HEEEEEEEESHOOOTTTSANDSCORES!
*sighs, turns over "DAYS SINCE LAST MASS SHOOTING IN AMERICA" sign to 0*
- Thread starter Charlie Don't Surf
- Start date
My point is simpler than what all this hullaballoo is about. Until people actually want to discuss the defining characteristic between men and women (our genetics) and the nature of that difference (biology, evolutionary pressures, etc.) then it is going to also be problematic to encapsulate women (all women) as victims, not just that men (all men) are oppressors. But people want to describe all kinds of differences without discussing any of the biology, which is fine. So let's just frame it in terms of people who are victims and the abuses they suffer then. Women don't need defending, people do. Men aren't the assholes, assholes are the assholes. When you remove the biology from the equation, it is purely a matter of humans hurting other humans and making it about men and women while ignoring the biology turns the discussion into the wrong thing: gender differences. It should be about helping people who need help.
I thought about putting in a qualifier, but I didn't want to confuse the issue
A
Anonymous
Anonymous
1. By show of LOVE IT!! ratings, who thinks that eliminating inequality will result in incidents of mass murder dropping to zero?
2. By show of Brofist ratings, who thinks that we, as society, could actually agree to the definition of "equality" sufficient to make question 1 possible?
2. By show of Disagree ratings, who believes that numbered lists should be monotonic?
2. By show of Brofist ratings, who thinks that we, as society, could actually agree to the definition of "equality" sufficient to make question 1 possible?
2. By show of Disagree ratings, who believes that numbered lists should be monotonic?
I agree.
Unfortunately there is bias in the society we live in and was better-worded by others, the difficulties do have a gender issue in them and those difficulties are not the same. I hadn't even considered what Krisken said about gender-specific expectations, but it's a great point--the expectations for both genders are bullshit, however, women's expectations all contradict each other. If you're a woman, you cannot do right. While it does stem from biology, it isn't controlled by that.[DOUBLEPOST=1401231333,1401231029][/DOUBLEPOST]
I feel like every woman I know (besides immediate family, and likely then because they're not going to share those experiences with their son/brother) has at least one horror story, many of them several.
It makes some sense to me, sure. We (men) are preached to that this is accepted (to some degree, at least) behavior, but since when has "So-n-so told me it would be OK to do this" ever been a valid excuse when explaining one's actions? Perhaps if an alternative was never presented, but then that's an entirely different problem.
--Patrick
Claiming "men can be victims too" doesn't translate to "...and women who claim they're victims (more often/and get hit harder/have to take more abuse over it/are less powerful to stop it/etc) are overreacting and/or exagerating".
Of course MRA extremists are idiots. However, those claiming the "expectations" for men are any less contradictory then for women are halmucinating or ignoring some of those expectations. I'm a man, I use a day creme, I shave plenty of bits of body, I try to be open about feelings and sensitive. That's what's expected of me. At the same time, I'm also expected to be "properly masculine" - tough, strong, no tears, always willing to play the hero, use physical strength for others.
Should the protection of men's rights, in so far as those need protecting (which is mostly the case when men are the victim - it's both against societal expectations and stereotypes and still a taboo for a man to show himself as "weak", far more so than for women), be part of feminism? Yes, in the same sense that feminism and antiracism movements are the same - they're both fights against inequality based on ridiculous grounds (gender or race - and we can expand this to all kinds of other types of discrimination as well, of course). It can easily be seen all over the place that, in many cases, groups fighting to end some form of injustice will turn a blind eye towards other forms of inequality or injustice. Easiest to point to feminism groups fighting against trans rights and vice versa, as they're both easily found on line, but the same is very much true with, for example, black and colored people in South Africa (go look up how the coloreds were treated under white and under black rule - before and just after Apartheid - before Mandela convinced other black leaders it was in their own interest to support colored rights as well), or indeed anti-feminist voices during the '60s amongst black leaders.
Of course MRA extremists are idiots. Dismissing the point of anyone because they point out the same problem is JUST AS BAD as labeling all feminists feminazis who want to exterminate men, though. There ARE legitimate gender/sex issues where men have a long way to go. It's not wrong to call attention to that, along with instances of women, children or trans-whatevers being victimized.
trans-whatevers, wow, you are really progressive
Very well. "Transgendered, transsexual, transfigured, travestite, asexual, antisexual, altersexual, dismissive of gender-based classification, eunuch ,etc, non exhaustive list". I did not mean that as a put-down, but as a general descriptor. I honestly don't know any single descriptor one can use to cover all variations. To draw a horrible analogy, I can try to list all things differently abled as "deaf, blind, paraplegic, transplegic, hemiplegic, mute, sensory disabled, over-stimulation-responsive,...." or I can write "differently-abled" (or "handicapped" if I'm not caring about American PC normativeness for a second).
There's plenty of those who still define themselves simply as male or female (possibly different from their gender, but still); there's also a small group who self-defines differently. I was trying to be inclusive. Next time I'll just say "men and women, and all the others be damned", mmkay?
Last edited:
LGBTQ seems to be doing fine, and I also have seen most people using just trans or trans* without calling a bunch of people's identities "whatever".
I can't speak for your country, but in America, the former is "what women want" and we're supposed to pretend at, while the latter is what we're expected to be as men, although swap physical strength for others with physical strength to prove you're the big man. It's a lot of macho bullshit, but that's kind of become the stereotype for America itself these days. In any case, the expecation is wrong either way, but having a contradiction does make it more difficult and I'm sorry you have to put up with that. In U.S. society, you cannot do right if you're a woman, and though I don't adhere to the bullshit expectation of men here, it's at least cut and dry so I know where others are coming from.[DOUBLEPOST=1401280586,1401280515][/DOUBLEPOST]
He is not representing the dragonqueer community. Failure.
I have a feeling this one isn't going to off himself.There was another shooting near, IIRC, a synagogue, yesterday, in Paris. Might be related, might be the same guy, might be unconnected. Who can tell? Either way, bunch of idiots -_-.
Honestly, I at least *understand* some types of racism. Sure, Turkish and Moroccon people are way over-represented in crime statistics - and of course, it's because they're mostly poor and badly educated and thus turn to (petty) crime more often. I can understand people havingn egative feelings towards them here - I know plenty of people who've been robbed/mugged by people of Middle Eastern or North African descent (and no, I don't condone it at all - it's backwards dipshittery), and I can understand them generalizing.
Jews, though? Seriously? Antisemitism is on a sharp rise in Belgium and neighbouring countries, and I just. don't. get. it. The orthodox ones may look a bit goofy (though no worse than aforementioned Northern Africans, I'd say), and they're mostly well-off, but....Seriously? Who have they ever wronged? I don't like Israel's politics one bit, but that doesn't translate to not liking Jews - most of them around here aren't Israeli. I'm honestly flabbergasted by antisemitism, even as misguided antizionism, let alone as straight-up anti-semitism. It doesn't make sense. It puts you on the line of the Nazis, without hyperbole. It's just pretty much the dumbest of all forms of racism ever.
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
What? I don't agree with, or accept, or whatever, any form of racism or discrimination. I'm just saying that, like a woman, after being raped, might be afraid or angry towards men, a person who has been attacked/mugged by a man from a certain descent might be badly disposed to that enthicity. It's a bad and wrong generalization in both cases; yet one seems to be fairly accepted as "part of coping" and the other one gets reviled. Both are wrong. I'm saying I can understand where it comes from. If you're going to say "trying to understand someone else's logic is bad because their deduction is bad", you close any and all form of discourse, and you're intolerant by default. Understanding where a misconception or prejudice comes from is the first step in helping solve it. I'm not trying to make ot go away by saying it's all relative, I'm just saying I can see/understand the reasoning behind some forms of racism, whereas that for antisemitism evades me completely.
If you want to take that as "Bubble thinks racism against some groups is A-OK", you're deliberately misreading my post.
If you want to take that as "Bubble thinks racism against some groups is A-OK", you're deliberately misreading my post.
I don't know much about your country; I wasn't aware the Turkish and Moroccan people were in control there, so that when a person of that descent commits a crime against someone else, that someone feels victimized by a society that encourages negative behavior. Just my ignorance showing.
I have absolutely no idea how "being in control" is at all related to "being a target for racism". I'm honestly lost as to what you're tring to link together.
I'm talking about people being racist towards Turkish or Moroccan people being, in my eyes, somewhat more understandable, if just as misguided, as antisemitism. Where or how you're linking this to a society encouraging negative behaviour eludes me completely.[DOUBLEPOST=1401285644,1401285399][/DOUBLEPOST](and completely unrelated, over 60% of all children in our two biggest provinces (Antwerp and Brussels) are now of foreign descent, with the vast majority of those being either Turkish, Moroccan, or Algerian. In about 25 years, "they" might actually be "in charge" here, in as much as there is a "they" to generalize to, and there's such a thing as a group "being in charge"). Yes, this is pushing some people into the arms of racists as they feel the need to "protect our culture". They don't seem to realize this only weakens "our" culture as it means it repells the new younger generation, instead of attracting them.
I'm talking about people being racist towards Turkish or Moroccan people being, in my eyes, somewhat more understandable, if just as misguided, as antisemitism. Where or how you're linking this to a society encouraging negative behaviour eludes me completely.[DOUBLEPOST=1401285644,1401285399][/DOUBLEPOST](and completely unrelated, over 60% of all children in our two biggest provinces (Antwerp and Brussels) are now of foreign descent, with the vast majority of those being either Turkish, Moroccan, or Algerian. In about 25 years, "they" might actually be "in charge" here, in as much as there is a "they" to generalize to, and there's such a thing as a group "being in charge"). Yes, this is pushing some people into the arms of racists as they feel the need to "protect our culture". They don't seem to realize this only weakens "our" culture as it means it repells the new younger generation, instead of attracting them.
Racism based on a negative experience is a result of simple learning instinct--if the person associates the bad thing with Element A, their brain is storing info that they should avoid Element A. Now, A could be the area they were in, a random circumstance before the incident, or the color of someone's skin.
It's experience and conditioning, and the only way to get over it is to experience Element A without negative incident, likely more times than the negative incident. People don't usually do that because our species learned to avoid stuff they see as dangerous.
The difference is when Element A is EVERYWHERE. This is why comparing the "women fear men" situation with "majority ethnicity fears minority ethnicity" does not equate. Men tend to be in control (not all men! herp derp). Conversely, minority ethnicity tends not to be in control, so the comparison doesn't work. I could be mugged/robbed by anyone, of any ethnicity, but as a white male, there are a number of problems I will never experience. No one's going to suggest I don't have decision-making power over my reproductive organs. No one's going to profile me as likely to commit a crime and pre-emptively harass/arrest me for it. Crime can happen to anyone, but generalized cultural behavior differs per demographic, and I've got it easy.
We don't like to talk about it in America, but it's true. Don't know about your country. Maybe the discourse is out in the open. Hell, maybe racism isn't as big a problem in your country as it is in mine and your robbery example is the only way racism comes up there. I have no idea. My experience with modern Belgium was a guy on another forum who brought in a mail-order bride from the Philippines, married her, had kids, cut her off from her family, and forbid her from working or making friends so she could raise his children because that was her purpose under God. I'm not basing that as knowledge about your country; just one fucked-up guy.
We have that shit too, except it's in retaliation to Mexican immigrants in the southern and southwestern states. The "protect our culture" idiots have no comprehension of a society formed by immigrants or how cultures changed just by the decade.[DOUBLEPOST=1401286721,1401286477][/DOUBLEPOST]
We will remain off-topic!
I had no idea equations had to work 100% and be 100% entirely perfectly fitted to the same mold to be allowed. I didn't say both situations were identical, I was making a comparison. I can understand a woman being judgemental of men after being assaulted/raped/harassed/etc. I can also understand someone being mugged by someone of ethnicity A to be judgemental towards ethnicity A. In both cases, a victim is using a wrong generalisation of a negative occurance to paint a large group black.
"I was raped by a man" -> "all/most/some men are bad"
"I was mugged by an Australian" -> "all/most/some Australians are bad"
Same logic. Yes, some of the other circumstances surrounding it may be different. Some racists are racist because of reasons like this (and the over-abundance of media focussing on ethnicity, religion, etc in their reporting - see also: the Zimmerman case). I fail to see how the prevalence of Element A is really a contributing factor, unless you're trying to say that women will have more "non-rape" connections with men than mugging victims will have "non-muggin" connections with Element Aists - in which case you're suggestiong women should be able to "get over" their prejudice easier than racist muggin victims - which is obviously the exact opposite of what you're saying. I honest to god don't knwo why or how we're miscommunicating. I'm not saying women aren't allowed to feel hostile towards men after rape, I'm not saying people should feel racist after being mugged by someone of a minorty ethnicity - I'm saying in both cases I can understand the reasoning and the psychological need served by it, but in both cases, they're generalizations of misbehaviour by individuals towards a group they're part of. Unless you claim "all men are rapists" or "all men are scum", which I'm fairly sure isn't your point, either. I wasn't talking about regular feminism, I wasn't talking about other forms of racism. I was just using a simile to form a sentence.
By the way, racism, mostly the "subtle" variety, is a huge problem in Belgium. It is.
"I was raped by a man" -> "all/most/some men are bad"
"I was mugged by an Australian" -> "all/most/some Australians are bad"
Same logic. Yes, some of the other circumstances surrounding it may be different. Some racists are racist because of reasons like this (and the over-abundance of media focussing on ethnicity, religion, etc in their reporting - see also: the Zimmerman case). I fail to see how the prevalence of Element A is really a contributing factor, unless you're trying to say that women will have more "non-rape" connections with men than mugging victims will have "non-muggin" connections with Element Aists - in which case you're suggestiong women should be able to "get over" their prejudice easier than racist muggin victims - which is obviously the exact opposite of what you're saying. I honest to god don't knwo why or how we're miscommunicating. I'm not saying women aren't allowed to feel hostile towards men after rape, I'm not saying people should feel racist after being mugged by someone of a minorty ethnicity - I'm saying in both cases I can understand the reasoning and the psychological need served by it, but in both cases, they're generalizations of misbehaviour by individuals towards a group they're part of. Unless you claim "all men are rapists" or "all men are scum", which I'm fairly sure isn't your point, either. I wasn't talking about regular feminism, I wasn't talking about other forms of racism. I was just using a simile to form a sentence.
By the way, racism, mostly the "subtle" variety, is a huge problem in Belgium. It is.
Necronic
Staff member
This really struck me. I wonder how much of the MRA argument is driven by these 'expectations'. Expectations can be a brutal, toxic thing for people of both sexes. Yet, I have a hard time giving them too much credence since accepting them is ultimately just a matter of choice. Self-determinism will always beat expectations.
Nothing in life is more potent than a self sufficient ego.
Ed: although, if you are in a marginalized minority this can be difficult. Women, gay men, trans* etc, have difficulty with self determinism since they have so little power. White men though? Puhleeze.
This is going to sound like bickering, but I'm not saying you're saying. Nonetheless I felt it needed to be pointed out. It's wrong to generalize, but I see a variance to degrees of understanding. There's a difference between someone going "I hate ___" because they're angry versus "I hate ___" because of actual hatred. To use a silly example to get it away from people and take things down a notch--someone has a bad day, says "I hate life" because they're frustrated, as opposed to a comic book villain saying "I hate life" because they hate the living and want life destroyed.
In all honesty, I feel like I know what you're saying with this stuff, but that's not how the words are coming across, if that makes any sense, so I'm going to try and assume best intentions going forward.
That sucks.[DOUBLEPOST=1401289790,1401289641][/DOUBLEPOST]
Good point. Like I think I said, I know what's expected of me. I choose not to go along with it, and yeah, some situations are unpleasant, but if a little unpleasantness is the worst I experience out in the world, I'll count myself very, very lucky.
Dave
Staff member
And MOST of his victims were men. He spouted a lot of misogynistic crap, but in the end he killed 4 men and 2 women. Kind of like the anti-Semite that killed the Christians at the synagogues. Turns out maybe crazy people do things that are insane.
Not all crazy people 
Mental Health is a definite angle of this, but I'm going to let my hatred of the term "batshit crazy" slide.
Good, I'd hate for you to get the vapors.
GasBandit
Staff member
Mighty white of ya.
It still doesn't change his incredibly misogynistic motivations in the first place.
Besides, his mental issues doesn't automatically excuse him of the crimes. It's not just a simple matter of "he's crazy." There are significant factors behind where he came to the conclusions he came to, how his state of mind turned that way, and what motivated his way of thinking. Someone isn't just simply "crazy" like it was a flip of a switch. There are far, far, FAR too many mitigating factors that go into mental health to devalue it down to that.
Agreed. His plan was still to slaughter an entire sorority / anyone partying there. That's anywhere from 60-100 people, he actually went to knock on the door but instead got in his car and shot from there somewhere else. Even though he was an incredibly ineffective murderer, doesn't mean that his intention / desire was to harm a lot of women.
BananaHands
Staff member
This.
The argument that he killed 'more men than women' is absolutely ridiculous. He stated his motivation several times and while yes, his sanity is certainly in question, it's obvious that he used a lot of the hate that's spewed on those MRA sites as a justification to begin his 'rampage'. His roommates, sadly, were just caught up in his insanity.
You go on to those sites and you see individuals spouting terms like 'involuntary celibacy' as if they're entitled to the affections of the opposite sex and you see posts about how victimized men are because women have an outlet to convey their frustrations in a world where (spoiler alert) most civilizations lean more towards benefiting the male population. While yes, I'm not denying that there are certain expectations placed on men that are unfair - it's completely dwarfed by what affects women.
I'll admit that it gets tiring when I frequent a site like tumblr and see various posts about how terrible men are - but I also realize that we're in an age where so many voices that rarely had an outlet now have one. If you're truly bothered by these things, you should focus on your own insecurities before you raise a flag and become some social justice warrior.