- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
Honestly, I agree men’s issues do need to be seriously discussed, but it’s wrong to hijack discussion about women’s issues to talk about men’s issues. The reverse is also true.
I’ve actually seen the opposite happen more often than the former. Both online and irl. A guy starts complaining about things and a cacophony of women show up to tell him how he’ll never understand what it’s like to be a woman.
Whenever I do see the opposite and when the guy interjects all that’s said is “there’s a time and a place to talk about men’s issues” but like when is it then?
Yeah I really don’t see the situation in the comic often at all. I won’t say it doesn’t happen, but I’ve personally witnessed way more of this reactionary diversion when men are discussing their unique issues.
I think it is most often when these conversations happen online that vocal reactionaries try to derail the conversation. More often than not, local and private dialogues I’ve been apart of and around tend to be more civil. In fact, both men and women seem to be on the same side when they voice their issues to each other face-to-face. I think cameras can also sour the situation, since it can put people on edge to be recorded.
At the same time, while there is a massive amount of people who get behind feminist movements and those who back counter-feminist movements, there is very few of those same counter-feminists who seem to actually ever participate in man wellbeing support infrastructure, hence why that infrastructure does not materialize. It seems that a good portion of folks only seem to pipe up as a direct counter to women trying to advocate for themselves, and then are silent and frugal when men are trying to advocate for themselves non-adversarily. I’d argue there are many people who are trying to attack both as they try to uphold the status quo.
We saw this reactionary behavior against feminist advocacy during Gamergate, as a great example - specifically when talking about the events related to Anita Sarkeesian’s ‘Tropes vs Women in Video games’. I went back and watched that series, and overall the points are fair criticisms of videogame writing (and honestly tropes in media in general). I don’t think that anything Anita pointed out was even that vilifying either. The overall response, however, was very toxic and dismissive, and was paired with a harassment campaign.
We saw a similar backlash from a vocal minority for most subsequent feminist actions surrounding cases of sexual abuse such as “Me Too” being countered by protests such as the “HimToo” movement. There’s no reason both these conversations couldn’t happen but it always seems that they only ever show up at the same time, and try to steal each others thunder.
We could also talk about the Depp v Heard court case, which had extreme levels of toxicity across the board, with large portions of folks on either side choosing to view one side as exclusively as a lying abuser and the other as completely exalted of any blame when what was being shown was an relationship full of mutual toxicity.
Remember The Bear?
Halsin would like a word.
You are showing exactly the behaviour that the meme is criticising.
No they’re not. The OP’s comic explicitly raised the comparison.
Both scenarios are possible and it is shitty to use whataboutism in both scenarios.
Whenever I do see the opposite and when the guy interjects all that’s said is “there’s a time and a place to talk about men’s issues” but like when is it then?
When it’s not being used as a whataboutism.
When it’s not being used as a whataboutism.
Ever seen a discussion about men complaining that they are assumed to be a threat just for being male get derailed by comments that it isn’t a problem worth complaining about compared to women’s issues? Or when the topic of how sexual abuse of boys is extremely common gets derailed as not really being an issue and dismissed by crime stats that often exclude non-penatrating sexual assaults?
Yes it sucks when whataboutism is used to dismiss complaints, but it is also frustrating that the same whataboutism is used to silence discussion that is about the issues that men face.
Ever seen a discussion about men complaining that they are assumed to be a threat just for being male get derailed by comments that it isn’t a problem worth complaining about compared to women’s issues?
No I haven’t ever seen that. But that would be an example of whataboutism so pretty shitty thing to say.
Or when the topic of how sexual abuse of boys is extremely common gets derailed as not really being an issue and dismissed by crime stats that often exclude non-penatrating sexual assaults?
No I haven’t ever seen thing either but again that is dismissive and a terrible way to invalidate a legitimate problem.
Yes it sucks when whataboutism is used to dismiss complaints, but it is also frustrating that the same whataboutism is used to silence discussion that is about the issues that men face.
So you feel whataboutism/dismissive responses are only used against men? Or do you agree that that is not a good way to respond to legitimate issues regardless of gender?
So feel whataboutism/dismissive responses are only used against men? Or do you agree that that is not a good way to respond to legitimate issues regardless of gender?
I am saying whataboutism is to commonly used to dismiss both men’s and women’s issues and it sucks in both cases.
Agreed
So you feel whataboutism/dismissive responses are only used against men? Or do you agree that that is not a good way to respond to legitimate issues regardless of gender?
They’re agreeing with you it seems to me, and sharing their anecdotes that despite that reality which they agree with, let me re-emphasize that, despite that reality (that using one gender’s struggles to whatabout another’s is considered both ineffective and borders on conflict-seeking, inherently), that in their experience, they have seen the same the same whatabout tactics used to dismantle discussion when a “male centric” issue is the discussion catalyst, as when it’s a “female centric” issue originating the discourse.
I can’t speak for that other commenter to your follow up question though, so I’ll answer it for myself: I do not feel that whataboutism/dismissive responses are only used against men, no.
As a matter of fact, I feel that they’re employed more often to stiffle discussions on “woman centric” concerns precisely because of how little Men’s issues are discussed, and the reason for both is the same. That this is a side effect of the patriarchal systems in place doesn’t absolve either side from the requirement to be genuine if genuine discourse is sought, though.
I have seen what the commenter is mentioning and right here on Lemmy to boot. Because whether male or female, a whatabout is an easy rhetorical blanket to reach for, and many do.
I believe that both genders (including and specially men, who must own up to the fact that collectively we’re the gender with the greater frequency of offense against other genders if we’re ever going to get to addressing why it’s the same systemic patriarchal roots binding women’s rights that choke out the existence of men’s rights issues) have to be willing to communicate.
Women in aggregate are crying to be heard, but “TooManyMen” aren’t listening that they’re (women) speaking for them both too, and I feel those men who are able to hear some of that message need to help out in stopping the whataboutism wall in their brothers before they get going…
The same way that I believe there’s women who need to do the same for many of their sisters in the public square.
Divided is how we’ve gotten to this, unapologetically more viscerally dangerous for womanhood world that pretty much always has been, but I feel that it is united that we’ll reach any dreams of equity or widespread understanding between the genders, if we ever will.
In short, I agree “that that [whataboutism tainting discourse] is not a good way to respond to legitimate issues regardless of gender”, but the mere axiomatic observation falls short of the next step:
Both sides need to acknowledge and give each other the room to voice out their feelings, views, ideas, etc, genuinely (trolls and agitators need not be entertained) while still keeping an eye for the possibility that unity lies not in knowing the correct answer but in the shared questioning.
Fellas let’s do (and encourage our brothers to) better whether we think it’s fair or not, and ladies, understand (and share with the sisters who it’s safe to) that a hypocrite and someone whose barriers are breaking will appear briefly as the same before change is undergone.
Women in aggregate are crying to be heard, but “TooManyMen” aren’t listening that they’re (women) speaking for them both too…
I’m one of those “
TooManyAllMen.” My problem isn’t women speaking about womens issues, my problem is when they do so with signs like we recently had an uproar about here on lemmy, signs that say stuff like “Not all men but always a man.” To me that sign says “Fine, you bitch when we say every one of you does it? Here, not all of you do it, but no women do it ever, no man or boy has ever been raped by a woman.” When I see some obvious bullshit like that, as a male rape victim of two different women, I’m calling it out. It is what it is.Don’t want me to call out obvious bullshit? Find better slogans than “All men™” “Not all men but always a man,” or the all too common comment which graced that thread as usual when these things are discussed: “Men are trash.” If I said “All women” do goddamn anything someone would be right here to tell me I’m a wrong incelbigot, if I said “women are trash” I might get whole ass instance banned, but when the turn tables all of a sudden it’s “yaaasssss qween girlboss.”
Why must we exclude victims, even lumping them in as de facto aggressors by gender? Why can’t it be all victims vs all abusers? The men are in aggregate crying to be heard too, but we’re told we need to “let women speak,” at best. At least that’s better than “You must’ve enjoyed it because of your body’s natural uncontrollable biological responses, you’re a gay pussy, she’s hot stop complaining,” or any of the other myriad of dismissals I’ve been told personally as have most male victims.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen the opposite, where the dude is holding a reasonable opinion or complaint.
Meanwhile this comment section is an example of the comic itself
there’s a time and a place to talk about men’s issues" but like when is it then?
Not when women are discussing theirs. It’s that simple.
It’s like you didn’t even read their comment.
It is very possible I misread it, my bad.
Go start your own thread then if it’s important to you. That’s the whole point, don’t hijack the conversation. Sucks when it happens to you, don’t do it to other people as revenge.
Man just going for irony right away, eh?
Whenever I do see the opposite and when the guy interjects all that’s said is “there’s a time and a place to talk about men’s issues” but like when is it then?
Probably not in the thread with the comic about womens issues being talked over by men, like you’re doing now, would be a good choice.
EDIT: I’ll eat the downvotes. Just wanted to say how embarrassing it is to be a man and hear ‘but what about men’s issues?’ used in a non-ironic way. Sorry ladies, you don’t deserve this crap. Also thanks for being the bulwark against fascism.
The downvotes are insane when you’re demonstrably right.
There was a wave of, likely from reddit, ‘mens rights’ users who came over and this happens all of the time now. Any time a woman mentions issues with a man, it’s “YEAH BUT WHAT ABOUT” as if the things can’t both exist.
I mean look what they’re upvoting: ‘I saw a feminist say she doesn’t care about guys, I super swear guys!’
It’s just fucking embarrassing how childish they are. Not even childish, because children can learn empathy. It’s as if they quite literally have zero empathy, and can only engage in sympathy with someone who is somehow similar to them. Like should I just post this comic here, the one we all read, as a reply to these people?
Irony is completely lost upon them.
The Bear incident made this plenty clear.
And they’ll just downvote anything you say, because you’re the bad guy now, regardless of what you’re talking about.
I’m just curious what it must be like to be so fragile. It’s like any time they aren’t being directly supported they fall apart and lash out at everyone around them. The hardest part is watching women calmly wait out the guys’ tantrum, then try to carefully explain to him (and in a way that makes him Feel Like A Man still, ever holding his hand emotionally) what is happening and they will still freak out.
It really is just embarrassing.
You are showing exactly the behaviour that the meme is criticising.
I agree with this and I’d also add that bringing up men’s issues to try to silence discussion of women’s issues then harms men as well because people associate discussion of men’s issues with that type of shit behaviour.
While I agree with this sentiment, IME it is very rarely intended to silence discussion of women’s issues, and is usually related to hyperbolic statements like “men are trash” or protest signs like “not all men but always a man” (both from a lemmy post I partook in “attempting to silence” last month.) Imo it’s reasonable to take offense, disagree, and express both of those feelings wherever I see it to call it out. I am not trying to silence women, I just want them to treat me with the same respect I treat them, if they don’t want me to say “all women are trash” because two women have literally raped me (except for the definition of rape in my area calls for penetration specifically, so legally forcing me to have sex with them was at most “sexual assault,” which while I’m mentioning it fuck that bullshit, but I digress), then they shouldn’t get to call me trash because someone who is not me, I’m not friends with, and who I’ve never even met, raped them either. I, as a male rape victim, am expected to be able to separate “those women” from “all women” lest I be an “incel” (though, by the definition of incel I think being raped twice negates that alone, yet they still call you one for being a victim and mad about being lumped in with the aggressors for the crime of having the same genitals as their aggressor), and all I’m asking for is the same in return. We can stand with victims and against abusers, it doesn’t have to be male victims vs woman victims vs abusers battle royale.
/rant.
Sorry, I happen to care about this topic a lot, being personally effected and all lol.
I understand the anger at the statements. They are visceral and immediately labelling. I’ve found that it is good to understand these taglines as simplified mantras, such as “don’t talk to the police”. It is meant as a heuristic for women’s safety, and so long as you understand that you yourself aren’t dangerous, the tagline does not apply to you. It also lets you know exactly where women are coming from: why they only use the restroom in groups, why they aren’t going to give you an outright answer most of the time, and why they will keep their distance until they know you.
I’d argue that these behaviors should not be gender-coded and should be practiced by both men and women, and that vilification of violent outbursts , and similar sexist tropes, should also not only apply to men. It is explicitly sexism which puts this barrier up, where women being violent is downplayed, and men who use women’s playbooks are viewed as less masculine.
These are issues of the same coin, which is a divide created by both genders applying different stereotypes to one another and then operating based on those stereotypes
I find it’s also helpful to look at such “taglines” for what they are, generalizations. It just so happens that when we generalize about women it’s sexist, when we generalize about races it’s racist, and when we generalize about men it’s “just a tagline.” I know men aren’t supposed to admit we have feelings or else we’re weak, but we do. I’ve been cheated on 3 times and raped twice, all 5 were by different women, does that give me licence to
generalize“create taglines” like “Women are trash?” Hell, I can’t even use the word “female” to the degree where I sometimes write “males… and women…” instead, lest I be crucified as a pariah, but if I call out “Men are trash,” literally, I’m still seen as in the wrong.No. Something’s gotta give, can’t have it both ways. Either women’s “taglines” are bad too or men can also generalize about women. Personally I lean towards “generalizations are stupid, tagline or not, and basically by using them you hurt yourself (your movement) in your confusion like a goddamn magikarp.”
Tbf, the times I usually see it “hijacked” it’s because of signs like “not all men but always a man” completely pretending that male rape victims don’t exist, or comments like “men are trash” under the post. If I ever in my life saw a post about male victims that said “women are trash” or had comparable signs and women complained, I would see that as totally justified.
Rage bait. These posts aren’t created to do anything other than get people mad at each other.
Then again, Hanlon’s razor.
There’s also plenty of room in there for less malicious situations as well (not that the malicious ones you speak of aren’t happening…they are…but there’s other cases as well).
I think a lot of the problems arise based on differing expectations, and ideas about what a “conversation” entails.
Too often, it seems like a conversation means “let me voice my grievances, assign blame, and explain my ideas about why it’s like that and what should be done…and didn’t you dare to disagree with me or question anything or point out flaws in my logic, because this is my space!”
And hey, you’re free to do that…but that ain’t a conversation. Conversation means you don’t get to dictate the terms completely to everyone else.
I feel like those who do this do know, deep down, that they don’t want a conversation at all… but “everyone shut up, let me say my thing, then agree with me” tends to draw in a smaller audience. You might be right, you might be wrong, but, “Listen to me and don’t say anything I don’t like.” isn’t a conversation.
Twitter normalized of extremely simplistic expression of complicated issues which leads to all kinds of kneejerk reactions. Some men misinterpret whatever complaint as being about them and turn defensive, and of course the most aggressive of those voices are amplified by social media. The inflammatory comments beget more inflammatory comments, reasonable people quickly exit the space and this is what you end up with.
I firmly believe it’s social media that’s to blame.
Some men misinterpret whatever complaint as being about them
I think that’s reasonable if the complaint is about men in general, or specifically calls out all men.
Do you think this comic calls out all men?
No
For sure social medias are a big part of it.
I understand that “all men are trash” and the likes are generalizations about men, not me specifically. But when you see these lines make rounds and rounds again, it can makes you question yourself even if you’ve done nothing wrong. And that’s a big hit to self-esteem and anxiety.
I’d like to, whenever possible, move away from women’s issues or men’s issues towards people’s issues.
It’s a good thing to do that, but some issues really are heavily affected by gender
That is very true. Often, it is reactionaries coming in trying to deny the existence of those issues blocking progress, not advocates for either. There are many actively trying to stop the conversation, and those very same individuals actively pose as ‘advocates’ while spitting vitriol. “There’s nothing wrong with how you act, it’s all just those progressives faults! No, you don’t need any help, it’s all fake!” This is explicitly just to shut the conversation down and strengthen the divide between gender advocates.
That’s the problem… When is it time to talk about men’s issues? Specifically, in a group that doesn’t listen to Peterson and Andrew Tate
I agree with what you said, but I think the solution is to talk about everyone’s issues instead of men’s issues. Men’s issues aren’t about the men, they’re about how men relate to others.
Women’s issues should have their place, but men don’t need the same thing… Instead they need everyone to show up and talk about their own issues
Bring it up in a space, any space, that isn’t there for the purpose of talking about women’s issues. Make a community now. Write in it.
I’m giving the community a month before it gets flooded by Peterson and Tate types.
That’s the problem. Some folks managed to create wholesome men’s subreddits back in the day. Don’t know how they’re faring now.
And !comicstrips is a space that is here for the express purpose of talking about women’s issues then? Or do you also believe this should be relegated to !feminists, too?
No and no. We’re talking about issues raised by the comic here. Some men’s, some are women’s.
That’s the problem… When is it time to talk about men’s issues? Specifically, in a group that doesn’t listen to Peterson and Andrew Tate
You can start a conversation.
Ok…I did. That’s what I just did. You were there for it
What now? I pointed out the problem, I can tell you the answer at the end of the conversation. The answer is third places.
How do we get there?
Ok…I did. That’s what I just did. You were there for it
There’s a difference between starting a conversation and hijacking an existing one.
No, there’s not.
This is not a Ted talk or a Wendy’s, this is an entirely related post on social media. This is an appropriate place to bring up these ideas
You worded that better than I could, well done.
Why does everything have to be so us-vs.-them? We all share the same planet.
This is potentially gender construct and sexism getting directly in the way of advocacy against real issues. Women start a protest advocating against a very real issue they face, by women for women, and it is spun as a direct attack on men. Same thing happens for men’s advocacy.
“…For the Master’s tool will never dismantle the master’s house. They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change. And this fact is only threatening to those women who still define the master’s house as their only source of support…” - Audre Large, in “Master’s Tools Will Never Take Down the Master’s House”
I don’t think most would blame many women for the practices they do in public to stay safe, despite the behavior explicitly being sexist. This is because we understand that in absence of these kinds of behaviors, women do actually get prayed upon, most often by men. It’s the reality of a dangerous world. however, we get angry when the statements and phrases used to justify these behaviors are said aloud.
What we fail to acknowledge is that that same kind of victimization is possible to a guy. Most guys would find the idea of deliberately using the bathroom at the same time as their friend as weird, possibly even girly. Machismo stereotypes and trying to conform to manliness actively makes men more vulnerable .
We also downplay women being violent, yet again a gender stereotype which not only lets women get physical in public, but actually also makes women easier to dismiss when they’re angry and yelling. This not only lets women get away with toxic behavior, but robs them of being taken seriously at other times.
These are both issues caused by gender, which is also actively defining how advocacy happens and creates an arbitrary divide.
I liked this comment. You wrote with the nuance and balance that I strive for. Thanks for sharing
Outrage is the new thing. Many people aren’t happy or able to feel like their life is affirmed without being angry with someone or at something and it’s vital to their ideology to impose their values on others.
Non compliance with their demands is non optional.
Is outrage all that new? It strikes me as evergreen
I would like my own planet.
Isn’t that what Mormons promise lol
Yes and no. It was.
Oh niiice. Do they have any customer reviews?
Yes: stay away and do not join. Seek real progress and learning outside of avoidance, superstition, and bias.
Sincerely,
an adult on an ongoing journey to deconstruct different traumas from being raised in said high-demand cult.
(Also, I can confirm the promise of a planet was canon, and infinitely more than just a single planet. But they recently decided to downplay that part of the doctrine, and some members now deny that there was ever a promise of achieving godhood. The cult always has a justification, and most members are more than satisfied with mental gymnastics.)
But do they have DRM?
Because humans like to make up categories which naturally cause inequality of some kind. I don’t want this but it’s the way it is and to pretend otherwise is ignorant and silly.
Sometimes certain subsets of the planet have problems particular to their region, culture, or cohort.
Telling a person wandering through the desert “I also get thirsty” maybe deflects from the issue at hand.
Telling a person wandering through the desert “I also get thirsty” maybe deflects from the issue at hand.
Or… That may be a show of support, in sharing of a common burden, a message of, “You are not alone in this struggle.”
Rather than always seeing it as a negative, maybe allow for the possibility that it’s coming from a different place.
Honestly, I feel like this whole sentiment of, “Don’t attempt to bring any context into a conversation. Only stick strictly to what one person has decided to talk about.” is not only counterproductive in that moment, but also in the medium and long term has a marked effect in shutting down future conversations about difficult and uncomfortable topics.
I mean, how many times does a person get into a conversation that starts with, “Can we talk about X?” or “Let’s have an open, honest discussion about Y?”…only to add something to that conversation and be told, “No, you’re wrong for bringing that up. We’re only talking about X and why it’s the worst thing ever.”… before they get to the point where the next time someone says, “Can we talk about Z?” they just say, “No, sorry. Not interested.”?
Many of these problems while not strictly zero sum are pretty close to it.
I feel like men do have it tough and when men start talking about it, they get shutdown and told to be a man. Boys dont cry afterall. So some men may feel its unfair when women speak up and are heard. So they want to make it about them. In the comic, just as the men are dismissive of woman problems, she is dismissive of mens problems. Instead of attacking an unfair weath class system, we bicker about shupid shit like men vs women. Its not race, gender or sexuality we should be discussing. Its social, weath classes.
The time to talk about men’s problems is any time you like, except when a woman has just started talking about women’s problems. If you redirect a conversation about women’s problems, you’re telling the women that you don’t care about their problems. If that’s the case, fine. Just don’t contribute, and let people who want to discuss the women’s problems do that. Start another conversation about men’s problems elsewhere.
Whataboutism at its core I think.
I guess so. Like most whataboutism it’s a deflection for the sake of self- preservation. The truth is that there are specific problems with the way society treats women, and recognising that is disruptive and possibly painful.
The problem is that it’s so easy to see it as a mechanism to maintain the status quo. Which it so often is. Even when men call for change, it’s quite often “women should behave differently” rather than “everyone needs to reflect on their behaviour and start making changes for the better.”
Fair. Just that nobody cares about mens problems, especially women.
I think people do care about men’s problems, but too often it just comes out as “the problem is toxic masculinity”.
Fundamentally yes that is a major problem, and we need to find a better identity that men can subscribe to. But it’s like taking a book and just showing people the last page: it seems like irrelevant nonsense without the preceding understanding.
If we set up a place where we listened to each other, and to the feedback of women, with the intent of forging a new and more functional form of masculinity, I for one would be very interested indeed.
What do you personally see as male problems? Without googling - just off the top of your head. Im intrigued as to what gets broadcast.
Off the top of my head for women - safety (both physical and psychological), financial independence, equality of opportunity, disparate domestic and emotional load, sexual objectification, gender pay disparity (overall), representation.
I won’t say reproductive rights because I don’t live in the US, and while body image is a problem, I think its also impacting a lot of young men too.
Broadcast to whom? I’m a man too, as it happens.
I think we have a lot of problems with mood regulation and emotional control of ourselves. We have problems with empathy, both experiencing it and expressing it. We have problems with sharing power. We have problems with responsibility: taking either too much of it or not enough. We have problems with openness, examining our beliefs, thoughts and emotions, especially with the help of others. We have problems with ambition and identity, aiming for things that are unrealistic or unhealthy, not clearly knowing what successful masculinity looks like in 2024. We have problems with body image, in novel and unexamined ways compared with women: there is absolutely no such thing as male body positivity. We have problems making friends and finding a partner. We have problems concentrating at school. Not all of us have all these problems, but I think there’s a lot in this list that a lot of men will identify with if they’re being honest.
Honestly, that is a good list of the internal struggles, though everything she had said to which you were replying were external pressures. I agree wholeheartedly with your list, but I feel we need to also represent the externalities we face as well.
I can only speak for myself and from a neurodivergent US perspective. I see a society which still applies enormous pressure on men to be the “provider” in a system which as made being a sole provider nearly impossible. A society which ties our worth and value as a human being to what we can provide, primarily, for employers, then secondarily to loved ones. We are expected to sacrifice our health, both mental and physical, to work in often abusive or untenable positions from which we see no escape becacusr to escape is to fail our family. We are told continuously that our only purpose in existence is to sacrifice, and if we try to take some space for ourselves when WE need it, we are selfish, inconvenient, or heartless and abusive.
To expand on HowManyNimons point about making friends and finding a partner, we are still expected, on the whole, to be the instigators of romantic relationships. To place ourselves in the position of being vulnerable, then rejected, sometimes with damaging savagery, repeatedly for a good chunk of our adolescent and post-adolescent years. As to the friendship relationships, as we get older and our focus is mandated by society to be focused on ever increasing sacrifice, we see the potential pools of friendships shrink. We are so stressed from work, money, and family that the idea of having to put in extra effort for finding and developing new friendships just feels Sisyphean. We end up in a negative feedback loop of social isolation which leads to even further mental dysfunction.
Again, this is my self assessment and social observation. I suffer all of this, and more, daily. My family is very worried about me because it has gotten so bad for me that it is like I have forgotten what happiness and contentment feel like.
she is dismissive of mens problems.
Not as presented. She’s being actively interrupted and trying to stay focused on her original topic.
You still hear “man up” a lot and it’s fucked up.
Did you just call gender-based discrimination a side contradiction?
Ppl that make these kinds of comics clearly do not socialize with others irl. This only happens online with other trolls, from everywhere on the spectrum of whatever group. But irl, most people are pretty decent.
The internet is part of real life. Internet trolls are real people behind their screens, and they live somewhere. Maybe they live far away from you and near this artist.
If you’re a digital artist, your domain is the internet. Your audience is the internet. Your medium is the internet. In that case, you’ll write about the internet.
Maybe they also don’t socialize because they never actually go out either. Just a bunch of asocials sitting in their respective moms basement trolling away.
Maybe the artist is a mum with a troll in her basement. Or maybe she has a shithead cousin who says this garbage at family reunions.
I agree. There is an added layer of depersonalization, but it’s still real life, just like driving in traffic. The same people who would be courteous in person could be cutting you off and being freely offensive on the road. The interactions are no less real, maybe even more real than some situations that prescribe some distancing, like a job interview or talking to a coworker, depending on how close you are.
The vast majority of ppl are decent. If others can’t find them, that’s a them problem.
I’m kinda with you on this. People are complex and for the most of their time they behave okaish.
No. Most people drive cars, despite the fact that they know cars are destroying all life on earth. Most people are capable of rationalising their behaviour to remove culpability for the consequences of their actions. Most people are evil, in the same kind of banal way that most people in Nazi Germany accepted the new way of doing things and didn’t fight back, because they felt they had too much to lose from resisting.
deleted by creator
Lmao, way to deflect. I didn’t say most ppl aren’t evil (not even addressing that your definition of evil isn’t even universally agreed upon), but I did say most ppl are actually pretty empathetic to the plight of others and thus decent in that regard.
Just like me. Here I am a very toxic one, but in the real world I consider myself a nice person
Isn’t that the whole point of social media? A cathartic outlet that doesn’t actually affect anyone or anything.
Yes, you little piece of shit
Honestly same thing happens when we talk about men.
Tons of women coming up, saying “women have it worse” and attempting to minimize the importance if men’s issues.
Let’s just listen to both sides for once, and make everyone heard. When everyone is given a platform to speak, there’s no need to interrupt each other.
Funnily enough you’re in the comic. Not that I think you intended that.
The comic is about the meta issue so it’s not quite the same imo
I agree that it’s not quite the same, and I’m finding it real interesting to ponder how that happens.
This comic and this comment section have been pretty thought provoking. (Heads up, this is overly abstract speculation from here): For example, here’s a mathsy diagram
This is a commutative diagram, and I’m not at the level of being able to explain it properly, but part of it is the idea of equivalence, the fact that there’s two routes from A to D that are equivalent.I’m thinking about this sort of analogous to what we’re seeing in the comic and these comments. Like, the base experiences we’re talking about (being spoken over when you’re trying to share your experiences, for example) are fundamentally shared experiences, but the manner of experiencing them is different, because it’s coloured by our own positionality (of which gender is a big part of). I think sometimes though, it’s like discussions don’t work because we get separated — some of us at B, and some at C. Like, it does matter that our experiences are different, but also, there’s a sense in which it doesn’t, because we need to head to the same place anyway.
I don’t know what converging on D would be in this analogy. Solidarity perhaps? Which would, I suppose, involve recognising that the route you’re on is different to the route other people are on, and that it’s possible to be heading to the same place. I’m not sure, this is quite abstract, but you said the word “meta” and that seemed to catalyse this thought, so here’s this comment. You’re welcome/my apologies
Oh hell yeah, Category Theory! LET’S GOOOOO!
The comic is about how when people speak online online about women’s issues, dudes keep trying to make it about dudes.
The comic itself is someone talking online about women’s issues, and the comments are all men trying to make it about them.
It’s remarkably similar.
The comic is about how when people speak online online about women’s issues, dudes keep trying to make it about dudes.
This is a legitimate complaint in the situations where the topic is uniquely a women’s issue, and people are trying to redirect the conversation to something that really isn’t the same thing and is a separate issue so talking about that means you aren’t talking about the first thing anymore. But the meta issue of someone trying to talk about one group’s problems and getting hit by whataboutism, seems arguably more universal and might not be specifically a women’s issue, so saying something along the lines of “yeah this happens to us too it sucks”, could be supportive and not about shutting up discussion of the original topic.
This isn’t a universal complaint about the frustration of whataboutism.
This is a specific complaint about how any time women try to talk about women’s issues in a forum that may contain men, those men engage in disingenuous whataboutism.
The men replying are almost never showing support, they’re minimizing the issue, or they’re trying to co-opt the thread.
It doesn’t need to be a uniquely woman’s issue for it to be a predominantly women’s issue.
And it doesn’t need to be a predominantly woman’s issue for women to want to talk about it from a woman’s perspective without men making it about them.The men replying are almost never showing support, they’re minimizing the issue, or they’re trying to co-opt the thread.
To me, the comment in question didn’t seem to be doing that. The point I’m trying to make is to object to the idea that it is categorically doing that, given the context. It seems like a divisive way of deciding what is bad behavior, to condemn any statement made in response to discussion about problems faced by one group that is not specifically about the struggles of that group, regardless of anything else about the statement.
This is a specific complaint about how any time women try to talk about women’s issues in a forum that may contain men, those men engage in disingenuous whataboutism.
If you would rather expand on how that goes or the ways in which this is predominantly a women’s issue, feel free to take this opportunity instead of responding to what else I’m saying.
Even now, you’re trying to derail the conversation, which is about how women have to deal with this bullshit all the time online, and make it about a topic you care about.
You don’t need to participate, if this isn’t the subject that you want to talk about.
My point is that it is a universal issue, all while many people are trying very hard to represent it as women-specific.
When male voices are shushed both under their posts and under those focused on women, they don’t have much of a platform to speak out. And they need it, too.
If all sides have an opportunity to say things without being interrupted, there is no point in chiming in and saying the other side has it worse.
As much as you may be right that both men and women are experiencing this, the post was talking about how women experience it. And when women speak out about it, it’s apparently hard to talk about just that and instead the male experience has to be discussed as well.
Again, I really don’t think you intended anything bad here. But as you said:
If all sides have an opportunity to say things without being interrupted, there is no point in chiming in and saying the other side has it worse.
Women try to talk about it (e.g. via this topic), but you interrupted by chiming in how men are also affected. That might well be true, but it’s also the kind of interruption that can be frustrating because, and I say this as a man, the experience women have is probably different (on average) from the experience men have.
You’re not one of the voices in the comic shouting “misandrist” or anything, but it is a kind of “and what about the men?” type of statement. And I don’t think you’re trying to be dismissive here at all and I do believe your intentions are good, but the result here is that what women want to talk about is once again not talked about, which is what the comic is about.
Your well-intentioned statement I think perhaps unbeknownst to you is steering the discussion away from the intended topic. And it’s exactly that problem that this comic addresses.
I see where you’re coming from, and I agree for the most part (and I also don’t agree with people taking pitchforks on you), but the direction I take to “steer it away” is to look at it as something universal, which is simply more helpful to understand why it happens, not to tie attention to men’s issues specifically.
I believe we’ve come at the point where women and men issues are so intertwined, so much permeating each other that it’s no longer helpful to see them as separate issues to begin with. Sure, we have different experiences, but those very experiences come from the interaction of problems on both sides, and looking at them from one side is essentially screaming into the void and hoping it helps - and when it predictably doesn’t, this leads to people vilifying each other instead of exploring the reasons behind it.
Everyone has to familiarize themselves with the issues other sides face, and come from the side of compassion if they want to be part of an actual solution. That includes men, women and enbies, too.
the direction I take to “steer it away” is to look at it as something universal, which is simply more helpful to understand why it happens, not to tie attention to men’s issues specifically.
I understand your intentions, but it doesn’t have the intended effect. By doing this you are making the assumption that the way women experience these issues is (close to) the same as the way men experience it. But you can’t really assume that, and often people disagree.
When women want to talk about problems they face, it’s important to hear them out and address their issue, instead of what amounts to ‘deflecting’ to a “grander” issue. At its core it’s a whataboutism that derails the conversation, and that’s not what you intended.
So my genuine advice is: don’t. Address these problems one by one. The solutions can often be different.
You have to assume that
I believe we’ve come at the point where women and men issues are so intertwined, so much permeating each other that it’s no longer helpful to see them as separate issues to begin with.
may well not be correct, and it can feel incredibly invalidating to people by assuming that this is the case.
I tried to make it clear that women have a drastically different social experience. It is true, and it would be weird to debate it.
But we have to separate venting from finding solutions. My very point is that we often cannot practically address women’s issues without addressing men’s ones, and vice versa. Going one by one, you will quickly hit the wall, as men (or women, if we talk about men’s issues) just won’t be able to do what they’re asked for. And instead of accepting that and working together, people tend to assume that the reason the other side doesn’t change is because they act in bad faith. This is inherently imbalanced and unworkable.
I see, but the point of the comic is that women don’t seem to agree with you and find that way of thinking about it fairly exasperating at times. In many cases there hasn’t been a serious attempt to address the issues raised, so claiming that you can’t address them without also addressing men’s issues would be perhaps a bit premature.
As much as you may be right that both men and women are experiencing this, the post was talking about how women experience it
Right, but if I made a post about how “Men poop,” and women came in to say “women poop too,” it would make complete sense. Maybe we should be talking about how everybody poops and everyone’s poop stinks at that, instead of “women’s poop stinks, no men’s poop stinks!”
We’re not talking about basic biological functions here. We’re talking about issues that men and women may experience differently. This example is apples to oranges.
Except it isn’t though. Take cases like the last thread I can recall on lemmy that could have inspired this comic, the french protesting against that one guy who had people come rape his wife. The front facing image of that post was a woman holding a sign that says “not all men but always a man.” What this sign should have said is “rape is bad,” instead it pretended the two women who raped me don’t exist and that I’m guilty by association of my genitals instead of a victim like them for going through the same thing they did. What’s more, I’m told to shut up and let women speak at best, usually with one or two “well you must’ve liked it,” or “what’re you, gay?s” thrown in for good measure, yet the second you say a woman must’ve liked it or what is she a lesbian you’re still the problem, can’t beat em, can’t join em. Even better, nobody says “shut up and let men speak,” we say “stop generalizing us as abusers for having penises,” and that is met with “shut up and let women speak.”
I’m sorry that you’re unable to parse metaphors, but everybody poops.
Comic: “I’m here to talk about women.” Heckling ensues
First Comment: “This is exactly what happens to men.” Wall of Upvotes
Proof that you can pull the users out of the Reddit but you can’t pull the Reddit out of the users.
For me, while I get where the post is coming from, a lot of the narrative seems to revolve around the dynamic of:
“We need to have an open dialog about XYZ. Let’s have a conversation.”
“Okay, then here’s ABC for context, as a comparison to XYZ.”
“Actually I’m here to talk about XYZ, not ABC. And you’re the problem for not strictly limiting this open conversation to the specific scope I want to consider.”
Like… you can either ask for open discussion or you can say, “Everybody shut up and listen to what I have to say, and unless you’re opening your mouth to completely agree with me in every way, don’t bother because I’m not here for anything other than letting you all know what I think.”
I’m not saying that the points are wrong or bad, just that it’s a bad look to start out with talking about an interest in having a dialogue, then as soon as there’s any expansion of the scope of discussion, suddenly being unhappy that there’s thoughts different from where it started out, and playing the victim or worse, blaming whoever took the invitation for an open dialogue at face value and engaged in good faith.
Like… you can either ask for open discussion or you can say, “Everybody shut up and listen to what I have to say, and unless you’re opening your mouth to completely agree with me in every way
There’s a big middle area you’re ignoring.
I feel like that’s a pretty gross misrepresentation of the issue.
The people in the comic (and in the comments here) are often trying to minimize the issue on which she is speaking, or co-opt the conversation for their own issues (typically forcing her and the original issue to the sidelines). They’re not adding context or having a discussion in good faith.
I’d actually disagree with you.
I don’t think the Comic is specifically about women.
I think this is about the overarching problem of whataboutism and its consequences on society and societal discourse.
In which case the OP would be on-topic and you would be the one derailing.
I am not saying that either of you is trying to derail but rather just showing that different interpretations (a more literal interpretation on your side and a more symbolic on ours) can lead to different discussions.
You’re right, and we all know who downvoted you
This meme is selling shovels, and the comments here are more than happy to dig holes it seems.
Can’t imagine why Lemmy is like this after carefully selecting the most opinionated Redditors for its community.
If it helps, I have no opinions. I’m just chaotic stupid alognment.
It does help, thank you.
Yeah? Well that’s just like your opinion, man
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Ricky Rogatoni, you dispense the sage advice of a fool. As a self-identifying fool I always appreciate your input.
People are reenacting the point of the comic in real time, it’s wild.
I’m just going to speak my mind as a Closeted transwoman who would look like a guy
I didn’t honestly want to get involved with this thread at all in fear of creating an absolute mess
But being trans myself I see myself having empathy for both woman’s and men’s rights because I know and understand the issues men are facing and see the issues woman are facing
I don’t like seeing the devide on either side and absolutely hate seeing the division and fighting especially when people advocate for men’s rights or woman’s rights
I personally advocate for both because I see everyone having rights as part of equality and equity and if you don’t want any one group to have rights then that isn’t equality or equity
We should be free to talk about both men’s rights and woman’s rights without being attacked for it
YES!
As a person who is just genuinely against all discrimination, including discrimination of women and men, I never quite understood why is this divide so powerful.
We’ll do our best if we work together, not compete for attention. Women face real issues. Men face real issues. Many of them play out of each other, and solving one would help untangle the other.
All while people will seemingly rip you apart for saying we could work together.
No, I don’t want to play the tug of war or steal the attention from the problem of “your side”. I just see how those issues intertwine, and working with both is paramount if we actually want to solve them. Let’s do that instead of whatever mess has been created.
Someone downvoted you which is lame. All you’ve advocated for is that both groups have their issues be respected in public discourse.
Because like the comic is pointing out as the issue and that OP has just done that exact thing - steering the conversation of topic away from the focus.
In a discussion about women by a woman, it sounds crazy but maybe they want the focus to be on women. That doesn’t mean men issues don’t matter or don’t exist. There are an infinite number of venues to discuss it that are not in a thread regarding women issues.
Is this thread really about women’s rights though?
It’s more of a meta thread about the issue the comic brings up, it’s about how some men switch the topic around. If the comic was intended to focus entirely on women’s rights it would end at the first image
And it’s fine to talk about enby issues in any discussion, because enbies are the most oppressed gender demographic.
Yea, that happens online. It rarely happens irl with regular folk. It’s really quite obvious when you actually interact with the outside world regularly. I’ve found that many ppl do empathize with most ppl’s problems. More often than what online comics imply.
I have never seen this happen. I am sure it happens. Perhaps we can leave these toxic people behind. Regardless of gender, color, …
I’ve seen it happen in both directions. I’ve seen more of it being the opposite as in the meme, but I’m a man so am more likely to see those instances. My female friends have had the opposite experience, probably for the same reason
Yeah, but no
There are assholes on both sides, like it or not.
Yes, there are loads of men who don’t deserve the name, that put women down, who can only be happy on the back of women. Fuck them
Having said that, I very much remember that video of guys going to a support group for men that committed uicide with feminists waiting for them outside to yell things like “it’s good that he killed himself!”. Fuck those assholes too.
Can we maybe ALL be nice to EVERYONE?
I’m sorry, but this comic doesn’t help. The reality is that both men and women face the same nonsense when they bring up what they have to contend with so how about we don’t try to disparage either side? Listen to both sides? You know, the thing we should be always doing?
I’m sorry, but this comic doesn’t help.
I don’t think it necessarily has to? Like, I agree with pretty much everything in your comment, aside from this part and what it implies. I read this comment as an expression of frustration from the artist, and it’s certainly one that I can relate to. I also realise that there’s a heckton of men who’ll relate too, because of how men who want to carve out space to talk about men’s issues can be cut off, even if they’re not the same men as the assholes who only want to talk about men’s issues when they’re speaking over a woman. However, I think that saying “both sides” to this misses the point of the comic
It can be useful to ground statements in our own personal perspectives because of how it limits the scope of what we’re saying. A smaller, messier example is that I am autistic and have done both disability activism and autism activism in the past. I am autistic and because of that, I am also disabled, and so many of my experiences as an autistic person can also apply more generally to disabled people. However, generalising a statement can be difficult, especially if on a difficult topic, such as institutional ableism. I was able to speak confidently on how that affected me personally, and to a more limited degree, how it affects other autistic people, because of who I am in community with. However, I don’t directly know any deaf people, for example, and thus I am cautious when talking about my experiences as a disabled person, lest I over-generalise. I get a similar sense from the comic’s use of “as a woman”. Grounding stuff in that way is often an attempt to limit the scope of the discussion to something more manageable when grappling with something hard to articulate.
I also do think it’s useful to recognise the difference in experience. As a silly example, I might say “as a woman, I need to breathe air in order to survive”. I could also say “as a human, I need to breathe air in order to survive”. I could also say “as an animal, I need to breathe air in order to survive”, but actually, I’d need to go and double check the facts on that last one. That’s sort of my point — sometimes statements are overly specific and should be simplified, like in the “as a [woman/human]” statements. However, limiting the scope (like in the “as a human” statement compared to the “as an animal” one) actually gives space for the possibility that some weird animals don’t need to breathe.
Apologies if I have explained this poorly. I don’t mean to come off as lecturing or argumentative; I am replying to your comment because I appreciate your points and I am open to discussion.
I’ve noticed this an uncomfortable amount on Lemmy. Being trans, I’ve started bringing up my pretransition experience/traumas living as a dude even if it’s not relevant whenever I talk about a women’s issue that effects me because I don’t get taken seriously otherwise.
Well, actually, lately I’ve taken up just not talking about women’s issues, and really just commenting less frequently over all, because this whole place is like a mine field of people who just wanna argue. Every time before I hit send I have to think “Is somebody gonna think this is about them and get pissed with me?” And 99% of the time the answer is yes.I’m sorry you had to deal with that lemmy is definitely a bit more wild in terms of strong opinions, some very cool people on here but also a lot of immaturity.
I’m not trans but isn’t that a normal thing to think before posting? I’m fine with saying to my friends “(wo)men have hurt me in the past, and it makes me less trustful of them” but I wouldn’t comment that publicly, since either I get weirdos saying “yeah I hate (wo)men too” or weirdos saying “the other sex does this but worse!” Either way they don’t get what I mean, so I’m going to be very careful with qualifying what I say. It’s a hot-button topic and it sucks I have to do that just to share an experience, but a lot of people are sensitive (myself included) to perceived attacks. I still get people misunderstanding it, but that’s usually 1/100 instead of 1/5. It sucks that it doesn’t feel like a group of friends, but there are a lot of communities on lemmy that will ban people acting like jerks (lemmy.blahaj.zone for one)
I suppose I just had higher expectations for Lemmy tbh. When I first joined on the first instance I found, the community was so nice, supportive, and in general just an amazing place to be where it felt like anybody could have a reasonable discussion about anything. It just really, really quickly devolved into what every other social media site is.
I did find using the app Connect to block lemmy.world where I assume most of the most toxic people land purely on account of its size instantly reduced toxicity in my feed by a massive amount, but it also unfortunately blocks half the content on the site and I also don’t like that I have to block plenty of reasonable users as collateral to achieve it..world is also the most commonly linked instance on reddit, so half the time you’re just dealing with angry redditors. Generally every time I say “wow this is so disappointing to see” it’s a .world post and the other half of the comments are trying to fight back against them. I think it’s just the nature of online communities that they get more toxic as they grow.
You’re definitely dodging more toxicity than you are positivity with blocking .world, every time I’ve seen just the worst comment ever it’s from .world. There might be an app or way to block the comments but not the posts from an instance, since nearly all .world posts seem fine (you could ask in the app community on lemmy, they’re generally super friendly). Sorry I can’t give better advice. Me personally I just stick to the positive communities and only brave the .world trenches if I’m feeling up to it (and make heavy use of blocking toxic communities)
I know I’m just one person, but your experiences are important and imo, necessary for women’s liberation (and human liberation more generally). I’m not going to say “you should share your experiences” because I get how exhausting it is to be challenged on basic shit all the time and that means commenting can be akin to self harm if overdone. I guess I’m just trying to expand that 1% of non-assholes into a larger percentage.
I say this as a cis woman whose feminism has gotten a hell of a lot more intersectional in recent years, in part due to trans friends. Knowing trans women in particular has helped me to feel more at home and happy in my own gender (femininity and its relationship with womanhood is complicated). Having lived as a guy for a chunk of your life no doubt means that your lived experience (especially with respect to gender) is messy and complex, but that’s great, because the world is messy and complex. At least, it would be great, if more people were open to listening to you when you share. I’m sorry that you have to do the cost:benefit analysis before commenting — that part is something I can relate to.
Pshhhh, noone here is going to argue with you. You’re wrong /s
Seriously though, sorry the internet is full of hatefull people. Thank you for what you have shared in the past. Some of us do benefit from hearing other people’s struggles, but just don’t comment as much. Negative engagement usually outweighs positive engagement on all social media platforms.
I’ve seen the opposite of this happen way more often. In fact, I think we should take care to let people speak on these issues without diminishing or having another issue hijack the discussion.
Anyone should be able to talk about their issues without being told that it doesn’t matter because there’s some other issue.
Upvote though because I like the discussion.
The way this comment section unironically mirrors the comic perfectly.
So many dudes here unironically talking about how men have it hard too 🤦♂️
It’s kinda pathetic lol. How is it so hard for people to understand that maybe the best time to talk about problems affecting you is not when someone else is talking about problems affecting them?
Typical!
When can we talk about men?
Shut up. Women are talking.
Indeed. I was referencing the comic for satire.
Apparently I needed the /s. I thought it was pretty obvious.
You’re not the only one, you’re just the only one who replied instead of silently downvoted the comment!
I knew the risks!
Thankfully, downvotes don’t matter. So we can keep having fun.
Men have it worse in every way, so you should focus on that.
It’s kind of crazy and laughable. All these dude unirocally making this about themselves. Make the opposite meme and watch the victim-bros therapy group unfold.
I love when I’m explaining a struggle of mine that is cause of who I am and then being enrolled in the oppression Olympics.
Yeah well imagine what its like being a non-binary half black half Mexican person with disabilities. Ugh I’m so tired of privileged people like you whining about how no one will listen.
Woah, woah.
I wanna say that’s never happened to me when I was talking about my experiences. But … I can’t.
I feel ya
If you wanna talk feel free to DM me.
It’s almost like assholes can’t keep their mouths shut when people don’t talk about their needs. If only society created less of those, that’d be nice.
WRT the first panel, I feel that way too.
That said, is this ragebait?
Yes.
Okay, I’ll just say it.
Everyone has it rough right now. Mostly because we’ve been thoroughly railroaded by corporations for most of our lives, but still.
Everything sucks.
