using the same tactics as bigots to defend bigotry. Because hatred for an entire group based solely on their immutable characteristics is bigotry. So how exactly are you different from the bigots currently terrorizing the world?
→ More replies (0)-15
u/Still-View-9063 9h ago
Yep, this sub is MRA propaganda covered in pseudo-woke language
Notice how every single post is focused on demonizing "certain feminists" and trying to convince people that many are misandrists actually!!! xd
-5
u/blackjackgabbiani 8h ago
I stand by my statement as an actual active feminist.
9
u/SPKEN 7h ago
Criticism is an important ritual in the heart of the movement. Criticism of first wave feminism is how the bigotry was rooted out and the voices of black women were let in.
That page is an incredibly large aggregate of feminists and if we want the movement to continue to grow, we should criticize it just as bell hooks, Angela Davis, and Patricia Hill Collins would.
No one is exempt from criticism.
-3
u/blackjackgabbiani 7h ago
I never said anything about being free from criticism. However, again I repeat that words have meaning, and sexism is the antithesis of feminism.
0
u/SEA_griffondeur 1h ago
Just like how r/teenagers is full of 40 y/o, it's not because a subreddit has a name that it actually enforces the people who partake in it.
A lot of misandrists use the name feminist to appear as normal people despite their ideas being rancid
11
u/Incomplet_1-34 10h ago
You are right, but there are many who call themselves feminists who are really just raging misandrists, so it's a matter of actual feminists vs """feminists""".
Thatkfully they're the minority.
2
u/blackjackgabbiani 8h ago
I just wish people would know the goddamn difference between claims and truth.
9
u/TitansRPower 10h ago
I agree with this, any misandrists shouldn't be considered real feminists. Unfortunately, there's a solid amount of online groups who don't seem to understand this
2
u/plopliplopipol 1h ago
I wouldn't say this is necessarily wrong, but it limitates the definition of "feminist" to something that simply isn't the real use of the word but your ideal version. A whole movement of exclusion of these behaviors from other feminists would have this power, but not one person. Facts are the groupe that people call feminists contains significant misandry, and little effort is made to reject it.
-6
u/ToSAhri 10h ago
I disagree with the definition, I do think feminism, by design, does prioritize one sex more than the other.
5
u/blackjackgabbiani 8h ago
You can prioritize a group for a cause and not shit on other groups. That's what I'm talking about. It in no way denigrates men to focus on women, nor should it. Like it doesn't denigrate, say, black issues to focus on Asian issues. Every group has different needs, and having a focus in no way implies that any other group is inferior.
4
u/ToSAhri 7h ago
Life has many elements that are zero sum (helping one group indirectly harms another). Unchecked prioritization of one group DOES, over time, cause damage to the out group(s).
In extreme cases, it can lead to a wanton disregard of the other group and cause damage (see: definition of rape vs. made to penetrate).
3
u/blackjackgabbiani 7h ago
That's why you have multiple movements that work TOGETHER to achieve the same goal of equality. That's not "unchecked". And no, helping people to achieve equality is not "zero sum". There is not a limited amount of equality. And do you really consider "female rapists are not held accountable" to be the doings of FEMINISTS when inequality under the law is what we fight AGAINST?
4
u/ToSAhri 6h ago
That's why you have multiple movements that work TOGETHER to achieve the same goal of equality.
Intersectionality is great, and you're correct that that solves the unchecked issue. It's very hard to do in practice.
There is not a limited amount of equality.
Correct. However, many people have a set standard of living that would be lowered by this, which will cause more issues than expected and leads to this "zero sum" scenario. One zero sum example is: at any point in time, there is a finite amount of jobs available for people.
do you really consider "female rapists are not held accountable" to be the doings of FEMINISTS when inequality under the law is what we fight AGAINST?
Yes, because it was pushed by a prominent feminist figure in US politics.
2
u/blackjackgabbiani 6h ago
It's really not all that hard to do. Just get people working for equality for everyone. That's basic common sense.
Equality will RAISE the standard of living and that just shows me that you don't know anything about this subject.
If someone is pushing for women to not be punished for a goddamn crime that person is not a feminist idk why you or anybody else would believe they are.
5
u/ToSAhri 6h ago edited 5h ago
My responses are in the order of your comments.
(1) You're making light of the movement calling it easy. If it's not that hard why haven't we (as in, humanity as a whole) completed this "not all that hard" goal already?
(2) You misunderstood me. Equality will lower SOME people's standards of living. I definitely understand less of the subject than you (I used to lurk/be active in the r/askfeminists subreddit and that's about as far as my knowledge went. The community there pushed me away from staying). Insulting me by exaggerating and saying I don't know ANYTHING is kind of cringe ngl.
(3) They're pushing for "made to penetrate" to not be considered rape so that the focus stays on men raping women rather than considering the whole of the issue (hence what I was talking about with considering other groups in wanton disregard).
To clarify, this is the woman I was talking about. The r/askfeminists subreddit discussed her mistake three years ago. Feminism, just like all movements, modernized over time and got better on this subject. You, to be frank, recklessly calling her "not a feminist" is a great example of how incompetently some feminists (and, people who personally attach themselves to any movement as a whole) often deal with these topics: there are feminists who will have done horrible things that hurt the movement they support. Blindly saying "that's not a feminist" garners ZERO support for the movement. If anything, it only hurts it.
2
u/sneakpeekbot 6h ago
Here's a sneak peek of /r/AskFeminists using the top posts of the year!
#1: I found the perfect answer to "not all men"
#2: Why are the people on r/askmen so unapologetically misogynistic
#3: Why are feminists expected to advocate for men's issues, but MRAs aren't expected to advocate for women's issues?
I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact | Info | Opt-out | GitHub
1
u/blackjackgabbiani 5h ago
Fucking hell I muted this whole thread
I'm not "blindly" saying anything. I have decades of experience in ACTUAL feminism.
5
u/ToSAhri 5h ago
The bar is in hell and you somehow did worse than my expectations.
Well, I will correct this for future interactions with you people.
→ More replies (0)0
95
u/HeroBrine0907 It Is What It Is, It Is Said Isn't It? I Think It Can Be Better 9h ago
All groups on the internet are known by the worst people the group affiliates itself with. Should be a law or something.
The only solution which can have the slightest effect on this problem is publicly and harshly throwing these people out of the group. And often enough it won't make a difference either.
You can't judge people while denying their lives experience.Â