one thing i've noticed, is that when you get into less moderated, harder to moderate, and less centralized services, particularly anti-censorship ones, you get a lot of shitty people congregating there. And the reason why is pretty simple, it's because you can. Some of it is probably just edgy shitposting, because, internet. Some of it is also just genuine, because again, the internet.
So you get this weird thing where it fractures heavily, into to small communal groups, that each do their own thing. But you have a broad group of outliers, who generally exist outside of this space also, which means that it tends to be rather hit and miss what you find.
This is one of the reasons i really like the darknet conceptually. Yes there may be racism there, but you know what else isn't there? Rules, and you know what that means? People can make their own however they please. Don't like it? Go away, simple as that.
I was at a shitty crustpunk bar once getting an after-work beer. One of those shitholes where the bartenders clearly hate you. So the bartender and I were ignoring one another when someone sits next to me and he immediately says, "no. get out."
And the dude next to me says, "hey i'm not doing anything, i'm a paying customer." and the bartender reaches under the counter for a bat or something and says, "out. now." and the dude leaves, kind of yelling. And he was dressed in a punk uniform, I noticed
Anyway, I asked what that was about and the bartender was like, "you didn't see his vest but it was all nazi shit. Iron crosses and stuff. You get to recognize them."
And i was like, ohok and he continues.
"you have to nip it in the bud immediately. These guys come in and it's always a nice, polite one. And you serve them because you don't want to cause a scene. And then they become a regular and after awhile they bring a friend. And that dude is cool too.
And then THEY bring friends and the friends bring friends and they stop being cool and then you realize, oh shit, this is a Nazi bar now. And it's too late because they're entrenched and if you try to kick them out, they cause a PROBLEM. So you have to shut them down.
And i was like, 'oh damn.' and he said "yeah, you have to ignore their reasonable arguments because their end goal is to be terrible, awful people."
And then he went back to ignoring me. But I haven't forgotten that at all.
The biggest mistake new moderators make is allowing bad actors to use the rules against them. You can't be too prescriptive, you can't give them ammo to go "well this doesn't technically violate any rule." And when they complain you have a "don't disrupt the community" rule and say it's "too vague" just tag them as potentially a problem and see what they do. In my experience, they inevitably deserve a ban.
This is my experience moderating communities as well. The worst trolls get a kick out of testing how far they can stretch the rules and provoke mayhem without getting banned. Excessively explicit rules also trample over people who would usually cause no trouble, but get too tense under exceptional situations.
Some people don’t know how to click downvote and move on with their day,
or make a comment,
or unsubscribe,
or make their own c/ComicsExceptPizzaCake community.
Some people have to talk to the manager and waste my time.
Damm, I didn’t know there were people with such a hateboner for pizzacake. Her stuff is not top shelf comedy but they tend to give me a chuckle consistently.
Completely agree. The normal silly comics are usually somewhat amusing. Can't say I like her more misandry ones, but they tend to be responses to actual assholes, so I just ignore them and move on when I see them.
To be fair, I've also seen a significant number of cases where a guy venting that a woman was shitty to him has been deemed misogyny unless he makes an explicit effort to make it clear he's only talking about those specific women and it does not generalize to any woman not specifically mentioned.
I have zero thoughts or comments on this specific comic, but can we please leave pizzacake on reddit? They were already plenty inescapable enough there.
They're boring and lame, and they have a cultish following of people who defend them not because they are actually good, but because the artist receives abuse.
This comic is a prime example of it. Completely unfunny, unoriginal, strawman argument that achieves nothing more than making people argue with each other.
When the response is 'mods should ban this artist's work,' absofuckinglutely more justification is needed. Kneejerk hatred for something popular is childish. Whining about it to others is performative sneering. Expecting authority to enforce a shallow contrarian opinion is just plain shitty.
Underlined in bold when half the complaints go 'We're not like that! Fuck this bitch!'
true but wanting people to stop posting something and asking the mods to ban it are different things, if that is what u got from the original comment that is an extremely... extreme reading of it. If that is the context u had in mind for ur comment i dont disagree but imma be honest i think u misread it.
Your downvote doesn't change reality. Dave, the person you linked, isn't a moderator here. They weren't relaying a mod report, they were just a user telling a story.
You made a factually inaccurate statement and doubled down on it.
And that marginal overstep in describing kneejerk hatred changes the discussion in some meaningful way. There's still multiple people overtly saying 'let's never post this' or 'I automatically downvote this.' There's still people accusing the author of "misandry" for describing, essentially, this thread. The silent downvote was to avoid making this sort of comment, where I fully expect the reply to be some 'ah-ha!' that misses the point: people absolutely hate this comic for no sensible reason, and they're not shy about it.
You posted your comments in reply to my comment specifically, while all I have asked is for this drama shitstorm to not come here on lemmy. I never accused her of misandry, never asked for any prohibition of her work, never even made any mention of the comic at hand or the topic it alludes to. Yet I was lumped in with incels and accused of trying to enforce prohibition.
Personally, I don't care why people have feeling about this comic creator or whether or not those reasons are sensible. I just don't want to see this exact shit here. That's it.
Meanwhile you've been making specific accusations and basing them on what seems to be nothing more than your gut feelings and assumptions, and wouldn't retract them even when this fact was pointed out.
If you have issues with others and their treatment of this creator, I suggest you bring it up in replies to them, not to me.
Genuinely, what is your goal? How would you like for this interaction to proceed or conclude?
all I have asked is for this drama shitstorm to not come here on lemmy.
Your root comment is the drama.
I am specifically taking issue with your treatment of this creator.
I want you to stop having and publicly expressing a kneejerk reaction to seeing this artist's work, if there's no justifiable reason. You didn't say "can we please leave the drama on reddit?" You said: "can we please leave pizzacake on reddit?"
Things do not exist in a vacuum. You cannot divorce this creator from the context of their works and fandom. That simply isn't how the world works.
But I am perfectly fine with you disagreeing with my take on the matter. I only object when you impugn me with false accusations. Don't accuse me of labeling this creator as anything and don't accuse me of calling for prohibition and I'm fine.
Yes, I have a kneejerk reaction to seeing this creator's work for the contextual reasons mentioned, and I am fine with you objecting to that. If that was your point, then cool, your complaint has officially been registered. But you sure did a shitty job presenting that as your point.
You don't ever want to see this artist's comics posted here, regardless of what those comics are. Clutch your pearls all you like - that's awful. That's terrible behavior, and you blame it on other people. Splitting hairs about how and why exactly you never want to see her work again simply means nothing.
It is inseparable from the very drama you are whining about in the first place. It is that drama.
Abuse is an absurd suggestion, especially considering the overt special treatment this creator receives on the other site. Just a bananas suggestion. Nobody is entitled to my viewership, and I am welcome to express my viewing preferences, even attempt to exert them within the realms of reason. Saying "I don't like this content and I do not want to see more of it" is not abuse to anyone, in any stretch of the imagination.
"Drama shitstorm" sounds pretty abusive, my guy. People are so toxic about this artist that you never want to see her work again. Have you even expressed an opinion of this content? Unless I'm mistaken, you've insisted you don't even care what the comic is, because you're automatically opposed to the "context." You are effectively blaming the artist for the whiners who follow her around complaining about her.
How is what you're doing not participating in that whining? What's the fucking difference?
But oh, my apologies, why should anyone else be "entitled" to post anything you don't like? What a reasonable framing, not absurd in the slightest. All you've done is ask that nobody ever post anything from this person ever again. That's totally distinct from prohibition in ways that matter.
I am surprised to learn that while user mod status is listed on the user page, apparently admin status is not. I wonder if that's just an oversight or by design.
I'm also surprised to learn that user reports apparently are sent to instance admins rather than community moderators; that's not how I would have expected.
Thank you for clarifying and correcting my error, cheers. ✌️
My issue with pizzacake is her wildly sycophantic fans and their disingenuous bad behavior.
So as much as I may not be a fan of pizzacake, yeah I agree she obviously isn't as awful or problematic as a literal Nazi and thus doesn't deserve to be maligned the same way as pebbleshit does.
I don't want to see this place turn into another worship space for pizzacake, but I also don't believe that she personally deserves any ire or overt negativity as a person
I legitimately don't understand how a man can be blind to this kind of treatment of women. Don't you just need to look at any treatment of women online for more than a nanosecond and you'll see this?
Protect one's ego at all costs. Anything that makes you feel bad, at all, is to be rejected.
Join in-groups that do not value or respect women.
For most people, belief is more social than we'd like to admit. So if your in-groups are a bunch of jerks who think women "talk too much" or whatever, you'll probably adopt that. It'll be continually reinforced from your socializing. Then with point #1, any time contrary evidence that does manage to break through you'll reject it rather than doing any hard work or introspection.
But just spitballing, let's imagine the victim (often but not always a woman) says something generalized like "Men are assholes online." The man hears this, and since they are a man, and since men were just called assholes, they feel like they were called an asshole. That hurts the sense of self, the ego, to accept.
I think it's the group identity thing, really? Like, the group they're a part of was insulted, so they feel personally insulted. Accepting that the group isn't great is hard for the brain. They don't want to be part of a group that's bad (men online) because that hurts their sense of self, the ego.
I'm a guy, but I don't, like, care. Not in a gender-queer or trans way, but it's just not a big deal to me. Maybe that's why if someone's like "Men are trash" I can just shrug. But if someone was like "People in New York City are pretentious, rude, assholes" I'd probably have an emotional response. But patriarchy is a much bigger and more wide spread issue, so it's not really the same.
That makes sense. Perhaps sweeping generalisations should be avoided out of concern such a response could be triggered. FWIW, there are loads of sweeping generalisations about women too. Even the ones that look innocuous bother me.
Maybe! I meant to write in my previous one but forgot: often when the person is making the sweeping generalization in this kind of context, they're upset. They're annoyed. They're not going to be their most kind, patient, self. You probably wouldn't be if some strangers just told you they were going to [threats and insults].
So while it's in a sense true that we should avoid broad generalizations, I think it's fair to cut someone slack in this kind of context. They are probably not looking to be nitpicked.
Think about times you're annoyed. Like, let's say FedEx just delivered you a smashed package for the third time in a row. You go "FedEx sucks they always ruin my packages". You probably don't need or want someone to go "actually, them deliver more than 99% of packages with no problems. Maybe you should [unsolicited advice]". It doesn't matter if that's true. That's not what you're looking for in that moment.
All of that aside, yeah, we should be mindful of speaking in absolutes.
my theory is that it's just sort of universal across the internet. You have a wrong think in a group, and that group will delete you forever.
I think there's a more specific version of this that ends up targeting women directly though.
We see it all the time with internet justice, someone posts rage bait, fake or real, people doxx them, people harm them, whatever. Shit like this just kind of happens. I think.
Selfishness, ignorance, lack of empathy, inability to see more than one perspective, misogyny, the “Well, I’m alright, Jack.” mentality, and the ability to ignore all the evidence in order to maintain my own personal view are just some of the tactics I’m employing right now to openly disbelieve what you tell me is your own personal lived experience. Glad I could mansplain explain that for you. s/
I suppose some men are just so used to their own toxicity that they just look down on anyone who "can't take it". Women suffer even more because they are more easily targeted and "will never be as tough"
I think it's just one of those like, hostile to anything not seen as "default" kinda things, right? there are two sexes, male, and political, two races, white, and political, two orientations, straight and political, kinda deal.
I think that's probably the case for some people in some communities. More broadly? i doubt it though, i think.
Like i've followed linux communities semi regularly, and every so often you'll get mentions of queer posting in the comments, and you'll get queerphobic shit in response, which given that the linux community is mostly older people, who are nerds, that generally tracks with what you expect, but there are also always people who just aren't pieces of shit also, so idk how much of it is demographic concat, or something else entirely.
Which laws? Most institutions in pretty much every society are still largely controlled by men. If you remove laws that are meant to create more equity or to protect women from discrimination, this trend will grow stronger, as people tend to hire and prefer the company of others like themselves. Men will vote for other men and male dominated fields will continue to hire men due to explicit or subconscious bias. There are always exceptions to this, but you can see that sort of self-selection occurring even in things that are low stakes, like hobby groups.
The "colorblind" approach doesn't really work. it only serves to maintain social hierarchies by ignoring that there's a problem in the first place.
By basically not having the laws which are there to promote solving the problem, it effectively ignores that there's a problem at all. Being officially legally the same doesn't mean society treats you the same, and at that point you're trusting the population to just dissolve the hierarchies themselves with the law disallowing the methods which are actually effective at doing that which... doesn't work.
Plus there's a ton of ways to discriminate in law without mentioning gender, and having plausible deniability about it. That's what a ton of the Jim Crow era in the US was about. That's what much existing legislation does with women actually.
Yeah, I'm gonna disagree with you here. Lots of people are really comfortable being excessive shits online, especially when they have some sort of grievance. PizzaCake is like a fucking lodestone for disdain, so this has definitely happened. Worse has definitely happened.
Assuming, of course, that we're both on the same page that this comic is an illustration of an online conversation and not, like, meant to be taken literally.
If this is supposed to be an illustration of an online conversation, I could certainly see that happening, but I due to the quite extensive use of body language I certainly did not assume that.
Either way, I’ve seen a few comics of hers and they were frankly all man-hating garbage. I’m sorry to say this but she is literally this meme:
Some women also have a way of doing things that are particularly off-putting to men, so it’s equally possible that the author THOUGHT she was saying something relatively innocuous while actually coming off aggressive or accusatory.
Either way, it’s a stupid comic because it does nothing to solve the issue — it just stereotypes men as being aggressive and brutish. This is certainly not going to help improve the situation in any way.
Yeah the comic is pretty dumb, it's definitely an over simplification. Just recognize that dudes being aggressive is a thing, even if it's not all dudes, because it certainly isn't.
People online can be rather hostile sometimes, yes. But not only isn’t it always men doing it, men are also quite frequently on the receiving end of it.
if that was what u meant then there is not reason to say what u said, everyone knows everyone can be aggressive, according to u ur previous comment is basically u saying "the sky is blue". be honest with urself u know what u meant.
Bruh, we're in sma thread where someone denied the possibility of men being irrationally aggressive. I'm merely counting and saying that, no, that is a thing that happens sometimes. If they had also claimed women can't be irrationally aggressive I would have addressed that, too.
no from the look of the modlog that is definitely a lie, again be honest with urself and me i like honesty too.
pretty sure op said that this is extremely rare and that there are 2 sides to a story.
also im not convinced that in the same context but with women switch in u would have said the same that sounds like bs, like if someone made a comic complaining about abuse from women and someone in the comment said something like "this is sexist and talking about this is a distraction from real sexism because the overwhelming majority of people who are abused are actually women so this is just a tactic and people who talk about it dont actually care" u would be the exact kinda person who would agree.
Dude you just made-up a whole-ass situation and told me what I'd do. I'm dying over here.
I'm going to have to assume you're talking about women abusing their male partners, since it would a clean gender flip for that sort of thing. That shit is a real problem! Male victims of abuse routinely get laughed out of police stations when they try and report their partner, and that's if the cops don't accuse them of being the real abuser.
I dunno if you can see it through the mod log or whatever, but the person was basically like "yeah, that happened."
Anyway, being disingenuous is an exhausting way to live life. You gotta keep track of all the bullshit you're spewing so you can keep up the facade. It's a million times easier to just be a straightforward person. Nevermind that that's just a shitty way to bem
I didn’t say it’s impossible, I said that it’s rare enough to be considered a mental illness. Perhaps not so much on the Internet, but the fact that there are clearly two people physically having a discussion made me assume that this particular conversation happened IRL, not online.
And yes, I certainly have experienced similar — basically in any gender-based discussion on Lemmy there’ll be people trying to curse and attack you unless you always 100% take the female side of the issue, which I won’t do because men have a right to be men. It’s certainly true that there are a ton of things they can do to improve, but consider that every day, new people show up to the same old topics and they have to go through their own learning process as well.
In short, the basic rule of online discussion should be to never ever take anything personally because unless you know the other person IRL, it most certainly isn’t.
As far as Internet discussions go, I’ve learned that you literally just have to grow a bit of a thicker skin and not take everything too seriously. Especially the abusive stuff.
The people responding to you do not know you personally, in fact they pretty much know nothing about you except what you posted. Something that’s harmless and inoffensive to one person or relatable to another can be off-putting and offensive to the next. The only way to achieve at least a little bit of clarity is to engage in an open discussion about it if it seems worth the time and effort.
Otherwise, my rule of thumb is that if someone just starts blasting insults at me they’ve already lost the argument and I’m just going to ignore them because that’s their own issue to figure out. It might be frustrating sometimes, especially if you think you’ve made a valid point and all you get is hate in return, but at least you’ll retain your sanity. And perhaps it’s a chance to rethink how to better communicate your point, but I don’t think going out there and wholesale accusing an entire gender is going to do anything to calm the waves.
To be fair, men would get near the same response. "Stupid bitch slut Ken". The hate is the same, only the names change. The internet is a hateful place with a multitude of people willing to step up and shit on you for expressing any sort of individuality or emotion.
The whole point of the place is anonymity. This enables people to do things they otherwise wouldn't, particularly when it comes to the treatment of others. How have you not noticed this?... Like have you taken 15-20 minutes and actually given this any thought or are you just going off of emotion?
Neither side in this sex war seems willing to admit that both parties are deeply behaviorally flawed in terms of operating within an (at least in rhetoric) equitable society we all claim to want with one another.
I think step zero would be for both men and women to admit that both are deeply flawed in their engagement with one another, acknowledge both are trying to operate within sociocultural environments we are evolutionarily unprepared for, and therefore shouldn't expect perfection or even competency from the other, so we can work to bridge the massive empathy deficit between us.
But since healing doesn't trend on social media or in culture like vitriol, insult, or indignation, carry on.
i would like to request a case study from the psych department, where we make another post once this has all blown over that just says "rape bad, don't rape women MMmkay?" or something like that so we can see how the responses differ.
i'm not shitposting i just think we should do this.
but that would require taking sex out of the equation. sex is what drives all of this misery on both sides. it's much easier to empathize with people you don't want to fuck, rather than seeing them as a in terms of sexual social dynamics, where those who are sexual desirable on both sides are given leeway in behaviour that is intolerable for those who are not sexual desirable.
I would absolutely agree with you, except for all the other lines humans are always eager to draw between ourselves to the point of undermining our own brothers and sisters. Race, religion, political affiliation, economic opinions, holy shit the lines we draw for socioeconomic status, these aren't random divisions, we seek them out and make bright red angry lines, it is in our nature to draw lines in the sand between ourselves, a remnant of when there literally wasn't enough to go around and only some survived a harsh winter.
To me, again, the first step would for us all to recognize this divisive nature within ourselves and acknowledge its existence to begin mitigating its detrimental effects using societal tools and culture eyes open. Same goes for greed, same goes for hate, our impulse to divide ourselves is destructive, our only hope is to acknowledge its there, it's a near universal problem WE need to minimize.
We can't though because we prefer to play pretend we are above our deeply ingrained animalistic programming, and would consider it insult to acknowledge those vestigial dark impulses are still part of us. But we need to, not to shame us, not to rationalize the cruelty that comes from them, but to add those variables into the equation of civilization so we can solve for homeostasis/relative happiness ans harmony. Denial/Repression is never the answer to anything. It makes things worse.
Lol, you must be one of the guys that get offended by this or the bear meme. If you think stuff like this attacks all men or you directly, or that women have done wrong to men even 1% of what sexism and men violence has done to them you just need to close lemmy for an hour and read a bit.
And im a man in case you were wondering, i just dont have my head inside my own ass.
Edit: just to make it clear to everyone reading this guy post where he talked about both sides and all that shit https://lemm.ee/comment/11953665 ended up just saying that for them womens problems are imaginary because they have a full belly and a roof. The story is always the same it doesnt take much to show when someone is such a level of sexist even when they are trying to hide it behind bullshit rethorics.
I hope you have a happy Wednesday regardless of your strongly held beliefs, unless one of them is wanting to have bad/unhappy Wednesdays, in which case I apologize for my transgression.
Sure, im all in for that, it is part of being communist you know? But at the same time that doesnt mean i treat the problems inherent to being a woman in our society as minor problems. ;)
Or are you saying that because there is homeless people and police harassment we should leave racism, sexism and other problems undiscussed? hmmmm, seems to me like you are trying to say that a big part of the earths population doesnt have the right to fight for a better life because there is people in worse conditions.
Ah so now we are on track, you really dont need to write your way around with so much bullshit, what you are saying is that women fears are imaginary to you, because they have a full belly, so all the problems they are telling you about dont exist because you, as in a singular person do not suffer them, so they must not exist because they can eat and have a home.
As you keep talking about homeless i will repeat: im all about helping homeless people, and also those in need before they get to being homeless. But that doesnt mean im blind to other people problems.
Its funny how you are able to go around so much to not say the reality: the only problem you see is what capitalism tells you, which is some people is poor, people that is not poor dont really have a reason to complain because there are others in much worse state so shut up. I guess you have the same view with unionizing and fighting for better working conditions? We are not under a freeway so we really should not complain? Lets shut up about working conditions because we have a full belly and a home so thats enough?
You need to read a bit more i think, or i missed when Marx said that the only way to fight class wars is helping homeless people (which again i support) and also i think i missed when it said that problems should be adressed from the most severe which means we need to forget about sexism and racism and low wages as long as we can "have a roof and a full belly" as you said.
I think i also missed when no one with half a brain said that it's proven we cant do both.
I really think you are so full of yourself that even lost track of what class war even means, you need to stop saying so much that you disregard womens problem because there are homeless people, maybe you should touch a bit of grass and go to communities and see what are their problems.
It certainly is remarkable that every time someone who Totally Isn’t Sexist and is Just Trying To Be Reasonable is on the topic of sexism, it will never take them long to go for ‘well other people are suffering more so sexism comparatively isn’t a real problem’.
PS: whatever role you think I have in “gender wars” you’re probably wrong.
I appreciate that I am not alone in having a better take
Yeah, don't know about that, buddy. "Leftists are male-exclusive subtle fascists" reeks of "I have no clue about left wing ideology and my analysis of the world around me is based on a total lack of knowledge and a total lack of actual analysis", but sure. Could be that leftists just do not respond well to you in particular.
I do not tap into culture wars at all because that is some manufactured bullshit meant to take away focus on class struggle in the US, a country I am not even from. Feminism is not a product of this, but rather of the very same ideals that lay the foundation of socialism. Men abuse women in a multitude of ways all the time, and it is not close to symmmetric, which of course does not mean I refute the very real consequences of the converse.
Having the right positions ^TM^ on the issues you bring in at the end, does not make me respect your disjointed post above.
Kinda hard to have an equal discussion when being a woman entails being sexually harassed and occasionally assaulted by a bunch of men, mostly ones you barely know or don't know at all, on a regular basis before you even hit puberty. Your "sex war" is more like a sex genocide with the effects biting the whole male demographic in the ass, even the ones who didn't cause it.
It's also hard when most of the men that participate in this discussion (despite often not wanting to admit it at first) subconsciously think that women should listen to their venting 5 seconds after meeting them and be in a relationship with them and hug them and bang them and stuff. Seriously, interacting with guys just feels like gambling, with most of them forming some sort of unhealthy obsession with you and taking your kindness as a sign of weakness or inability to see their red flags; to a lot of guys, interaction with them is basically a green light to move on you. It sometimes feels like life is a "don't unintentionally upset or engage with a random man too much or else he might find your phone number on the dark web and send you texts threatening to rape, torture, and murder you". We live in a society where it's relatively common for high school girls to have a guy classmate they occasionally talk to tell/text them that they wanna rape her, just unfiltered and out there because she decided to have a conversation.
Their problems are caused by patriarchy too, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to subject myself to sexism from them. They, whether they realize it or not, feel like they deserve what they want from a woman, the unfairness of women not wanting them makes them frustrated and they see gender equality as a means to an end, they see it as a way to have women finally love them.
It's not so much of "women and men are equally fucking up and need to make up" as it is "women are extremely scared by men, and negotiating with the likely emotionally unstable potentially violent people with nothing to lose who probably thought about you and them dating immediately after seeing you never seems like the good option". It's like encouraging kids to interact with people who they think are violent and might shoot up a school in order to convince them not to shoot up the school... Even talking to someone out of pity is endangering yourself.
Most guys want to get in your pants or eventually get to that point, whether you're apathetic to them or nice to them or mean to them. How am I supposed to talk to guys about sexism when usually their main concern is the lack of action with women and my main concern is interacting with men is inherently extremely risky and I fear I'm about to get raped or murdered when a man raises his voice at me?
It has to be at least 95% of straight men who are the danger women have to do conversational twister with to be relatively safe and comfortable around, and the remaining portion of men usually take an "insult" about the majority of men as an "insult" to them.
Men and women are both negatively affected by our sexist system but the playing field is not level. The solution is getting a majority of men to realize exactly what women deal with from men, and getting them to actively work against their subconscious sexism to promote a safer environment for women and remove the high risk of interacting with men, including by halting the rampant objectification of women and their bodies, so women and men can actually be humans with each other for real. The widespread outrage things like the bear meme gets show that this probably isn't going to work out any time soon. Men usually immediately think of it as a challenge to "prove" that women are worse by saying a lot of them are bitchy and hard to read and gold diggers or something, rather than a way to understand why women can't feel safe around men the same way they can around women. But instead men think of it as how women feel about any single man, including them.
At least there are communities like !mensliberation that are on the right path though. Sigh.
Kinda hard to have an equal discussion when being a woman entails being sexually harassed and occasionally assaulted by a bunch of men, mostly ones you barely know or don’t know at all, on a regular basis before you even hit puberty.
genuine question, how do you expect it to get any better if you aren't being civil? Like yeah theoretically if someone punches you or something, it'd feel good, and probably be legal to bash them over the head with a tire iron, but let's be honest, the only thing that's gonna do is end up with one of you dead. Which might work on the scale of war.
But when we're talking about something on the scale of, literally half of society (or all of it), i don't see how you expect that to work. I also don't expect it to work, don't get me wrong, i love having in depth conversations about problems, it's fun. There's an unspoken rule that goes a little something like "play hard, fight hard"
Their problems are caused by patriarchy too, but that doesn’t mean I’m willing to subject myself to sexism from them. They, whether they realize it or not, feel like they deserve what they want from a woman, the unfairness of women not wanting them makes them frustrated and they see gender equality as a means to an end, they see it as a way to have women finally love them.
it's definitely interesting i've talked to a number of people, being an aro/ace myself it's really weird talking to horny people. I can safely say, being told by a friend of yours that "they would like to rape you" is definitely one of the experiences of all time. My response to that is and will always be "i will kill you" because seriously what the fuck.
I get the feeling that people are probably over pathologizing it, because it's hard to define, understand, and conceptualize why another person would ever fucking say that. I dont think it's explicitly due to negligence, i think it's a little more nuanced. Though i still think the defining factor here would be aggression, as that's usually what follows intent.
It’s not so much of “women and men are equally fucking up and need to make up” as it is “women are extremely scared by men, and negotiating with the likely emotionally unstable potentially violent people with nothing to lose who probably thought about you and them dating immediately after seeing you never seems like the good option”. It’s like encouraging kids to interact with people who they think are violent and might shoot up a school in order to convince them not to shoot up the school… Even talking to someone out of pity is endangering yourself.
i think you might be misunderstanding the point here, i think the intent is specifically that women don't know how to effectively communicate this problem, generally because violence scary. And the fact that men generally aren't aware of it, because they aren't self conscious to that degree, or they simply don't have that level of real world experience surrounding them. It's hard to ask questions you don't know how to ask after all. I think some men don't think/realize that it's a problem, and since nobody seems to be informing them otherwise. Continue thinking that. I think there are an extreme minority that think otherwise, or at least i like to that think that way. Because otherwise i would expect a shit ton more crime be going on than there seems to be right now. I think for them, they're probably more actively involved in these spaces, than other people are (on account of the hateful rhetoric) and as a result outweigh the better people, significantly. By a few factors i think.
There's also the question of whether some of these are just literal bots now? Because that might be a thing.
Most guys want to get in your pants or eventually get to that point, whether you’re apathetic to them or nice to them or mean to them. How am I supposed to talk to guys about sexism when usually their main concern is the lack of action with women and my main concern is interacting with men is inherently extremely risky and I fear I’m about to get raped or murdered when a man raises his voice at me?
i think this part calls back to the previous part i mentioned about the original comment here, i don't think anybody understands what's happening, and i don't think anybody understands what to do about it either. Also i feel like this over sexualizes men? Than again i'm also aro/ace so like, good luck making me horny (maybe i just don't fucking understand it lol). In certain contexts i could see this being very true. On dating apps for example. At a bar for another one. Generally, just out in society. I don't think that's really the case. Because if most men are thinking about sex constantly that's called porn addiction. That's bad.
my point ultimately, is that as a male, or at least a male presenting individual, it's impossible for me to be capable of understanding the quintessential experience of "being a woman" likewise, as a female, it's also impossible to understand the quintessential experience of "being a man" and when you're trying to speak across the divide, like a language barrier, it's really difficult to effectively make a point, that either side can understand, that communicates problems between the two. Direct communication is probably the best solution, given that it requires the least amount of effort to think about. The problem here is how do we most effectively communicate the problem directly. There are almost certainly ways of doing it. The question is how, and finding the answer to it is the hard part.
Men usually immediately think of it as a challenge
fascinating generalization here btw. I have nothing else to say on it, so i'm just gonna let that one simmer i guess.
But instead men think of it as how women feel about any single man, including them.
this is one of the documented dangers of generalized statements. I think what happens here is that people make a generalization, and generalization usually include a social sub group. Think of "linux neckbeards" for example, and what happens when you make them, and specifically make statements about them that are negative. What i think happens, is that people see that, understand that you're talking about the entire collective, and then realize that they're a part of it, and that they're a single individual. And if you think that badly of the group, you must therefore, think equally as bad as any given individual, and most people like to seem themselves as average, or above average, so what happens is that it impacts them. It's the same reason people don't like PR speak, it's the same reason everyone hates HR, it's the reason everyone hates legislation and politicians. They never just say it, and as a result it's always hiding behind this layer of literary function. And people don't like being spoken to like they aren't people.
A good solution to this problem, obviously, is to stop making them. That's a good start. Another solution, and the one that i like to employ because it's a lot more versatile, is to speak about something in a very analytical manner. I speak about things directly, but i also speak about them in a very disconnected tone, so that it's obvious that my thoughts are independent from my person. It also tends to instill a similar rhetoric in the other individual, because you sort of have to respond to it in kind, given it's wording.
When you come off adversarial, people are going to respond in an adversarial manner. When you come off disconnected and flippant manner, people will also recognize that, and respond in kind. There will always be an individual who doesn't respond in kind, and we refer to them as outliers, in a societal manner. There are either, unconscionably good people, or they are criminals, who do not respect the law.
speaking about the previously mentioned solution again, i've tried to do that with this response, i don't have forever to work on this, so i'm not proof reading it lmao. But you may have noticed i'm not talking about you, or women more generically. I'm not talking about what you said literally, i'm talking about what was said in a more broad and societal manner. The reason why is that it doesn't read lightly. And frankly, being angry on the internet all day, not very healthy, so i try to be pretty cognizant of it from time to time. Since i've isolated it, and i'm speaking about it more clinically. It's much easier to disconnect me from your statements, and you from your statements as well. The hope here is that i can at least give you something to think about, whether it perhaps makes your day better, or gives you some food for thought, idk. That's not my prerogative ultimately, that decision is up to the reader of this wall of text. At the end of the day i just want people to think more with their brains, and say less with anger. It's good for you mentally, it keeps your brain healthy, and it promotes a more functional society.
in a way, you can look at this post as me trying to practice what i preach. We all strive to be good people, but don't always try to be good people.
edit: im back, sorry i forgot to mention something i wanted to talk about right now.
There's currently a big problem with red pill manosphere type shit right? You ever wonder why? It turns out the answer is pretty clear if you just look a little bit into it. Bear with me, i'm using free market economic theory here, it's going to get a little funky. This is a missing market segmentation, and what we're seeing is, people capitalizing on it. Not because it's good content, but because there is so little existing, productive content that shovelling out this dogshit content in place, apparently suffices for a considerable amount of the market buyers. It's increasingly reported across young men that they "have no purpose" and "don't know what to do" and "don't feel important" etc... The landscape is shifting. (i found the word limit lol, never mind, was going to add more, i can't)
*Kinda hard to have an equal discussion when being a woman entails being sexually harassed and occasionally assaulted by a bunch of men, mostly ones you barely know or don’t know at all, on a regular basis before you even hit puberty.*
genuine question, how do you expect it to get any better if you aren’t being civil?
The decision matrix here isn't [civil engagement ||or|| uncivil engagement], but rather:
[civil engagementandincur non-zero risk of uncivil retaliation ||or|| do not engage]
Non-participation is the safer option, broadly speaking. If your speaking with a stranger, it's better to let a minor slight slide, than to engage civilly. As you get to know someone better, as you become more familiar with conditions, this chart becomes a secondary consideration or even unnecessary. But with strangers, you never know if you're dealing with an outlier.
Person wrote a whole, nuanced, and detailed response outlining the various communications issues and such (including already addressing your robotic interpretation), and that's all you contribute?
Considering it's a whole lot of aggrieved bullshit revolving around civility-haranguing, you're lucky the harangued respondent even gave that much. Posts like this are deadass why when debate pervs start debate perving to that magnitude, I respond with "I'm real happy you feel that way but I'm not reading all that shit"
Cause I want the 10 minutes it took me to get through all that ego-brain bullshit returned to my possession
i've been saying this the entire time, and weirdly, people seem to like it, or at the very least, stop commenting to my responses because they simply don't want to engage because productive dialogue bad? Or something, idk it's the internet don't ask me, i'm not real.
They aren't hostile in the same degree towards all groups. Sure, you may have people mock you on a voice chat after you get killed in a game, but the chances are nothing alike those of the harassment you will get for having a female voice.
I am baffled by how humanity has managed to survive this long when so many men suck so fucking much. Then, when I think of it further, large portions of it was probably due to the women having no fucking choice, exemplifying one of many important ways in which men suck.
so true men dont have feelings there is no reason to care about what they think or how they feel or how things affect them. Empathy is wasted on men, not that u had any of that anyways.
