For those men who do not understand, think of it like this:
Imagine you are strolling deep through the woods, its late, you are exhausted, now who would rather randomly run into, a normal, reasonable woman, or a crazy feminist?
Don’t be silly, I’m a sensible liberal feminist I know women are too stupid, feeble, and detached from reality to be able to affect the real world where men are solely in charge of everything important!
Yes people, if you take the very reasonable belief that women are people then you have to accept they’re capable of bad things too and of being mistaken, manipulated, and manipulating.
They implied that being a feminist implies being crazy and misandrist. How is that not incel talk?
Stop pretending sexism works one way.
I’m taking a guess and claim that you don’t really understand sexism. It hurts men, too, yes. But not in the way you think it does (but rather by toxic masculinity).
I’m taking a guess and claim that you don’t really understand sexism. It hurts men, too, yes. But not in the way you think it does (but rather by toxic masculinity)
This is what you’ve said. I’m not assuming anything about what you’ve said.
I was in 5th grade when my misandrist teacher very pointedly exclaimed how much she hated little boys. In a class of 30 kids, the only people who got A’s were the three girls.
You can just fuck off. Misandry absolutely exists, it effects men and boys - not just in a ‘toxic masculinity’ way.
Using two or more adjectives doesn’t imply conflation.
The sentence “You can have a regular apple or a big green apple” doesn’t imply that green apples are big, or that big apples are green.
It also doesn’t imply that big green apples are irregular outside of this local phrasing context.
It just implies that the set of ‘regular apples’ being referenced does not include the instance of ‘a big green apple’
I can see where the confusion is coming from, this is tricky to explain clearly.
That’s why context is important. And the way they wrote just seems like they conflate the two. If you look at the other comments with all the MRA chodes, I think it’s not too far fetched.
I’m taking a guess and claim that you don’t really understand sexism. It hurts men, too, yes. But not in the way you think it does (but rather by toxic masculinity)
I directly countered that. Suddenly the goalposts have shifted and what you said isn’t actually what you said.
I mean Andrea Dworkin is dead doesn’t mean that all of them suddenly vanished from the face of the earth. Are you going to come across them? Probably not, they’re busy at home gooning in a vain attempt to take the “political” out of “political lesbian”.
For those men who do not understand, think of it like this:
Imagine you are strolling deep through the woods, its late, you are exhausted, now who would rather randomly run into, a normal, reasonable woman, or a crazy feminist?
lol. Found the incel
Not an incel nor the commenter, but mysandry is all over the place in many feminist communities (not all, though).
Stop pretending sexism works one way.
Don’t be silly, I’m a sensible liberal feminist I know women are too stupid, feeble, and detached from reality to be able to affect the real world where men are solely in charge of everything important!
Yes people, if you take the very reasonable belief that women are people then you have to accept they’re capable of bad things too and of being mistaken, manipulated, and manipulating.
They implied that being a feminist implies being crazy and misandrist. How is that not incel talk?
I’m taking a guess and claim that you don’t really understand sexism. It hurts men, too, yes. But not in the way you think it does (but rather by toxic masculinity).
I think you need to specify why:
equals
Like their argument was dumb, but misandrists absolutely exist and can be some truly despicable people.
They implied that feminists are automatically grazy, misandrist and different to “normal” people.
Yeah, you assumed that’s what they meant.
This is what you’ve said. I’m not assuming anything about what you’ve said.
I was in 5th grade when my misandrist teacher very pointedly exclaimed how much she hated little boys. In a class of 30 kids, the only people who got A’s were the three girls.
You can just fuck off. Misandry absolutely exists, it effects men and boys - not just in a ‘toxic masculinity’ way.
They wrote
It’s implied.
I’m not claiming that misandry doesn’t exist. But it’s not a systemic issue. The definition of sexism is systemic, though.
Using two or more adjectives doesn’t imply conflation.
The sentence “You can have a regular apple or a big green apple” doesn’t imply that green apples are big, or that big apples are green. It also doesn’t imply that big green apples are irregular outside of this local phrasing context.
It just implies that the set of ‘regular apples’ being referenced does not include the instance of ‘a big green apple’
I can see where the confusion is coming from, this is tricky to explain clearly.
That’s why context is important. And the way they wrote just seems like they conflate the two. If you look at the other comments with all the MRA chodes, I think it’s not too far fetched.
You wrote
I directly countered that. Suddenly the goalposts have shifted and what you said isn’t actually what you said.
Stop.
Where have you countered that misandry isn’t systemic and which goalposts were supposedly moved?
Ah, I see you can’t read.
Downvotes don’t make you right, donkey.
I mean Andrea Dworkin is dead doesn’t mean that all of them suddenly vanished from the face of the earth. Are you going to come across them? Probably not, they’re busy at home gooning in a vain attempt to take the “political” out of “political lesbian”.