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.
Therefore, misandry cannot exist in our current society
It can and does though, you changing your definition of these words to try and avoid reality and blaming criticism of your arguments on rape culture is exactly the sort of problematic behaviour that is pushing boys away from the left.
If you don’t mean to dismiss the prejudice men encounter, don’t assert that the thing they described doesn’t exist. Even if they used a word in a way you would not.
You’re not the language police, and using a word as it’s defined in the dictionary is not a sin against gender-equality.
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.
It can and does though, you changing your definition of these words to try and avoid reality and blaming criticism of your arguments on rape culture is exactly the sort of problematic behaviour that is pushing boys away from the left.
Except, it’s not.
Maybe you should try and be introspective about why you are twisting definitions to downplay poor behaviour from particular groups.
If you don’t mean to dismiss the prejudice men encounter, don’t assert that the thing they described doesn’t exist. Even if they used a word in a way you would not.
You’re not the language police, and using a word as it’s defined in the dictionary is not a sin against gender-equality.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/misandry