4 ms·

That's a deeply misogynistic take. What do you base this on?

CryptoPunk 5y ago
How is it misogynistic? I base it on the prevalence of stories like this, where a woman ostensibly consents to sexual advances and later regrets it and feels she had be abused. The issue is not consent. The issue is vulnerability. Women are generally more vulnerable to advances from men and more likely to consent to an interaction when it's not in their best interest, than men would be, due to well documented physiological and psychological differences between the sexes.
- DoreenMichele 5y ago
  It essentially assumes incompetence on the part of women. That's not the only possible explanation. I don't even think it's the most plausible explanation. Social pressure and upbringing are large factors in human behavior and it takes time to make society-wide changes.
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    Is noting that women have two times less upper body strength misogynistic because it implies less competency in hand-to-hand combat or heavy manual labor? I'm assuming women are more compassionate and less aggressive, which makes women less competent in competitive settings where self-advocacy is important, and more competent in scenarios requiring cooperation and caretaking, like child-rearing. Whether these differences are inherent to female biology, or a result of deeply ingrained structures of human culture that mold girls in their upbringing is orthogonal to my premise. But as it happens, there is overwhelming/definitive evidence that much of these differences are biological in origin, and noting that is not misogynistic. We do not make the world better by deceiving ourselves about it. An accurate model of the world is needed before any positive changes for it can be formulated. A positive but inaccurate vision of the world does not result in actions that improve the world.
    - DreamScatter 5y ago
      Women are extremely competitive and they are not more compassionate than men.
      - CryptoPunk 5y ago
        Women are less aggressive and more compassionate (agreeable) than men on average.
        DoreenMichele 5y ago
        There is zero reason to believe that this superficial appearance is due to innate wiring. Female aspies tend to be under diagnosed because girls get pressured to conform socially so much that even when they have an actual social disability, they are expected to get with the program anyway. That right there is shocking evidence of the extreme social pressure the world places on girls and not boys.
        CryptoPunk 5y ago
        There is every reason to believe that higher female agreeableness is due biological sex differences, given 1. the evidence, which I'd be happy to share if you're actually open to having your views changed 2. females bear children and have been the primary caregivers of young children throughout all of human evolution, which is going to apply massive selective pressure for sex-mediated traits in females conducive to nurturing children, like agreeableness
- cloudfifty 5y ago
  > I base it on the prevalence of stories like this So you've just pulled it out of thin air. What I figured. It's just victim blaming through misogynistic prejudices.
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    Personal observation is not 'pulling it out of thin air'. And I did the opposite of victim blaming. I stated that even a woman's consent does not absolve men of responsibility for women suffering poor outcomes as a result of the interaction. You mischaracterized my comment to an extreme degree, without even bothering to understand, let alone contend with, the points raised. Attitudes like this are not conducive to constructively discussing complex social issues. They lead to the forwarding of certain propositions being avoided, out of a fear of eliciting exactly the kind of response you provided, which increases the possibility that society will settle on a faulty model of the situation, and thereby not institute changes that improve it.
    - cloudfifty 5y ago
      Sorry, but what a pathetic tone policing reply to blatant misogynistic garbage about women being inherently "more emotional", "We've tried the 'rawr girl power", and so on. You're just wrong and clearly not worth the energy.
      - CryptoPunk 5y ago
        Being held to account for your false accusations is not "tone policing", so please stop gaslighting. I didn't write that women are "more emotional". I wrote they are generally "more emotionally vulnerable". It's irresponsible to make extremely harsh accusations against someone when the analysis that the accusation is based on is sloppy and low-effort. And as an aside, claiming that women are generally more emotional wouldn't be misogynistic, any more than noting that men are generally more aggressive is misandrist. There is nothing sexist about claiming general psychological differences between the sexes. Your accusations are extreme mischaracterizations, and the basis of your dismissal of my argument is based on a weak/entirely-ideological heuristic.

How is it misogynistic? I base it on the prevalence of stories like this, where a woman ostensibly consents to sexual advances and later regrets it and feels she had be abused. The issue is not consent. The issue is vulnerability. Women are generally more vulnerable to advances from men and more likely to consent to an interaction when it's not in their best interest, than men would be, due to well documented physiological and psychological differences between the sexes.

DoreenMichele 5y ago
It essentially assumes incompetence on the part of women. That's not the only possible explanation. I don't even think it's the most plausible explanation. Social pressure and upbringing are large factors in human behavior and it takes time to make society-wide changes.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  Is noting that women have two times less upper body strength misogynistic because it implies less competency in hand-to-hand combat or heavy manual labor? I'm assuming women are more compassionate and less aggressive, which makes women less competent in competitive settings where self-advocacy is important, and more competent in scenarios requiring cooperation and caretaking, like child-rearing. Whether these differences are inherent to female biology, or a result of deeply ingrained structures of human culture that mold girls in their upbringing is orthogonal to my premise. But as it happens, there is overwhelming/definitive evidence that much of these differences are biological in origin, and noting that is not misogynistic. We do not make the world better by deceiving ourselves about it. An accurate model of the world is needed before any positive changes for it can be formulated. A positive but inaccurate vision of the world does not result in actions that improve the world.
  - DreamScatter 5y ago
    Women are extremely competitive and they are not more compassionate than men.
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      Women are less aggressive and more compassionate (agreeable) than men on average.
      - DoreenMichele 5y ago
        There is zero reason to believe that this superficial appearance is due to innate wiring. Female aspies tend to be under diagnosed because girls get pressured to conform socially so much that even when they have an actual social disability, they are expected to get with the program anyway. That right there is shocking evidence of the extreme social pressure the world places on girls and not boys.
        CryptoPunk 5y ago
        There is every reason to believe that higher female agreeableness is due biological sex differences, given 1. the evidence, which I'd be happy to share if you're actually open to having your views changed 2. females bear children and have been the primary caregivers of young children throughout all of human evolution, which is going to apply massive selective pressure for sex-mediated traits in females conducive to nurturing children, like agreeableness
cloudfifty 5y ago
> I base it on the prevalence of stories like this So you've just pulled it out of thin air. What I figured. It's just victim blaming through misogynistic prejudices.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  Personal observation is not 'pulling it out of thin air'. And I did the opposite of victim blaming. I stated that even a woman's consent does not absolve men of responsibility for women suffering poor outcomes as a result of the interaction. You mischaracterized my comment to an extreme degree, without even bothering to understand, let alone contend with, the points raised. Attitudes like this are not conducive to constructively discussing complex social issues. They lead to the forwarding of certain propositions being avoided, out of a fear of eliciting exactly the kind of response you provided, which increases the possibility that society will settle on a faulty model of the situation, and thereby not institute changes that improve it.
  - cloudfifty 5y ago
    Sorry, but what a pathetic tone policing reply to blatant misogynistic garbage about women being inherently "more emotional", "We've tried the 'rawr girl power", and so on. You're just wrong and clearly not worth the energy.
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      Being held to account for your false accusations is not "tone policing", so please stop gaslighting. I didn't write that women are "more emotional". I wrote they are generally "more emotionally vulnerable". It's irresponsible to make extremely harsh accusations against someone when the analysis that the accusation is based on is sloppy and low-effort. And as an aside, claiming that women are generally more emotional wouldn't be misogynistic, any more than noting that men are generally more aggressive is misandrist. There is nothing sexist about claiming general psychological differences between the sexes. Your accusations are extreme mischaracterizations, and the basis of your dismissal of my argument is based on a weak/entirely-ideological heuristic.