Should be pretty clear if you actually bothered to read it, but I’ll spell it out for you: P-R-O-G-R-E-S-S-I-V-E-S; and overall people who acknowledge the experiences of women that this is supposed to highlight. And I am also on that side, I just think you’re doing an absolute shit job of it, being needlessly discriminating, and creating division - as I already explained.
By just highlighting the experiences of women in the society we live in, and all the sexual violence they fall victims to, and how much violence is specifically directed at women - without resorting to cheap inflammatory “memes” (*). And as another way to a solution, we can also just try to be and create good role models for young men.
(*)And saying that has actually reminded me, that’s usually exactly how the far right likes to act and spread their message too: inflammatory rhetoric that can make a catchy sound bite that will reach a lot of people, but which has no real depth to it. I’d rather not those tactics and actually try having real conversations.
What are you talking about? When did I even say anything like that? Of course they will still get threats, the point is what is the best way to move forward, raise attention to these issues to bring about a better society, instead of making the situation worse, which is what I think your behavior does.
I’m really not sure if you’re even engaging in good faith and I’m not gonna spend all day on this, so this will be the final thing I’ll say:
I think that meme is unnecessarily divisive and will cause the average man (at least young man/teenager) who stumbles into it to feel attacked, and even more so when accused of either “not getting it” or “being a misogynist”; and in a time when they are just a couple clicks away of falling into and alt-right pipeline that will acknowledge their feelings and tell them the left/progressives have it out for them, it’s really unproductive to use rhetoric like that, which can make them feel “othered” and part of an out group.
I’m sorry, but if a “debate” like this is all it takes to turn someone into a redpilled incel, they were going to become one anyway and we have much bigger problems.
The fact is that women get attacked just existing in an online space and a scary amount of men feel threatened any time a woman speaks up for herself. Because that’s patriarchy. When the power structure is threatened in any way, No matter what example a woman gives, no matter how hard she attempts to not be divisive, there are still a bunch of men who feel threatened by her suggesting that any man may possibly pose a threat to a woman because they take it personally.
And they will feel ‘othered’ because the patriarchy has raised them to believe they are the superior humans because of their gender and any suggestion that some men may do the wrong thing where women are concerned is an explicit threat to them personally. And the whole point of this is that a woman doesn’t know whether the strange man she encounters in the woods will do the wrong thing. There’s just no way to know whether or not a man will assault her. People can claim that’s true about strange women as well, but, again, that’s missing the whole fucking point. Again, though, the point will be missed no matter how diplomatically it is put because it challenges the patriarchy.
Okay, this comment was the best so far and actually seemed to care to make a point/converse, so I’ll make just one final reply.
Your first sentence might be true for older men, or men who are already “allies” to put it simply, but it’s simply not true for younger men, and again it’s also just unhelpful and pushes people away. Overall, it makes you sound like you care more about being angry and being right, than actually helping to make society better. Not that I don’t understand that feeling by the way, I’m just saying it’s unhelpful and not constructive.
And yeah, off course there will always be some men who will feel threatened anyway when people raise the issue, but the question is how many feel threatened and “othered” in one situation versus in the other situation. I mean, I’d hate to fall from a ladder, but I’d rather fall from a short ladder than a tall one; does that make sense? I’d rather you go with the option that will push less young men into the arms of people like Andrew Tate, rather than the one that will push the most just because you’re angry and want to make your point in the most brutish way possible.
And they will feel ‘othered’ because the patriarchy has raised them to believe they are the superior humans because of their gender and any suggestion that some men may do the wrong thing where women are concerned is an explicit threat to them personally.
They feel “othered” because the meme is inherently sexist, and if they complain they get called sexist. Again, imagine if instead of “men” this is talking about a marginalized group and the problem becomes explicit. Just because men are not a marginalized group in society, does not mean that the same feelings are not evoked in them when confronted with such rhetoric.
You make a lot of good points, but where I am stuck on is the idea of blaming these videos (especially the initial ones, not all the reactions) for people falling off that ladder and becoming an incel. That takes years of grooming and if they were at that point, something was going to push them over sooner or later.
Also, maybe it is sexist for all of those women to find strange men more threatening, but it doesn’t change the fact that a large number of women do feel that way and maybe it should be explored why instead of criticizing them for it.
You should look into the origin of the word meme. It’s not terribly old and you clearly don’t understand it. You’ve also gone and thrown away your benefit of the doubt by arguing semantics on what’s clearly meant to be a lighthearted and hyperbolic comparison. Propping up random ideas and putting them, as words, in someone else’s mouth is dumb as hell. Pretty sure there’s hundreds of places online where you can argue with other people who don’t know the difference between socratic and aristotelean logic.
See above re: people didn’t get it.
By the way, what is “my side” and what would they agree with me about?
Gr8 argument m8!
Should be pretty clear if you actually bothered to read it, but I’ll spell it out for you: P-R-O-G-R-E-S-S-I-V-E-S; and overall people who acknowledge the experiences of women that this is supposed to highlight. And I am also on that side, I just think you’re doing an absolute shit job of it, being needlessly discriminating, and creating division - as I already explained.
Okay, how would you illustrate this that wouldn’t cause a huge amount of controversy and misogyny?
By just highlighting the experiences of women in the society we live in, and all the sexual violence they fall victims to, and how much violence is specifically directed at women - without resorting to cheap inflammatory “memes” (*). And as another way to a solution, we can also just try to be and create good role models for young men.
(*)And saying that has actually reminded me, that’s usually exactly how the far right likes to act and spread their message too: inflammatory rhetoric that can make a catchy sound bite that will reach a lot of people, but which has no real depth to it. I’d rather not those tactics and actually try having real conversations.
You think that doesn’t result in threats of violence and rape too? Really?
What are you talking about? When did I even say anything like that? Of course they will still get threats, the point is what is the best way to move forward, raise attention to these issues to bring about a better society, instead of making the situation worse, which is what I think your behavior does.
I’m really not sure if you’re even engaging in good faith and I’m not gonna spend all day on this, so this will be the final thing I’ll say:
I think that meme is unnecessarily divisive and will cause the average man (at least young man/teenager) who stumbles into it to feel attacked, and even more so when accused of either “not getting it” or “being a misogynist”; and in a time when they are just a couple clicks away of falling into and alt-right pipeline that will acknowledge their feelings and tell them the left/progressives have it out for them, it’s really unproductive to use rhetoric like that, which can make them feel “othered” and part of an out group.
I’m sorry, but if a “debate” like this is all it takes to turn someone into a redpilled incel, they were going to become one anyway and we have much bigger problems.
The fact is that women get attacked just existing in an online space and a scary amount of men feel threatened any time a woman speaks up for herself. Because that’s patriarchy. When the power structure is threatened in any way, No matter what example a woman gives, no matter how hard she attempts to not be divisive, there are still a bunch of men who feel threatened by her suggesting that any man may possibly pose a threat to a woman because they take it personally.
And they will feel ‘othered’ because the patriarchy has raised them to believe they are the superior humans because of their gender and any suggestion that some men may do the wrong thing where women are concerned is an explicit threat to them personally. And the whole point of this is that a woman doesn’t know whether the strange man she encounters in the woods will do the wrong thing. There’s just no way to know whether or not a man will assault her. People can claim that’s true about strange women as well, but, again, that’s missing the whole fucking point. Again, though, the point will be missed no matter how diplomatically it is put because it challenges the patriarchy.
Okay, this comment was the best so far and actually seemed to care to make a point/converse, so I’ll make just one final reply.
Your first sentence might be true for older men, or men who are already “allies” to put it simply, but it’s simply not true for younger men, and again it’s also just unhelpful and pushes people away. Overall, it makes you sound like you care more about being angry and being right, than actually helping to make society better. Not that I don’t understand that feeling by the way, I’m just saying it’s unhelpful and not constructive.
And yeah, off course there will always be some men who will feel threatened anyway when people raise the issue, but the question is how many feel threatened and “othered” in one situation versus in the other situation. I mean, I’d hate to fall from a ladder, but I’d rather fall from a short ladder than a tall one; does that make sense? I’d rather you go with the option that will push less young men into the arms of people like Andrew Tate, rather than the one that will push the most just because you’re angry and want to make your point in the most brutish way possible.
They feel “othered” because the meme is inherently sexist, and if they complain they get called sexist. Again, imagine if instead of “men” this is talking about a marginalized group and the problem becomes explicit. Just because men are not a marginalized group in society, does not mean that the same feelings are not evoked in them when confronted with such rhetoric.
You make a lot of good points, but where I am stuck on is the idea of blaming these videos (especially the initial ones, not all the reactions) for people falling off that ladder and becoming an incel. That takes years of grooming and if they were at that point, something was going to push them over sooner or later.
Also, maybe it is sexist for all of those women to find strange men more threatening, but it doesn’t change the fact that a large number of women do feel that way and maybe it should be explored why instead of criticizing them for it.
You should look into the origin of the word meme. It’s not terribly old and you clearly don’t understand it. You’ve also gone and thrown away your benefit of the doubt by arguing semantics on what’s clearly meant to be a lighthearted and hyperbolic comparison. Propping up random ideas and putting them, as words, in someone else’s mouth is dumb as hell. Pretty sure there’s hundreds of places online where you can argue with other people who don’t know the difference between socratic and aristotelean logic.
You managed to say a lot without really saying anything. And when did I argue semantics or put words in someone’s mouth?
I’m not gonna go through this entire conversation again, so I’ll just link you my last comment which should sum up my thoughts relatively well.
Dumbass lmao
Ok 👍 😘