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 strongly encourage you to strive for more precise language. If observers regularly make the same rhetorical rebuttals to your statements, that’s a signal that you should seek a clearer phrasing.
When you say something like “misandry isn’t a thing” or “blacks can’t be racist towards whites”, it’s very easy for someone not already familiar with modern usage to hear “[hating men because they’re men] isn’t a thing” or “blacks can’t be [racially biased against] whites”, even if you meant “[sexist oppression of men] isn’t a thing” or “blacks can’t be [systematically advantaged over] whites.” And then we all get to waste time arguing over the precise meaning of words while those in favor of oppression gleefully watch.
Likely every white guy you’ve ever met has a first or second had experience of being presumed dangerous because they’re a man or being presumed a bigot because of their skin color. These presumptions are often soft and quickly discarded, and they certainly aren’t a big a problem as rape-culture or the school-to-prison pipeline, but just because the wrongs are lesser does not mean they don’t exist.
Likely every white guy you’ve ever met has a first or second had experience of being presumed dangerous because they’re a man or being presumed a bigot because of their skin color. These presumptions are often soft and quickly discarded[…]but just because the wrongs are lesser does not mean they don’t exist.
Ah right, my mistake, folks who are oppressed by inherent power imbalances are treating those that have privilege with prejudice because *checks notes* they…vibe check…folks…that look like their oppressors? Yep, nope, that definitely checks out.
I’m sorry if you at all got the impression that I don’t understand why being a white guy gets treated with prejudice by those who are traumatized by the systemic oppression of a society biased towards rich white guys.
But quoting me and eliding the part where I specifically note that such prejudice is lesser and understandable is bad form.
But quoting me and eliding the part where I specifically note that such prejudice is lesser and understandable is bad form.
It’s not like it was hidden from view for anyone reading the thread, or that I didn’t make it clear that I was eliding a part of the quote.
People responding to their trauma isn’t prejudice. What you’re saying is rape culture. I’m an SA survivor myself. Telling me that my being cautious is somehow hateful towards men is a wild approach.
Just because a judgement based on someone’s sex or race is based on honest fear doesn’t make it accurate or fair.
You arent just “being cautious”. This is a topic-based social media platform in the comments of a topic specially about the experiences of young men, where you’ve actively dismissed the subjective experiences of men even when we concede that our discomfort is of less urgency than your trauma.
Whether or not you are motivated by hate, your actions can still do harm.
Pointing out that misandry doesn’t exist is seperate from me being cautious in my everyday life. Trying to conflate the two as a gotcha to win an internet argument is also perpetuating rape culture.
[…]where you’ve actively dismissed the subjective experiences of men even when we concede that our discomfort is of less urgency than your trauma.
I haven’t denied that men are treated with prejudice at times, or that they face discomfort. I am saying that the definition of, say, misogyny, is systemic. Therefore, misandry cannot exist in our current society.
All of this honestly feels like an MRA op or something, similar to the “queer is a slur” TERF op in the early 2010s that started on tumblr. Innocent bystanders spread that stuff too, I’m not claiming you’re an MRA.
Seriously wondering about leaving the Fediverse because of this stuff. You literally don’t ever see these takes on Bluesky, outside of some folks that get shunned, even amongst men there. I genuinely wonder if it’s because there’s no PoC on the fediverse, all of them have been chased off whenever they point out racism. If there were, they’d probably bite the head off anyone claiming you can be racist towards white people.
Also just, people unironically using the term “terminally online leftists” in this thread is insane conservative nonsense. Other countries and cultures exist, and in most of them the Overton window is far to the left of the US’. I’m a member of a far left political party, I’ve been to rallies and involved with other leftist orgs. When conversations come up around the topic in the OP, no one says fuck men and no one says “misandry” is the problem. Most of the conversations centre around how to regulate US social media companies, how algorithms radicalise young men, how there’s no way that’s an accident.
So I agree, figuring out a way to talk to young men already radicalised is important, and a discussion that is lacking in leftist spaces. But parroting MRA talking points, like that they are facing systemic prejudice, in order to deradicalise them just ain’t it chief.
And that’s how you fail miserably to rally people to you cause but instead alienate them and push them into the arms of the right. Goodjob. You’ve demonstrated the OPs original point perfectly.
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 strongly encourage you to strive for more precise language. If observers regularly make the same rhetorical rebuttals to your statements, that’s a signal that you should seek a clearer phrasing.
When you say something like “misandry isn’t a thing” or “blacks can’t be racist towards whites”, it’s very easy for someone not already familiar with modern usage to hear “[hating men because they’re men] isn’t a thing” or “blacks can’t be [racially biased against] whites”, even if you meant “[sexist oppression of men] isn’t a thing” or “blacks can’t be [systematically advantaged over] whites.” And then we all get to waste time arguing over the precise meaning of words while those in favor of oppression gleefully watch.
Likely every white guy you’ve ever met has a first or second had experience of being presumed dangerous because they’re a man or being presumed a bigot because of their skin color. These presumptions are often soft and quickly discarded, and they certainly aren’t a big a problem as rape-culture or the school-to-prison pipeline, but just because the wrongs are lesser does not mean they don’t exist.
Ah right, my mistake, folks who are oppressed by inherent power imbalances are treating those that have privilege with prejudice because *checks notes* they…vibe check…folks…that look like their oppressors? Yep, nope, that definitely checks out.
I’m sorry if you at all got the impression that I don’t understand why being a white guy gets treated with prejudice by those who are traumatized by the systemic oppression of a society biased towards rich white guys.
But quoting me and eliding the part where I specifically note that such prejudice is lesser and understandable is bad form.
It’s not like it was hidden from view for anyone reading the thread, or that I didn’t make it clear that I was eliding a part of the quote.
People responding to their trauma isn’t prejudice. What you’re saying is rape culture. I’m an SA survivor myself. Telling me that my being cautious is somehow hateful towards men is a wild approach.
Just because a judgement based on someone’s sex or race is based on honest fear doesn’t make it accurate or fair.
You arent just “being cautious”. This is a topic-based social media platform in the comments of a topic specially about the experiences of young men, where you’ve actively dismissed the subjective experiences of men even when we concede that our discomfort is of less urgency than your trauma.
Whether or not you are motivated by hate, your actions can still do harm.
Pointing out that misandry doesn’t exist is seperate from me being cautious in my everyday life. Trying to conflate the two as a gotcha to win an internet argument is also perpetuating rape culture.
I haven’t denied that men are treated with prejudice at times, or that they face discomfort. I am saying that the definition of, say, misogyny, is systemic. Therefore, misandry cannot exist in our current society.
All of this honestly feels like an MRA op or something, similar to the “queer is a slur” TERF op in the early 2010s that started on tumblr. Innocent bystanders spread that stuff too, I’m not claiming you’re an MRA.
Seriously wondering about leaving the Fediverse because of this stuff. You literally don’t ever see these takes on Bluesky, outside of some folks that get shunned, even amongst men there. I genuinely wonder if it’s because there’s no PoC on the fediverse, all of them have been chased off whenever they point out racism. If there were, they’d probably bite the head off anyone claiming you can be racist towards white people.
Also just, people unironically using the term “terminally online leftists” in this thread is insane conservative nonsense. Other countries and cultures exist, and in most of them the Overton window is far to the left of the US’. I’m a member of a far left political party, I’ve been to rallies and involved with other leftist orgs. When conversations come up around the topic in the OP, no one says fuck men and no one says “misandry” is the problem. Most of the conversations centre around how to regulate US social media companies, how algorithms radicalise young men, how there’s no way that’s an accident.
So I agree, figuring out a way to talk to young men already radicalised is important, and a discussion that is lacking in leftist spaces. But parroting MRA talking points, like that they are facing systemic prejudice, in order to deradicalise them just ain’t it chief.
blahblahblah blocked.
And that’s how you fail miserably to rally people to you cause but instead alienate them and push them into the arms of the right. Goodjob. You’ve demonstrated the OPs original point perfectly.