And we are talking about men from nearly 100 years ago. I think a lot of progress has been made.
My point is thats besides the point. Generalizing the negative nature of an entire group of people is what the nazis did, what the imperial japanese did, what racists do, what rapists do, what homopbobes and transphobes do. You can call out misogyny without aligning your behavior with these horrible people, who’s behaving like this is exactly what brought about this kind of mistreatment in the first place.
And I am once again saying that this argument doesn’t do that. You just conditioned to jump to this misinterpretation as a defense, and people who conditioned you to do so did that for not amazing purposes.
I mean, a nazi-pedophile is the king of US, obviously my attitude is in minority. Doesn’t change the fact that you’re offended at your own misunderstanding of the whole issue.
One could understand “men are trash” as having the meaning “every single man is trash”, which would be in line with racism as you say. Or one could understand it as “the group overall is trash”, meaning any individual member isn’t necessarily trash.
The latter meaning is in some senses a matter of data - men are extremely overrepresented in e.g. violent crimes.
Which, again, doesn’t much about the individual man.
I think at the core its like we are all here to be kind to one another. You can point to statistics, historical context, etc… but when it comes down to it, is calling people trash leading with kindness? Is that the kind of speech that seeds good into the world? Is that speech that betters you, men, and women? I don’t think so. I think there are far more kind and constructive ways to have dialogue.
It’s not kind for sure, completely agree. My point was more that even if it’s unkind, it’s not necessarily racism or bioessentialism.
I think we must be kind to individuals, but still acknowledge problems with groups. That does require a shift in mindset to not feel personally impacted by statements about a group you belong to, which is easier said than done.
The expression “cheetahs run fast” is true, even if a slow cheetah, for example a wounded cheetah, is still a cheetah. Thus, the expression “men are trash” is true, even if a non-trashy man is still a man. The insistence on saying “not all men” every time someone says “men are trash” is just a new demonstration of the problem.
(I’m a cis man myself, BTW.)
Edit: this article explains it better than I could.
Yikes that’s sad. Another generation of men hating femcels shooting themselves in the foot because of inherited prejudice. There’s a big difference between calling out bad actors within your group (which I do with fellow guys regularly) and being misandrist. Seems like you got henpecked pretty hard
What percentage of a group needs to be considered trash in order for the whole group to be called trash?
Every group has trash people. Is every group trash? Are all women trash too?
If I met a woman who was trash, and then went online and said “women are trash”, would that be acceptable?
What if I happen to live in a place where I’m surrounded by trash women unproportionally, would it be okay for me to declare all women as trash, because that’s all I have ever met?
Where do you draw the line? How do you measure when enough people in the group become trash, so that it’s okay to call the whole group trash?
Men are trash sure; but so is this meme.
No entire group of people is trash. This is the same thinking behind misogyny and racism, and is the exact kind of speech that breeds incels.
If you read that from this meme, you might need to go back to school to learn some literacy a bit more.
And we are talking about men from nearly 100 years ago. I think a lot of progress has been made.
My point is thats besides the point. Generalizing the negative nature of an entire group of people is what the nazis did, what the imperial japanese did, what racists do, what rapists do, what homopbobes and transphobes do. You can call out misogyny without aligning your behavior with these horrible people, who’s behaving like this is exactly what brought about this kind of mistreatment in the first place.
And I am once again saying that this argument doesn’t do that. You just conditioned to jump to this misinterpretation as a defense, and people who conditioned you to do so did that for not amazing purposes.
You can believe it doesn’t but obviously your 2014 attitude is in a small minority today
I mean, a nazi-pedophile is the king of US, obviously my attitude is in minority. Doesn’t change the fact that you’re offended at your own misunderstanding of the whole issue.
One could understand “men are trash” as having the meaning “every single man is trash”, which would be in line with racism as you say. Or one could understand it as “the group overall is trash”, meaning any individual member isn’t necessarily trash.
The latter meaning is in some senses a matter of data - men are extremely overrepresented in e.g. violent crimes.
Which, again, doesn’t much about the individual man.
So would you say “Black people overall are trash” is a racist statement?
As I’m clearly in the wrong according to downvotes, could you elaborate on what I’m missing?
I think at the core its like we are all here to be kind to one another. You can point to statistics, historical context, etc… but when it comes down to it, is calling people trash leading with kindness? Is that the kind of speech that seeds good into the world? Is that speech that betters you, men, and women? I don’t think so. I think there are far more kind and constructive ways to have dialogue.
It’s not kind for sure, completely agree. My point was more that even if it’s unkind, it’s not necessarily racism or bioessentialism.
I think we must be kind to individuals, but still acknowledge problems with groups. That does require a shift in mindset to not feel personally impacted by statements about a group you belong to, which is easier said than done.
The expression “cheetahs run fast” is true, even if a slow cheetah, for example a wounded cheetah, is still a cheetah. Thus, the expression “men are trash” is true, even if a non-trashy man is still a man. The insistence on saying “not all men” every time someone says “men are trash” is just a new demonstration of the problem.
(I’m a cis man myself, BTW.)
Edit: this article explains it better than I could.
Congrats on being the first male femcel I’ve seen on the internet
I’m a married man with daughters. I want a better world for them.
Yikes that’s sad. Another generation of men hating femcels shooting themselves in the foot because of inherited prejudice. There’s a big difference between calling out bad actors within your group (which I do with fellow guys regularly) and being misandrist. Seems like you got henpecked pretty hard
I’m no misandrist. I’m just capable of reading statistics. Our world is not safe for women, and if you deny that, you’re a part of the problem.
Plenty of racists claim not to be racist. This doesn’t make their racist opinions suddenly not racist. Nice try tho
What percentage of a group needs to be considered trash in order for the whole group to be called trash?
Every group has trash people. Is every group trash? Are all women trash too?
If I met a woman who was trash, and then went online and said “women are trash”, would that be acceptable?
What if I happen to live in a place where I’m surrounded by trash women unproportionally, would it be okay for me to declare all women as trash, because that’s all I have ever met?
Where do you draw the line? How do you measure when enough people in the group become trash, so that it’s okay to call the whole group trash?