Slop.
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/gossip
The classic "when people disagree with me it proves I'm right" gambit
😭 is up there with 🤣 as a clear sign someone is malding over getting owned
"Men are dumb."
"Now men are disagreeing with me, when I am objectively correct. Thus furthering my point."
"Men are getting mad at me for saying this, which proves they are overly emotional and not logical at all."
"Men are threatening me! This proves that they are thuggish, thick-headed lumpen thugs!"
"Men have removed my account from the website! I am being censored, which proves I am correct!"
"I have now landed a seat on The View. I will be so excited to raise this discourse to the national level."
This comment proves she's right
That is some severe gender essentialist brainrot.
I do get why women hate men. We absolutely deserve it, and I'll never complain when I see it. But obviously lib bio-essentialism isn't the solution.
Do you deserve it, though?
I've definitely deserved hate in the past, I'm definitely no ideal. Other times it's been terrible experience from other men, which honestly is understandable.
That's much closer to the right idea, that you're able to recognize and respect why others feel the way they do, and have self-awareness of your own flaws. The idea I'm trying to get at with the question is really just that if you understand and respect why people hate you, that this is in fact very different from feeling like you "deserve" their hate, if that makes sense.
I want to explicitly preface this comment to state that lib bio-essentialism isn't the solution. I just need some theory to know what is the answer.
That said, what kind of response do you expect ButtBidet to give? If ButtBidet says no, you effectively get:
#notallmen
https://www.zawn.net/blog/hello-youve-reached-the-not-all-men-hotline
If ButtBidet says yes, the justification that follows would be on the basis of the patriarchy existing and putting men in a privileged position... which seems to be wandering right back into lib bio-essentialism territory.
Really I was just trying to laconically poke at the notion that "men deserve hate" without having any specific answer in mind. I figured that if the question amounts to "Is your own statement true?", and the question could not be answered with either a simple yes or a simple no, that it would become apparent that something was wrong with the statement itself.
If ButtBidet says yes, the justification that follows would be on the basis of the patriarchy existing and putting men in a privileged position... which seems to be wandering right back into lib bio-essentialism territory.
What.
No, the patriarchy existing is not bio-essentialism! Neither is white supremacy existing race realism! What the fuck! These are social systems that justify themselves through such pseudoscience but in reality are 100% social and thus can be overthrown.
No, the patriarchy existing is not bio-essentialism
I wasn't intending to claim that — the patriarchy can and should be overthrown. The patriarchy harms people of all genders.
I was thinking of a particular line of reasoning following from it to justify men deserving hate (for instance, "men deserve hate on account of being men, because they are in a system where they are privileged") might be though.
I guess you're right that a better line of reasoning could follow, e.g. men, exploiting this position of privilege and thus inflicting harm, deserve hate as a result.
I understand
I do get why women hate men.
Damn. Crazy how we just take statements like this at face value.
Don't we make jokes about being crackers on this site all the time? It's the same thing. No one says not all white people here.
Don't we make jokes about being crackers on this site all the time?
Generally self-effacing, yes. That's before you get into what "whiteness" even is.
Fear of sexual violence is a real motherfucker, isn't it? Hating and fearing all men is a trauma response to living in patriarchy.
What is it that you don't get..?
I want to know more. How did men evolve after women?
i mean that part is technically true, just uhh, like 1.2 billion years ago when some algae invented sex, but brains didn't exist back then so 
Wouldn't it have been male ones that diverged from the hermaphroditic model first? Think there are some slugs that are only hermaphroditic and male, but I've never heard of hermaphroditic and female.
afaik parthenogenesis is not hermaphroditism and is a strong indicator that the female sex existed first
It's the Chicken-Egg dilemma. You can't have a man without a woman first. Therefore, men evolved second.
god poured a can of bud light onto a plate of baby back ribs. voila, man.
Men are simply the product of the highest of end Chili's.
Maybe she misunderstood ancestral eve to mean all humans descended from her, not just all modern humans?
they're probably referencing the (potentially outdated) fact that all humans start as 'female' and about half become 'male'
The type of ‘feminism’ literally no one likes
Bio-Truth 
actual 
Bio-Alternative-Facts 
I'm in favor of making men mald and therefore critically support this
Sometimes I wish humans had more of the dimorphism these essentialist types seem to believe in, that way I could have a big red dewlap or colorful plumage
I'd have big red butt cheek flaps
Wow... This explains why men don't know about the womb pouch, and how it's literally impossible for women to have a flat stomach because our superior internal organs stick out. Women stay winning 💅
alt account.