Women only trans inclusive This is an inclusive community for all things women. Whether you're here for make up tips, feminism or just friendly chit chat, we've got you covered.
Rules…
I mean that goes for almost everyone's interactions with everyone, except for those who are super socially anxious and self-conscious. People that are evil don't think they're evil. People that are basically saints, think they're just doing what anyone would do. Just human psychology for you.
I would agree. Just as everyone is the hero of their own story, no one is the 'bad guy' in their own story...and will often do olympic level mental gymnastics to fit that image.
@LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone do you not consider the content of this post to be a direct violation of rule 3? See my other comments here to understand my view point better. But regardless doesn't this objectively count as hate filled talk about a group?
It is not saying that all men treat women poorly, but that men treat women the way they think a woman deserves to be treated.
A good man will treat a woman with respect because he acknowledges that basic human respect is deserved at that point.
A shit man will treat a woman horribly because in his mind she 'deserves it'. Without something that changes his viewpoint he will not look back on it and say 'I was wrong'.
And this works if you flip the genders too
It didn't suggest men are treating women poorly, it said they treat them as well as they think the deserve. If you interpret that negatively, ask yourself why.
Must every reply of this type accuse the commenter of being sexist? Can't you imagine someone could hold any view except your own without being a monster?
I didn't accuse anyone of being sexist. I'm suggesting people hold implicit biases about sexism.
Fair, and also I just realized this is the women-only community, so I must leave. Have a nice day
Thank you for checking the rules and being civil. Have a good week.
I did not say it did, I said it made negative assumptions(they all think they are okay, they will never change) on all men. As if no man can ever see his own mistakes, as if no man can ever understand the issue and change. To call this post not negative towards men is disingenuous.
If what I'm saying is so far off the mark, then so is calling it hate speech.
I don't agree that people can't change, though.
That’s some lovely gaslighting there, buddy. If I slap you in the face, then it’s you who have a problem if you interpreted my little pat as a violent act.
People have got to learn the definition of gaslighting. And come up with better analogies.
Gaslighting is when you tell someone that what they see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears isn't real and you're doing it in order to discredit their judgement and make them doubt themselves. That is what you're doing with your casual denial that this post is straight up hateful towards all men.
You can do your mental gymnastics and deny this all you want, but one has to be blind and stupid to not understand the purpose of this post as being divisive and hateful towards men.
As a woman, I do not approve of this type of bs, especially not in a group that is supposedly against spreading hatred.
Maybe if you read it you'd see the statement isn't saying anything at all, which isn't something I'm denying. It's deliberately phrased to be a general, non-statement while inciting biases someone may read into it.
Interpreting a phrase different from someone else isn't gaslighting, but I see you've resorted to straight up insults. Touch some fucking grass, christ.
I think you're the one who needs to read the statement again. It is very clearly negative towards men.
If it was neutral, it would not have added "Dishes out"
"You'll never convince any of them to change"
"None of them think they are the problem"
Those are not neutral statements. They are accusatory and as it is stated in the beginning of the comment, it is accusing all men.
I have never heard any context where "dishes out" was used in a positive or neutral way toward someone. It is always a negative way of saying that someone is treating other people in a way they wouldn't like to be treated themselves.
If the statement was neutral, then why would it be necessary to put emphasis on men not being willing to change the way they dish out what they think women deserve?
And why would anyone have to think men were the problem if them dishing it out to women wasn't an issue?
I believe you know that this statement is hateful towards men and you're being cheeky about it, because if not, then you probably are the one who needs to learn how to read the meaning of a sentence.
The first half is true. The conclusion is wrong.
No one ever thinks they're in the wrong while they're doing something. No one. The fact that they are doing it is evidence that they have a justification for it. People only realize they're the problem after they do a thing. That's not just men. That's how we all work. Men change when they can be convinced that their past behavior was wrong.
Thank you! I can't stand the sentiment that people can't change. It's so harmful.
I agree. I think the reason that this kind of behavior is so prominent in men is that the world around them tends to be more approving of men in general. A patriarchal society will be more forgiving and allow worse behavior to fester in men while being more scrutinizing and judgemental of "others".
Himpathy. It's a real thing.
This is so well said and such a demonstration of why this problem will take a fundamental cultural shift to solve. The irony is that the op (and everyone else don't get me wrong) can't see this exact problem in their post for the reason you said.
Change is gradual and always a result of a person believing they are the ones who chose to change, sometimes change comes along and the person thinks they've stayed the same.
And, not to downplay the OP, but men have changed for the better. It sounds ridiculous, but compared to the 1900s? Holy shit have things gotten better. The issue is that there's so much more societal consciousness about it and it's still agonizingly slow.
It's changed for the better since the '70s/'80s even. It's also backslid a couple of times since then (and we're in the middle of a massive backslide right now in much of the world).
I believe that some men can be shown the error of their ways. My biodad was a cheating, psychologically abusive piece of shit for most of my life. He eventually changed as a person and treats everyone well. But there were a lot of people in his life influencing him to better himself
My ex (and rapist), on the other hand, is still a piece of shit and probably always will be based on his life choices and the people he surrounds himself with.
I think the issue with this opinion is the core assumption that all men necessarily have all encompassing views on all women. Once you don't evaluate people based on random groups they have no real choice in being a part of, you stop having ideas such as "women deserve X" or "Blacks deserve Y" or "All men are Z" or any other form of bigotry.
So as frustrating as the patriarchy is, and as much as it sucks that significant portions of our society is inherently sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, and much more. We won't solve it by just being sexist the other way, nor will we teach the next generation to empathize with those who are different. We need to be honest with ourselves and ask "Am I judging people based on their actions, or based on immutable attributes?"
The tags society assign to you (be it gender, race, religion, etc) mean nothing about your value. Your actions and beliefs are the metrics that should be used to evaluate you as a person.
In no way did this statement suggest all men were mistreating women. You read that into it yourself.
This could easily be applied to anyone for any subject without being problematic.
I did not say that it did, I said that it made generalizations about men
It's not a generalization to say a group treats another group as well as they deserve, since "as good as they deserve" can mean anything.
The generalization here is that all men have an idea of what all women deserve, as if all men judge women based on their gender
That's an interpretation I didn't see at all, and I don't believe is supported by the wording of the statement. Being aware of a group and deciding how that group ought to be treated does not mean they will be treated differently for being members of that group.
I still think you're applying a bias here, and the statement is designed to expose those biases because it really isn't saying anything at all. Aside from the not changing part, which as I said I disagree with.
"There is not a single men on earth that thinks he mistreats women"
"Every man dishes out exactly what he thinks women deserve"
All men do have all encompassing views on women, they're socialised to believe them, most of them serve capitalism. Shutting your eyes to their existence, doesn't make them not there. It feels like you are trying to "not all men". If people are judged by their actions, do the 62 million men who logged onto a rape your wife website, to enjoy the uploads, just this week gone, get judged for their behaviours, what about the consistent amount of rapes actually committed, predominantly by men, the amount of women killed a year. The canary in the coal mine, died years ago. This is a systemic and cultural issue. Men are cultured to hate women, look down on women. They speak nicely to women they find attractive and treat those they don't without even basic respect. Because they're socialised to see women as an adornment put on this earth for them, an object. When you smooth over and try and imply it's bigotry to point out systemic oppression, it's right in there, with the oppressors, enabling the system. Patriarchy doesn't just suck, it kills, hundreds if not thousands a year. It's not just an annoyance.
All men do have all encompassing views on women
Bullshit
There is a difference between believing "society teaches men X" or "society enables men to do Y" and believing "all men are X" or "all men do Y"
This isn't a "not all men" comment, this is a genuine discussion about how our victimhood causes us to go beyond justice and equality and into retaliatory attacks.
There is a big difference between a small comment like "all men suck" (which I still think is unhelpful and hurtful) and the deep and thought out belief that the OOP posted. To say "not all men" to the small comment is to miss the point and just be defensive, but the OOP is something else that deserves discussion, not to mention the fact that the title of this post is asking for opinions.
Just to add my pov for context:
I am AMAB but I am not a man, but society identifies me as one. I have been hurt bu people generalizing about non-cis, I have been hurt by peolle generalizing about non-straight, I have been hurt by people generalizing about women, and I have been hurt by people generalizing about men. The one that stands out the most for me is the men one, not because of any special attachment or because it is worse (it is obviously not), but because within the groups that are understanding and accepting of who I am (call it liberal, woke, progressive, idc) the generalization of men was always so casual and in the open. It reminded me of the other side, the people that I used to hate because they would openly joke about "the gays" and black people, and especially women. Everytime I heard a sexist remark I would cringe and wonder how they can be so casual about being so horribly disrespectful and aggressive towards literally half of the world? And now days I don't hang around these kinds of people, but I find myself in a very similar situation because it seems that here (while they are 10000% better) they feel comfortable to openly disrespect and be aggressive towards the other half of the world...
I will say, this is just a comment so there is a lot of nuance here, but while I draw similarities between both sides, I whole heartedly believe and feel that one side was actually horrible and the other is more of understandably flawed situation.
Besides disagreeing with the conclusion, I'm deeply suspicious of accounts with "radfem" in the name since that's what TERFs like to call themselves.
I just call them transphobes, as I don't perceive them to be feminist in any way. If they were, then they wouldn't be fighting to reduce their own bathroom access, fighting to subject people to nonconsensual bodily inspections, and so on.
Extremely true! It can help to understand the type of transphobe so you can pick up on dog whistles like radfem more easily of course.
No one really ever thinks they're evil.
You're right. Remember years back when everyone suddenly became "anti-bully"? It was doomed to fail, and I called it out at the time, because "bully" is less an identity and more a thing almost everyone has done at some point (even if they don't remember it.) People don't tend to self-identify as "bullies." Those who make a habit out of picking on others see it as acceptable, because it raises their social clout and/or makes them feel better about themselves. They're going to ignore messaging directed at "bullies" because they don't see themselves as being one. The entire idea of targeting "bullies" was a snipe hunt from the start. It's an easy rallying cry to make but a complicated issue to solve.
The same goes here, with those who are abusive not thinking they are abusers. Whether it's a kid putting down the "weirdo" to make their friends laugh, an entitled man guilt-tripping his girlfriend into having sex against her wishes, or a narcissist parent who humiliates their own kid then claims they're trying to "help" them, the people doing these things don't see themselves as "bad." They all think what they're doing is normal.
As long as protecting their egos is considered more important than everything else, they'll continue to fail at the empathizing and self-reflection they need to improve themselves.
That’s like those billboards you see driving home that say domestic violence is wrong as is if some wife-beater is going to see it and be like, “oh shit no way.”
Those are meant more for women, to help them recognize abusive situations are not alright.
Every villain is the hero in their own story
I don’t know if it’s right or wrong but I do know many of the guys who say “not all men” tend to be the ones that don’t treat women well.