4 ms·

This might be my management role leaking, but in my experience you are being far too rational. Humans are emotional beings first and foremost, then rational. I

This might be my management role leaking, but in my experience you are being far too rational. Humans are emotional beings first and foremost, then rational. I do think society is hostile to him, but I don't want him to become a reactionary, or a culture warrior. I'm his mother, I want him to be happy. I won't sacrifice my son to some abstract societal goal no matter how noble it might seem. This is why I cannot agree with your idea of ending inequality requires asymmetric behavior. It is wrong to rationalize away all the collateral damage that happens to living human beings under the guise of statistics and history.

wpietri 4y ago
Ok? I don't think society is overall hostile to men. I'm a man. I think I might have noticed. I'm not telling you to sacrifice your son to some abstract goal. I'm telling you that his happiness depend on things more meaningful than a gender label. Your son doesn't have to attach his identity to an oppressor class that is ending, which surely would impact his happiness. He can instead attach it to the end of oppression, something he can feel happy working toward. And it's not my idea that ending inequality requires asymmetric behavior. It's a basic fact that if Bucket A has 4 apples and Bucket B has 2 apples, asymmetric behavior will be required to get an equal number of apples in the buckets. Similarly, reducing my male privilege is going to require behaviors that are not perfectly the same toward all people. Should we try to minimize "collateral damage" as we move forward? Absolutely! But we should also keep in mind that not moving forward means ongoing damage. If we treat the collateral damage to men (from improvement) as more important than the damage to women (from not improving), that's just another flavor of patriarchy.
- stuckinhell 4y ago
  You don't notice because you aren't the same generation. You seem to have a blindspot around the idea of generational differences. My son did not get advantages from being part of the oppressor class, YOU did. My son and you might both be male, but the generation experience is not the same. My son is a innocent child. You an old white man telling me I should tell my son to to accept an identity he does not deserve. I will not force my son to pay for your oppressor sin/guilt. There is a way forward for both young women and young men,but its not your way. Your way only works if humans were robots.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    I have young male family members and also try to keep up with what's going on. So I think painting me as out of touch is incorrect. If you'd like to demonstrate that patriarchy entirely ended sometime in the last few years I'm certainly willing to look at your data. I certainly believe that the generational experience is different. But I also believe that we have not get achieved gender equality. For example, dating and sexual violence for high schoolers in 2019: https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/snapshots/DataSnapshot_YRBS2019.pdf https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/snapshots/DataSnapshot_YRBS20... > You an old white man telling me I should tell my son to to accept an identity he does not deserve. I am not in fact telling you that. That's what people like Andrew Tate want: for him to see himself as a Big Man who gets his bigness from lording it over women, an identity he does not deserve. I'm telling you that he should accept an identity he can earn: a person in the world who can feel empathy for the people around him, appreciate that he, like everybody, is caught up in the vast flows of history, and that he can participate in steering those flows in the direction he thinks for the better.
- fidgewidge 4y ago
  > Ok? I don't think society is overall hostile to men. I'm a man. I think I might have noticed. Your left wing ideology is so extreme that it's causing you to hopelessly contradict yourself, are you aware of that? It looks ridiculous. You already said "I'm perfectly fine with things like the future is female" - that's objectively a very hostile statement against men but because you yourself are a part of the woke misandrist social movement you keep trying to rationalize it. So you say things like "Society isn't generally hostile against your son; its hostility is to patriarchy" which is meaningless ideological babble. Woke people consider all men to be members of the "patriarchy" so it's the same thing. You also claimed "that as long as he's working for what's right, he doesn't have to worry too much if people's trauma leads them to mistake him as being part of something wrong" except this so-called trauma is a lie. Men are not oppressing anyone, you haven't benefited from any such oppression and if people identify that young man as "part of something wrong" then he does in fact have to worry about that, because they will oppress him in false vengance even though he is innocent.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    Ah, a spew of right-wing ideological talking points without the slightest bit of data. How surprising to find this in a discussion relating to feminism! I am perfectly ok with people who spout stuff like this claiming I'm ridiculous, so you just keep going, bub.
    - fidgewidge 4y ago
      Why would I cite data when you didn't? What data can even be cited to refute totally subjective statements like the ones in this thread? If you want points with data look at the usual suspects: percentage of men in prison, ratios of men/women in higher education, or the one this thread is about (women more likely to be elected in ....).
      - wpietri 4y ago
        Yeah, I thought you couldn't cite any data for your claims. Nice work adding in some whataboutism to distract, though.

wpietri 4y ago

Ok? I don't think society is overall hostile to men. I'm a man. I think I might have noticed. I'm not telling you to sacrifice your son to some abstract goal. I'm telling you that his happiness depend on things more meaningful than a gender label. Your son doesn't have to attach his identity to an oppressor class that is ending, which surely would impact his happiness. He can instead attach it to the end of oppression, something he can feel happy working toward. And it's not my idea that ending inequality requires asymmetric behavior. It's a basic fact that if Bucket A has 4 apples and Bucket B has 2 apples, asymmetric behavior will be required to get an equal number of apples in the buckets. Similarly, reducing my male privilege is going to require behaviors that are not perfectly the same toward all people. Should we try to minimize "collateral damage" as we move forward? Absolutely! But we should also keep in mind that not moving forward means ongoing damage. If we treat the collateral damage to men (from improvement) as more important than the damage to women (from not improving), that's just another flavor of patriarchy.

stuckinhell 4y ago
You don't notice because you aren't the same generation. You seem to have a blindspot around the idea of generational differences. My son did not get advantages from being part of the oppressor class, YOU did. My son and you might both be male, but the generation experience is not the same. My son is a innocent child. You an old white man telling me I should tell my son to to accept an identity he does not deserve. I will not force my son to pay for your oppressor sin/guilt. There is a way forward for both young women and young men,but its not your way. Your way only works if humans were robots.
- wpietri 4y ago
  I have young male family members and also try to keep up with what's going on. So I think painting me as out of touch is incorrect. If you'd like to demonstrate that patriarchy entirely ended sometime in the last few years I'm certainly willing to look at your data. I certainly believe that the generational experience is different. But I also believe that we have not get achieved gender equality. For example, dating and sexual violence for high schoolers in 2019: https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/snapshots/DataSnapshot_YRBS2019.pdf https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/snapshots/DataSnapshot_YRBS20... > You an old white man telling me I should tell my son to to accept an identity he does not deserve. I am not in fact telling you that. That's what people like Andrew Tate want: for him to see himself as a Big Man who gets his bigness from lording it over women, an identity he does not deserve. I'm telling you that he should accept an identity he can earn: a person in the world who can feel empathy for the people around him, appreciate that he, like everybody, is caught up in the vast flows of history, and that he can participate in steering those flows in the direction he thinks for the better.
fidgewidge 4y ago
> Ok? I don't think society is overall hostile to men. I'm a man. I think I might have noticed. Your left wing ideology is so extreme that it's causing you to hopelessly contradict yourself, are you aware of that? It looks ridiculous. You already said "I'm perfectly fine with things like the future is female" - that's objectively a very hostile statement against men but because you yourself are a part of the woke misandrist social movement you keep trying to rationalize it. So you say things like "Society isn't generally hostile against your son; its hostility is to patriarchy" which is meaningless ideological babble. Woke people consider all men to be members of the "patriarchy" so it's the same thing. You also claimed "that as long as he's working for what's right, he doesn't have to worry too much if people's trauma leads them to mistake him as being part of something wrong" except this so-called trauma is a lie. Men are not oppressing anyone, you haven't benefited from any such oppression and if people identify that young man as "part of something wrong" then he does in fact have to worry about that, because they will oppress him in false vengance even though he is innocent.
- wpietri 4y ago
  Ah, a spew of right-wing ideological talking points without the slightest bit of data. How surprising to find this in a discussion relating to feminism! I am perfectly ok with people who spout stuff like this claiming I'm ridiculous, so you just keep going, bub.
  - fidgewidge 4y ago
    Why would I cite data when you didn't? What data can even be cited to refute totally subjective statements like the ones in this thread? If you want points with data look at the usual suspects: percentage of men in prison, ratios of men/women in higher education, or the one this thread is about (women more likely to be elected in ....).
    - wpietri 4y ago
      Yeah, I thought you couldn't cite any data for your claims. Nice work adding in some whataboutism to distract, though.