5 ms·

To me it's misogynistic because when I heard it first it's implied that my happiness is tied to a woman. Since I'm happily married and very much in love I know

To me it's misogynistic because when I heard it first it's implied that my happiness is tied to a woman. Since I'm happily married and very much in love I know that without her I'd probably end up being a philosopher pondering problems without answers to run away from the trauma of losing her. I've been through it before :)

Idk__Throwaway 4y ago
And how is implying your happiness is tied to a woman misogynistic?
- kraig911 4y ago
  For sake of mental gymnastics I'll humor you. It's misogynistic because it's rooted in I presume in my culture that women generally don't sit and ponder problems, or resort to alcohol, drugs and crime as bad as men when things go bad. Women generally move on. So that belies a certain belief that women are the cause of all problems - And that is misogynistic.
  - jasmer 4y ago
    The statement does not imply those assumptions, and even if it did, it would not be misogyny. The fact there is so much discussion about this is the 'issue' here and it's toxic.
- multiplegeorges 4y ago
  It reduces women to instruments to serve men's happiness.
  - Gud 4y ago
    No it doesn’t.
    - weakfish 4y ago
      Great argument! Let me try. Yes it does. Did it do it right?
      - Gud 4y ago
        Parent didn’t provide an argument and the burden of proof is on them.
        concordDance 4y ago
        You can and should do better than them, not descend to their level. It's obvious to any reader that the parent was just making a bold assertion.
        xigoi 4y ago
        How do you prove that something is false if you weren't given a reason why it should be true in the first place?
        krageon 4y ago
        By saying what you just said. It's already better than saying "No u".
  - tmn 4y ago
    This is the logical fallacy prevalent in these types of 'this offends me' reactions. You have completely fabricated this takeaway.
  - dgfitz 4y ago
    A.) No it doesn't, not even a little bit. B.) He said he was happily married, he didn't say his happiness it tied to a woman, you're twisting words.
  - slt2021 4y ago
    replace woman with kids. Happy parents are happy parents, unhappy parent is a philosopher parent. doesnt sound like any -ism to me
peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> To me it's misogynistic because when I heard it first it's implied that my happiness is tied to a woman. Nowhere it is implied that an unhappy marriage for a men is due to women in the marriage, if I had to guess, unhappiness in marriage for men is tied to having kids. Anyway, focusing on the fact that it says "men" instead of focusing on the fact that it says "unhappiness" says a lot about the priorities people have nowadays. It's like reading "The Fox and the Grapes" and focusing on the fact that there's a talking fox trying to eat grapes.

Idk__Throwaway 4y ago

And how is implying your happiness is tied to a woman misogynistic?

kraig911 4y ago
For sake of mental gymnastics I'll humor you. It's misogynistic because it's rooted in I presume in my culture that women generally don't sit and ponder problems, or resort to alcohol, drugs and crime as bad as men when things go bad. Women generally move on. So that belies a certain belief that women are the cause of all problems - And that is misogynistic.
- jasmer 4y ago
  The statement does not imply those assumptions, and even if it did, it would not be misogyny. The fact there is so much discussion about this is the 'issue' here and it's toxic.
multiplegeorges 4y ago
It reduces women to instruments to serve men's happiness.
- Gud 4y ago
  No it doesn’t.
  - weakfish 4y ago
    Great argument! Let me try. Yes it does. Did it do it right?
    - Gud 4y ago
      Parent didn’t provide an argument and the burden of proof is on them.
      - concordDance 4y ago
        You can and should do better than them, not descend to their level. It's obvious to any reader that the parent was just making a bold assertion.
        xigoi 4y ago
        How do you prove that something is false if you weren't given a reason why it should be true in the first place?
        krageon 4y ago
        By saying what you just said. It's already better than saying "No u".
- tmn 4y ago
  This is the logical fallacy prevalent in these types of 'this offends me' reactions. You have completely fabricated this takeaway.
- dgfitz 4y ago
  A.) No it doesn't, not even a little bit. B.) He said he was happily married, he didn't say his happiness it tied to a woman, you're twisting words.
- slt2021 4y ago
  replace woman with kids. Happy parents are happy parents, unhappy parent is a philosopher parent. doesnt sound like any -ism to me

peoplefromibiza 4y ago

> To me it's misogynistic because when I heard it first it's implied that my happiness is tied to a woman. Nowhere it is implied that an unhappy marriage for a men is due to women in the marriage, if I had to guess, unhappiness in marriage for men is tied to having kids. Anyway, focusing on the fact that it says "men" instead of focusing on the fact that it says "unhappiness" says a lot about the priorities people have nowadays. It's like reading "The Fox and the Grapes" and focusing on the fact that there's a talking fox trying to eat grapes.