7 ms·

Last year there was some graffiti near my house: "Trans rights are human rights!" Okay, fair enough. Then a few metres later, in the same colour and obviously

by arp242 3y ago

Last year there was some graffiti near my house: "Trans rights are human rights!" Okay, fair enough. Then a few metres later, in the same colour and obviously by the same person: "Kill all men!" People will say "yes, but it doesn't mean literally kill all men", and of course it doesn't. But it's not exactly positive, is it?

type0 3y ago
Some people do mean it though edit: radicalism is a real thing
- arp242 3y ago
  I suppose, but those are staggeringly rare and can essentially just be ignored.
- mathgeek 3y ago
  > People will say "yes, but it doesn't mean literally kill all men", and of course it doesn't. As an honest question: why “of course it doesn’t”?
  - breakyerself 3y ago
    Because both sexes are required for the species to survive. Killing all men would mean the end of all women too.
    - yarg 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - yowlingcat 3y ago
        [flagged]
        yarg 3y ago
        We've been (I say we) sexually reproducing for over 1,000,000,000 years. And yet somehow we've reached the point where if you acknowledge human sexual dimorphism, you're a fascist. It's a damned weird ideology, and if it doesn't go away it should at least be acknowledged as a religion.
        breakyerself 3y ago
        Acknowledging how things are isn't fascism. Imposing your ideas about how things should be in a way that harms trans people is fascist.
      - breakyerself 3y ago
        Hey nice hyperbolic strawman you've got there. It's actually the opposite. Transphobes think sex is interchangeable and can be imposed from the outside. The rest of us think gender comes from the inside and simply believe in loving and supporting people regardless of how THEY express their own gender. People like you want to impose an external concept of gender onto trans people that doesn't comport with their self image. You want to forgo the medical science and drive trans people into depression and suicide because the idea of it makes you feel yucky.
      - type0 3y ago
        The goal is parthenogenesis, I think Seksmisja movie is prophetic in some sense
    - nyokodo 3y ago
      > Killing all men would mean the end of all women too. There is some percentage of “feminists” who don’t love women but simply hate men.
      - arp242 3y ago
        There is some percentage of $x who hate $y for almost any value and combination of $x ad $y. It's not meaningful or constructive to look at the extreme nutjob examples when examining a movement in its entirety.
        dumpsterdiver 3y ago
        I completely disagree. As you know, the extreme nut job examples are always the loudest people in the group. It is not meaningless to account for them.
        arp242 3y ago
        I agree many have an apparent outsized influence, but with some exceptions in most cases I think this is only optics, and they don't really represent all that many people. "280 character soundbite" social media isn't helping either here, nor is "zomg person X said something ridiculous"-type "journalism".
    - tbrownaw 3y ago
      Well, someone did seriously suggest getting rid of 90% of men, and invented a fairly popular slogan in the process. "The future -- if there is one -- is female" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Miller_Gearhart https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Miller_Gearhart
  - roughly 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - explorer83 3y ago
      Didn't need laws when propaganda could convince large numbers of men to take up arms against each other in bloody combat.
    - arp242 3y ago
      > “kill the trans people” is I think a law in Florida Wait, which law is that?
    - eli_gottlieb 3y ago
      >“kill all black people” is a thing the state has tried to do, No, generally a slave caste are not all murdered. My grandmother's second husband who had a number tattooed on his arm and spent years hiding in a forest, that was an attempt to kill all the X people.
logicprog 3y ago
Yeah I'm very left wing and in trans circles and that combination of rhetoric never made sense to me. It's giving in to the same harmful gender essentialism that generates transphobia (especially TERFs, who are basically entirely motivated by second wave radical feminism's silly misandry) so it's just kind of self contradictory, not to mention being unhelpful. Plus it's just... stupid? Like, sure, patriarchy, but one of the crucial parts of third wave feminism was seeing how patriarchy doesn't benefit all men at all, it only benefits a few, and even the mechanisms of their privilege can also harm men a lot. And saying stuff like that really does psychologically harm men even if they still have privilege (especially since they may not actually be in a good life position despite that). It's actually become a point of discussion in online trans spaces bc trans men have begun pointing out how harmful this rhetoric is — being made to feel evil and like "gender traitors" and stuff for being men, or, if they're excludeded from "KAM," being made to feel like men-lite. There's no winning with it.
asylteltine 3y ago
[dead]
flybrand 3y ago
It was written on a wall, doesn’t that mean it is literal?
brickteacup 3y ago
I really wanna ask whoever wrote that if trans men are included
- arp242 3y ago
  Speaking of which, I felt [1] was a rather interesting article on that. Multiple people are interviewed and their experiences differ, but stuff like this really stands out, and especially that last paragraph is pretty relevant here: Prior to my transition, I was an outspoken radical feminist. I spoke up often, loudly and with confidence. I was encouraged to speak up. I was given awards for my efforts, literally — it was like, “Oh, yeah, speak up, speak out.” When I speak up now, I am often given the direct or indirect message that I am “mansplaining,” “taking up too much space” or “asserting my white male heterosexual privilege.” Never mind that I am a first-generation Mexican American, a transsexual man, and married to the same woman I was with prior to my transition. I find the assertion that I am now unable to speak out on issues I find important offensive and I refuse to allow anyone to silence me. My ability to empathize has grown exponentially, because I now factor men into my thinking and feeling about situations. Prior to my transition, I rarely considered how men experienced life or what they thought, wanted or liked about their lives. I have learned so much about the lives of men through my friendships with men What continues to strike me is the significant reduction in friendliness and kindness now extended to me in public spaces. It now feels as though I am on my own: No one, outside of family and close friends, is paying any attention to my well-being. I can recall a moment where this difference hit home. A couple of years into my medical gender transition, I was traveling on a public bus early one weekend morning. There were six people on the bus, including me. One was a woman. She was talking on a mobile phone very loudly and remarked that “men are such a–holes.” I immediately looked up at her and then around at the other men. Not one had lifted his head to look at the woman or anyone else. The woman saw me look at her and then commented to the person she was speaking with about “some a–hole on the bus right now looking at me.” I was stunned, because I recall being in similar situations, but in the reverse, many times: A man would say or do something deemed obnoxious or offensive, and I would find solidarity with the women around me as we made eye contact, rolled our eyes and maybe even commented out loud on the situation. I’m not sure I understand why the men did not respond, but it made a lasting impression on me. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2018/07/20/feature/crossing-the-divide-do-men-really-have-it-easier-these-transgender-guys-found-the-truth-was-more-complex/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2018/07/20/feat...
QuarterReptile 3y ago
Just to be clear, "kill all men" literally means "kill all men", whatever the mindset of the man broadcasting it.
yarg 3y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- lucubratory 3y ago
  I can't flag yet, but you were flagged because your comment included a lie insinuating that queer people are predators, specifically that they "indoctrinate and neuter children". Most people would recognise that as hate speech, and older people would remember that the exact same hate speech was used against homosexuals (and still is, by many of the most fervent spreaders of the idea today).
  - yarg 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - lucubratory 3y ago
      I am not interested in debating the hate speech with you and I don't know why you thought I would be, obviously I am not going to believe your nonsense, I'm a normal person. I was just answering the complaining at the end of your comment about why your comment was flagged.
      - yarg 3y ago
        You're using feelings rather than reason to argue, which generally doesn't find much traction on Hacker News. The increasing politicisation of the flag button, and its pernicious use as a surrogate for strong disagreement is a disturbing trend. And you still have not come even remotely close to justifying the assertion that I'm engaging in hate speech - and the reason for that is not your unwillingness to engage, it's that there exists no argument in support of your case.
htag 3y ago
That person has very strong emotions about gender.
macinjosh 3y ago
:%s/men/jews/g Doesn’t seem ok now does it? Because no matter what it’s not ok to call for the death of any group. JFC why is this is hard?
- mistermann 3y ago
  Have you ever tried this approach in the real world? In my experience it just makes things worse.
- somewhereoutth 3y ago
  The distinction is that Jews can and indeed repeatedly have been rounded up and slaughtered. Not something that will ever happen to 'men' as a whole class (who would do it? Women?)
  - infamouscow 3y ago
    What a brain dead reply. So violence is fine because it's not as bad as some other horrific events in the past? The barometer shouldn't be the frequency of violence reaching a certain threshold. It's should be zero for everyone. You should genuinely be embarrassed at this remarkably stupid and pathetic distinction.
    - somewhereoutth 3y ago
      The point is that the threat cannot be real (to the class as a whole). Indeed, it is hard to consider it real to an individual, unless you think there are gangs of women going around beating up men just for being men. Surely you can see the distinction between a real and possible threat, that might genuinely put fear into the object class, and words that can never be actioned? "Kill all men" might as well say "beware of the vicious rabbit"
      - infamouscow 3y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depp_v._Heard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depp_v._Heard
rowanG077 3y ago
What exactly does it mean then? No matter how charitable I view "Kill all men!", I fail to find an interpretation that doesn't mean "Kill all men!".

by arp242 3y ago

type0 3y ago

Some people do mean it though edit: radicalism is a real thing

arp242 3y ago
I suppose, but those are staggeringly rare and can essentially just be ignored.
mathgeek 3y ago
> People will say "yes, but it doesn't mean literally kill all men", and of course it doesn't. As an honest question: why “of course it doesn’t”?
- breakyerself 3y ago
  Because both sexes are required for the species to survive. Killing all men would mean the end of all women too.
  - yarg 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - yowlingcat 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - yarg 3y ago
        We've been (I say we) sexually reproducing for over 1,000,000,000 years. And yet somehow we've reached the point where if you acknowledge human sexual dimorphism, you're a fascist. It's a damned weird ideology, and if it doesn't go away it should at least be acknowledged as a religion.
        breakyerself 3y ago
        Acknowledging how things are isn't fascism. Imposing your ideas about how things should be in a way that harms trans people is fascist.
    - breakyerself 3y ago
      Hey nice hyperbolic strawman you've got there. It's actually the opposite. Transphobes think sex is interchangeable and can be imposed from the outside. The rest of us think gender comes from the inside and simply believe in loving and supporting people regardless of how THEY express their own gender. People like you want to impose an external concept of gender onto trans people that doesn't comport with their self image. You want to forgo the medical science and drive trans people into depression and suicide because the idea of it makes you feel yucky.
    - type0 3y ago
      The goal is parthenogenesis, I think Seksmisja movie is prophetic in some sense
  - nyokodo 3y ago
    > Killing all men would mean the end of all women too. There is some percentage of “feminists” who don’t love women but simply hate men.
    - arp242 3y ago
      There is some percentage of $x who hate $y for almost any value and combination of $x ad $y. It's not meaningful or constructive to look at the extreme nutjob examples when examining a movement in its entirety.
      - dumpsterdiver 3y ago
        I completely disagree. As you know, the extreme nut job examples are always the loudest people in the group. It is not meaningless to account for them.
        arp242 3y ago
        I agree many have an apparent outsized influence, but with some exceptions in most cases I think this is only optics, and they don't really represent all that many people. "280 character soundbite" social media isn't helping either here, nor is "zomg person X said something ridiculous"-type "journalism".
  - tbrownaw 3y ago
    Well, someone did seriously suggest getting rid of 90% of men, and invented a fairly popular slogan in the process. "The future -- if there is one -- is female" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Miller_Gearhart https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Miller_Gearhart
- roughly 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - explorer83 3y ago
    Didn't need laws when propaganda could convince large numbers of men to take up arms against each other in bloody combat.
  - arp242 3y ago
    > “kill the trans people” is I think a law in Florida Wait, which law is that?
  - eli_gottlieb 3y ago
    >“kill all black people” is a thing the state has tried to do, No, generally a slave caste are not all murdered. My grandmother's second husband who had a number tattooed on his arm and spent years hiding in a forest, that was an attempt to kill all the X people.

logicprog 3y ago

Yeah I'm very left wing and in trans circles and that combination of rhetoric never made sense to me. It's giving in to the same harmful gender essentialism that generates transphobia (especially TERFs, who are basically entirely motivated by second wave radical feminism's silly misandry) so it's just kind of self contradictory, not to mention being unhelpful. Plus it's just... stupid? Like, sure, patriarchy, but one of the crucial parts of third wave feminism was seeing how patriarchy doesn't benefit all men at all, it only benefits a few, and even the mechanisms of their privilege can also harm men a lot. And saying stuff like that really does psychologically harm men even if they still have privilege (especially since they may not actually be in a good life position despite that). It's actually become a point of discussion in online trans spaces bc trans men have begun pointing out how harmful this rhetoric is — being made to feel evil and like "gender traitors" and stuff for being men, or, if they're excludeded from "KAM," being made to feel like men-lite. There's no winning with it.

asylteltine 3y ago

[dead]

flybrand 3y ago

It was written on a wall, doesn’t that mean it is literal?

brickteacup 3y ago

I really wanna ask whoever wrote that if trans men are included

arp242 3y ago
Speaking of which, I felt [1] was a rather interesting article on that. Multiple people are interviewed and their experiences differ, but stuff like this really stands out, and especially that last paragraph is pretty relevant here: Prior to my transition, I was an outspoken radical feminist. I spoke up often, loudly and with confidence. I was encouraged to speak up. I was given awards for my efforts, literally — it was like, “Oh, yeah, speak up, speak out.” When I speak up now, I am often given the direct or indirect message that I am “mansplaining,” “taking up too much space” or “asserting my white male heterosexual privilege.” Never mind that I am a first-generation Mexican American, a transsexual man, and married to the same woman I was with prior to my transition. I find the assertion that I am now unable to speak out on issues I find important offensive and I refuse to allow anyone to silence me. My ability to empathize has grown exponentially, because I now factor men into my thinking and feeling about situations. Prior to my transition, I rarely considered how men experienced life or what they thought, wanted or liked about their lives. I have learned so much about the lives of men through my friendships with men What continues to strike me is the significant reduction in friendliness and kindness now extended to me in public spaces. It now feels as though I am on my own: No one, outside of family and close friends, is paying any attention to my well-being. I can recall a moment where this difference hit home. A couple of years into my medical gender transition, I was traveling on a public bus early one weekend morning. There were six people on the bus, including me. One was a woman. She was talking on a mobile phone very loudly and remarked that “men are such a–holes.” I immediately looked up at her and then around at the other men. Not one had lifted his head to look at the woman or anyone else. The woman saw me look at her and then commented to the person she was speaking with about “some a–hole on the bus right now looking at me.” I was stunned, because I recall being in similar situations, but in the reverse, many times: A man would say or do something deemed obnoxious or offensive, and I would find solidarity with the women around me as we made eye contact, rolled our eyes and maybe even commented out loud on the situation. I’m not sure I understand why the men did not respond, but it made a lasting impression on me. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2018/07/20/feature/crossing-the-divide-do-men-really-have-it-easier-these-transgender-guys-found-the-truth-was-more-complex/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2018/07/20/feat...

QuarterReptile 3y ago

Just to be clear, "kill all men" literally means "kill all men", whatever the mindset of the man broadcasting it.

yarg 3y ago

[flagged]

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
lucubratory 3y ago
I can't flag yet, but you were flagged because your comment included a lie insinuating that queer people are predators, specifically that they "indoctrinate and neuter children". Most people would recognise that as hate speech, and older people would remember that the exact same hate speech was used against homosexuals (and still is, by many of the most fervent spreaders of the idea today).
- yarg 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - lucubratory 3y ago
    I am not interested in debating the hate speech with you and I don't know why you thought I would be, obviously I am not going to believe your nonsense, I'm a normal person. I was just answering the complaining at the end of your comment about why your comment was flagged.
    - yarg 3y ago
      You're using feelings rather than reason to argue, which generally doesn't find much traction on Hacker News. The increasing politicisation of the flag button, and its pernicious use as a surrogate for strong disagreement is a disturbing trend. And you still have not come even remotely close to justifying the assertion that I'm engaging in hate speech - and the reason for that is not your unwillingness to engage, it's that there exists no argument in support of your case.

htag 3y ago

That person has very strong emotions about gender.

macinjosh 3y ago

:%s/men/jews/g Doesn’t seem ok now does it? Because no matter what it’s not ok to call for the death of any group. JFC why is this is hard?

mistermann 3y ago
Have you ever tried this approach in the real world? In my experience it just makes things worse.
somewhereoutth 3y ago
The distinction is that Jews can and indeed repeatedly have been rounded up and slaughtered. Not something that will ever happen to 'men' as a whole class (who would do it? Women?)
- infamouscow 3y ago
  What a brain dead reply. So violence is fine because it's not as bad as some other horrific events in the past? The barometer shouldn't be the frequency of violence reaching a certain threshold. It's should be zero for everyone. You should genuinely be embarrassed at this remarkably stupid and pathetic distinction.
  - somewhereoutth 3y ago
    The point is that the threat cannot be real (to the class as a whole). Indeed, it is hard to consider it real to an individual, unless you think there are gangs of women going around beating up men just for being men. Surely you can see the distinction between a real and possible threat, that might genuinely put fear into the object class, and words that can never be actioned? "Kill all men" might as well say "beware of the vicious rabbit"
    - infamouscow 3y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depp_v._Heard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depp_v._Heard

rowanG077 3y ago

What exactly does it mean then? No matter how charitable I view "Kill all men!", I fail to find an interpretation that doesn't mean "Kill all men!".