1193
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
1193 points (94.4% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
26167 readers
3266 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The standard of “very good body” is higher for women, sure, but the standard of “good enough body” for women is much, much lower than the one for men.
The first one is useful if you want to be an actor or model, the second if you want to find a partner for life. Guess which of the two is more relevant for the average person.
Your body affects your life in many more ways when you're a woman. My body affects my employment, it affects me whenever I go anywhere in public, it affects my relationships with friends with family and with coworkers. It's open season to make comments about my body, regardless of if I've got a "very good body" or not. Harassment of women is the norm. It's not attached to perceived attractiveness, at least not in that only those deemed very attractive suffer sexual harassment and assault. We all suffer in this, and over a lifetime starting as a literal child it totally dehumanizes you. Being lesser is a woman's place, because all society will ever focus on is our bodies and how they relate to men. We don't even get to be people, just game pieces surrounding men only relevant in whatever use we have to them. Misogyny is a cornerstone of our society itself. It's baked into our politics, our tradition, our history, our legal system, our families, It's everywhere. And thats why comparing the way men and women experience body standards and policing doesn't work. The scale isn't even close to the same, nor is the severity.
Ok, now this is just plain overdramatizing. We’re not in the 19th century anymore, on paper women have every right men have in the whole first world, plenty of corporations are built with the main purpose of providing pleasant experiences to women and a lot of women have been in very high positions of power. Women ARE people just as much as men according to the huge majority of people, and those who don’t think so are usually unlikeable by men and women alike.
Misogyny is very much an issue in the modern society because its roots were in misogyny and you don’t change thousands of years in a century, but we’re moving very fast. I can get that your physical appearance can make a difference in whether you get hired in some companies (and if it does, you probably dodged a bullet), but to say that in modern society women “don’t get to be people” is insulting to all the progress humanity has done.
I've lived it myself, listen to women and read the studies and surveys on these things. On paper means nothing, especially when women are unequal in ways the law does not even account for. In my hometown nearly half of all women have been sexually assaulted. I rarely meet a woman who hasn't experienced any sexual harassment or assault, many experience it before they're even adults. Girls and women are still suffering, in many ways things have barely changed at all. Yes we can work jobs now, yes we can vote. But even people who think it's wrong continue to perpetuate misogyny anyway, misogyny exists everywhere in everyone across society. We all get indoctrinated as children into it, and it takes a lot to deconstruct all the propaganda we're fed.
Society has made some progress, but honestly not very much. Women don't even have human rights in the US. In terms of culture, in terms of actual people and their actual beliefs, we have actually changed very little in the last 50 years. People have always hated women and that has not changed as much as you seem to think it has. Again, I'd encourage you to listen to the stories of women when they talk about the way society continues to discriminate against them. I'd encourage you to frequent women's forums online and read what we talk about and what horrifying realities we live in.
We’ve changed “very little” since the time of these ads? When there were still places in Europe where women couldn’t vote? When marry-yor-rapist laws were still common? In those years where we had the first female UK prime minister, the first female German chancellor, the first female US vice president and so on? Come on.
Sexual harassment is very much a problem in modern society, and way too many misogynists still exist, but to say that women are still “not people” and that we’re not moving forward in recent years is definitely an exaggeration. Women from 50 years ago probably wouldn’t believe it if you told them all the progress we’ve made in the meantime.
The dominant structure of the patriarchy has never changed. Women still earn less, disproportionately suffer sexual and physical violence, still face constant policing of our bodies, still face patriarchal attitudes in men and our friends and our families, were still expected to have children and marry men and we face prejudice and discrimination if we are unwed and have no children. This entire conversation has been principally about American power structures, but similar ones exist around the world. Women can't even get safe health care in America. Women are legally not afforded the same rights as men in America, not that the legal system is the sole metric by which we measure inequality. We are still expected to be homemakers, still face sexual harassment in our homes in our workplaces in education and from our friends. We still get assaulted by men at staggeringly under reported rates. The ruling class is almost entirely men. The ruling class is almost entirely patriarchal. Rapists still barely suffer any punishment for their crimes, not even 10% of rapists ever see any kind of consequences for their actions.
You are vastly overestimating how much society has changed. 50 years ago we had no right to safe health care, and once again today we don't. 50 years ago our mother's were being beaten and sexually assaulted by their partners at sickening rates, and still we are today. 50 years ago women were paid less than men, and so we are today. I could go on. Nominally blatant hatred towards women is less tolerable in today's media, but its still tolerated and present in a lot of it. Our actual lives, our actual experiences, our suffering at the hands of misogyny has changed very little from 50 years ago. I mentioned in another comment, but I briefly worked with kids at a youth center. And I can say with certainty that the trend isn't even better with their generation. Systemic change was always required to solve systemic issues, and we have never even come close to systemic change with regards to misogyny. That would mean deconstructing one of the cornerstones of American society and culture, and you've seen how any attacks on American society or culture are perceived. Our concerns are always dismissed and our proposal for change always falls on deaf ears by those who see no problem with our suffering.
So just because crimes against women still occur we haven’t improved at all? It’s not an improvement until there is absolutely zero crimes being committed against women?
Again, you can’t expect that to happen in a century. Crimes against women have been taken much more seriously in recent years, hell, some of them weren’t even considered crimes 50 years ago. Prejudices and patriarchal attitude has also been getting less and less intense, as people, both male and female, realized they’re generally harmful to everyone. Things have gotten better, are getting better and hopefully will get even better as more and more “relics of the past” leave this world and newer generations take over.
When women are actively losing rights i don't see how you could possibly think that inequality against women is getting better. You're just dismissing change by saying women must continue to suffer the effects of misogyny until some undetermined point in the future when all will naturally resolve itself. Misogyny has existed in many forms throughout all of human history. Now is the time when women are able to best advocate for themselves. We are not equal and it has only improved in terms of the social acceptability of voicing outright hatred towards women. This is a good thing, and I'm not saying it isn't. It is not enough. It is nowhere near enough. Women are so burdened by misogyny that we can never be equal unless we are actively counteracting misogyny wherever it exists.
The reality is inequality against women has not improved nearly as much as you seem to think. I am a woman, I have first hand experience of it. If you see the improvement of inequality against women as a good then I have no idea why were having this conversation. You should be able to completely understand the way women suffer systemic institutional violence and discrimination in a way that men as a class do not. We can never even scratch the surface of doing something about it if every time we talk about it we're told that we are exaggerating and lying, or worse that we're attacking men.
Misogyny which is a systemic issue requires systemic solutions. Simply making it socially unacceptable to outright advocate explicit violence and hatred against women does not address the many other ways that women suffer from misogyny. But this is all moot, as we don't even legally have the same rights as of now. So it doesn't matter, women are objectively suffering because of misogyny from even the state and it's violence in much the same ways we are in the 1970s. In many ways today's landscape looks even bleaker than it did then, with states and politicians actively taking away more women's rights.
What rights are you losing? I can only think of the whole abortion issue in the US and it’s pretty clear people are already sick and tired of it and it’s not going to last for long, unless they pull some shenanigans. In the meantime I feel very bad for women who saw or will see denied an abortion request as that’s something that can straight-up ruin your life, but unfortunately as long as America is so reliant on religion you can’t expect to see decisions that make sense. Again, time will definitely help as newer generations are overwhelmingly irreligious and in support of abortion.
And no, I’m not dismissing change. Actually we haven’t even talked about change at all. The main focus of this discussion has been more of an oppression olympics kind of one. So in case I missed it, what is your suggestion for an actual, systemic solution that will solve sexism? Because I really can’t think of one that isn’t “teach kids not to be sexist and hope it trickles down as time goes on”.
I mean the right to bodily autonomy and access to safe health care has been taken away for women. Its already been a year, I dont know how you can consider that not lasting long. There's an entire party of politicians in America and in a lot of other closely related countries that is openly against the rights of women. In Texas and Florida there are pushes to have women's rights to custody and divorce changed. By the parties currently ruling those states. But in any case, what's written in law and what happens are not the same and discrimination against women exists even in ways the law says are illegal.
Theres the anti feminist "oppression olympics" concept again. A systemic solution to misogyny would be to actively undo the systemic inequalities against women. Make misogyny unacceptable at any level of society, someone who is misogynistic should not be allowed to exist socially in any context whatsoever. It should be met with active resistance in every place it exists. Women should be paid equally, and the government should be interfering in business hiring practices and wage disputes to ensure that women are at all levels being paid equally. Meritocracy isn't real, and women should be afforded equal political and social power in all contexts. That means the dissolution of all forms of patriarchal propaganda, the dissolution of the institution of the nuclear family, the dissolution of sex based discrimination in all forms of education housing and employment, a completely rebuilt justice system that appropriately investigates every single incidence of sexual harassment sexual assault and rape and ensures that punishment is extremely severe.
And even that wouldn't totally resolve it in all its forms, since capital is the primary vehicle for the ruling class to use power. Capitalism upholds patriarchy, and income inequality would need to be addressed to make women equal in society.
Uh, it is unacceptable and met with resistance in the great majority of the first world? We can’t really do any more than that, you want a law to be able to legally murder someone on the basis of a misogynistic affirmation?
Great, how do you enforce that when not even all white men are paid equally? People are always going to have biases. We can make laws for public employment and impose ranges for private ones, but there’s never going to be a list exhaustive enough so that every person doing a job is retributed the same way.
And this is what is constantly trying to be done (well, except in half of post-2016 USA but that’s a different issue). Nuclear family is in an “involuntary” constant decline with the majority group of people being “married without children” in a 2000 statistic. I don’t really remember hearing about any blatantly patriarchal propaganda or systemic sex-based discriminations in education, housing or employment in recent times and I’m pretty sure the little that still does exist is in a shrinking minority, feel free to prove me wrong.
This is, supposedly, what’s in place now, but the fact that it isn’t working doesn’t mean it’s intentional. In general, sexual crimes are among the least likely to leave physical, indisputable proof, and it is therefore very hard for judges to prosecute them effectively. The fact that yes, the justice system is a very old institution and has definitely bias behind it is undeniable, but while I hope it gets “rebuilt” as well, I don’t think it’s going to change much (unless you fill it with people that have a bias towards males, which would just be changing the target of the problem).
This is very exaggerated
How much time would you say you dedicate to investigating men's issues vs women's issues?
As a woman and my friend group being mostly women anything that affects women I hear about. I have listened plenty of times to men talking about the problems they face. I'm aware of the challenges imposed on men by society, many of which are directly related to and affected by misogyny and toxic masculinity. I'm not a sociology researcher by any means, I see studies I come across and listen to people talk about problems they face. I have my own personal experiences with men and those of my friends family and partners past and present.
I don't take issue with discussion of men's issues, thats objectively good. It does not have to be to the dismissal of misogyny though.
Could you put a number on it? Like... for every 10 studies/articles on women's issues you read, how many men's issues studies would you be reading? 10 to 10? 10 to 5? 10 to 2?
Or let's say you've spent idk... 200 hours looking into women's issues, talking to women, etc... How many hours have you listened to men, or researched their issues? 200:200, 200:100, 200:50? (not counting debates) Your best ballpark.
Like how many men's forums are you subscribed to?
I cannot adequately answer that question, and its complicated by many studies I've read being surveys of both men and women. I also am a woman, so I have my own first hand experiences of misogyny.
I'm subscribed to forums that are about things that affect both men and women, but as I have less to contribute in the way of advice and assistance for men I do not subscribe specifically to any of them. Doesn't mean I don't see any of their content however.
You should definitely take the leap! If you can approach male spaces without bias you'd gain deeper perspective into these issues.
I am aware of what issues affect men. I am aware of social pressures on men. I am also aware of the ways that men as a class have privilege and how they both benefit from and suffer because of misogyny.
You are in quite a position to be saying that I need a deeper perspective on gender issues.
I don't see how you can make that claim at all when you don't even read male forums, much less can't even put a vague number on your own exposure.
Here's a good article from a woman that lived as a man for 18 months.
Multiple competing perspectives are crucial. You are not immune from bias.
Yes the one article about that. And yeah men suffer things too, but they do not as a class suffer from a power structure across all levels of society. 🙃 Misogyny and the ways toxic masculinity sometimes disadvantages men are not the same things. I'm not gonna reiterate it again lol. You can re-read my other comments.
Men literally can't suffer from a power structure by your definition of those terms. It's not that men don't experience oppression from power structures, it's that your definition of power structures is oppression by a "ruling class", and you see men as that "ruling class", so by your definition they can't be oppressed by their own power structure. It has nothing to do with men as individuals.
THIS is why you need to expand your perspective. That line of reasoning is complete mental gymnastics. It's friggen hilarious how feminists justify their own bigiotry, and reinforce the perceptives they claim cause so much harm.
Like you may not believe it's moral, but your fundamental perspective is "men are in charge". I find it like.... interesting as fuck that this is what feminism has looped back to. Shit like this makes me think that as a species we are really just too petty or too stupid to get past our own biases.
This assumes women on average are as interest in "just sex" as men are. I don't care for men thinking my body is just good enough for sex.
I mean, in a relationship, what else do you need a body for? The main thing that keeps two people interested in each other is the personality, as long as the bodies are “good enough” to sexually stimulate your partner there’s not much more they’re needed for. Hell, for some that isn’t even a requirement.
But it doesn't make sense to complain about women supposedly having higher standards when men and women seem to have, on average, different expectations towards a relationship? I would rather be alone than being with a person who just finds my body good enough. For many men this seems to be different.
I always thought the “different expectations” prejudice about relationships was more about average men wanting a “body to fuck” that’s also a pleasant person and average women wanting a pleasant person that’s also a “body to fuck” (you know, the old adage about push-up bras and lies).
I don’t know if it’s also about how much is your body attractive to your partner, to me it seems like an unnecessary requirement and kind of “objectifying yourself”. Like, if a person is in love with your personality and finds your body simply “attractive”, is that not good enough for a relationship to you? That situation is like hitting a jackpot for most men I know.
It is objectifying towards yourself. And it stems from the fact that in media and our society in general women are valued by their looks. There are very few examples for likeable female characters, for example, who aren't also beautiful and young. It's a complex issues and that's why it is especially questionable to produce such a meme.
Then why would you do that? If you recognize it’s not right to expect that, why would you specifically want a partner that absolutely loves your body?
Because, as we’ve been saying, most characters (whether males or females) in fiction are beautiful. There’s also very few examples of likeable male characters that aren’t also beautiful.
You might have a point with the age but I’d attribute that to historical Hollywood stars being mostly male, as more popular actresses get old we’ll definitely see more likeable old women.
You would do that because that's how you are socialised as a woman growing up. Your value is your youth and how beautiful you are. That's it.
It is not easy to just rid yourself from socialising. As a man this can be hard to get when it's about beauty standards because beauty standards imposed onto men are not even close as restrictive as those imposed onto women.
There are many examples for unattractive, funny looking, old, chubby, etc. male characters in media. For female characters that's the exception.
I don’t know, I really don’t get the reasoning. I can understand being conditioned so that your subconscious gives a higher importance to your body than what it should be, and that can be hard to completely get rid of, but you consciously typed “I would rather be alone than being with a person who just finds my body good enough”. That doesn’t seem like something egodystonic you’re actively trying to fight.
And as for representation in media, are all those funny looking/chubby characters actual, three-dimensional characters or are they just the comic relief whose main point of their personality is “he’s a nerd/fat/ugly”? Because for fat kids that’s exactly the opposite of body positivity, and the only reason why there’s so many males and little females in that trope is because making fun of a woman for her appearance is generally something frowned upon (meanwhile for men it’s totally ok, at least until recently)
Why would I fight it though? I don’t see it as a necessity to have a romantic relationship with someone.
There are plenty of examples where the male character is not attractive and is also not made fun of.
Because you said it’s objectifying yourself? And that’s not a good thing? And saying you’re not that interested in romance is very different from “I would rather be alone than being with a person who just finds my body good enough“. That means you’re interested, as long as the other person finds your body very attractive.
Again, define “not attractive”. Because ugly and fat characters are almost always made fun of. If “not ugly, but not gorgeous” characters count as “not attractive” I can find a lot of female ones too.
I feel like you really try to twist what my point is or I am not good at explaining it in English. When you have been told your whole life that all you have as value is how physically attractive you are, the way you approach relationships is different.
While a man perhaps can still believe the other person likes them, even though they only find their body ok or good enough, for many women this is much harder. That has a lot of consequences for our society, including the difference in behaviour in online dating apps, why women are less likely to buy sex, dead bedrooms, etc.
It's just a matter of what feels worse for me. And for me it feels much worse to be with a man who settled for me, than to be single.
Regarding representation in media, I won't argue with someone who seriously tries to say female characters have a diverse representation just as male characters. That's frankly a ridiculous take. Arguing with someone who seems to live in a different reality doesn't make sense.
I’m not talking about “settling for”, I’m talking about someone loving you for your personality and not really caring too much about how attractive you are. Isn’t knowing your partner loves you for who you are and not for how you look like a better situation? Again, relationships are something that’s ideally supposed to last for decades, a beautiful body isn’t.
There’s a lot of beautiful men and women in media, and there’s a lot of average-looking men and women in media. I already explained why I think there’s way more “ugly” males than females but you’re saying it isn’t true because there’s plenty of male characters that “aren’t attractive” and aren’t made fun of, so I asked for your definition of “not attractive”, as if you mean definitely-less-than-average I really can’t think of many.