cause traditionally/stereotypically feminine things are seen as stupid, useless, and cringe while masculine ones are seen as serious, deep, and respectable.
trans people also show that being a man is seen as an “upgrade” while being a woman a “downgrade” (trans men don’t get a fraction of the hate trans women do). same thing with tomboys-femboys.
plus, a man and woman could do the exact same thing (being assertive for example) & the perception will be different (woman - bitch, man - boss).
I understand the feedback because there’s no need to distinguish between gender when you are talking about something as generic as personal empowerment. The post is not about girls, it’s about human psychology.
I’d disagree with this. Personal empowerment is universal and applies to everyone, sure. But its nature is personal, and shaped by a multitude of factors including (but not limited to) gender. That’s basically the idea behind intersectionality.
Along the various lines that make up someone’s circumstances, groups can share collective barriers to their empowerment. In this case, women face specific, gender-based obstacles (men do as well, but that wasn’t what was being discussed). So when you generalize a conversation about one group’s particular issues, at best you derail something that would’ve been helpful. At worst, you end up with an “All Lives Matter” bumper sticker.
ETA: And yes, I know all people face bullying/teasing. But the nature of the bullying/teasing is not universal, nor is the impact it has on the collective empowerment of specific groups.
so why exclude men who are made fun of for feminine expression?
there are definitely socialized negative biases that specifically women deal with, but being exclusionary doesn’t actually help the cause, it just narrows the audience that is allowed to relate to the cause.
and it applies in gender neutral situations, like drawing literally anything in jr.high/highschool would grant the name ____fucker, no matter the benign nature of the variable being drawn.
it’s a good little rule that doesn’t need to devolve into a cultural battle about which group gets to identify with it more.
i constantly talk about the atheist/mra vs feminist war which just put everyone on the defensive, destroying active efforts in fighting groups like the heritage foundation, who are now doing unimaginable systemic harm to women through destruction of academic spaces and scientific efforts around women’s health largely propped up by religious fundamentalist efforts.
sometimes you have to be like “there’s something specific about this group which we don’t want being lost in the current conversation,” but also sometimes it’s good to be less rigid about which generalized group is allowed to identify with or benefit from progressive ideals.
Making a post about women doesn’t - and shouldn’t - mean you’re excluding men. I feel like excluding should only be defined as an active attempt to prevent people from associating with the post, rather then a failure to include men and enbies and every other gender in existence in the body of the post.
I feel like leftist spaces have gotten a bit too expectant that everything relevant to an individual must be explicitly stated to be as such, rather than encouraging people to simply find relevancy even in things that are not explicitly made for them. I’m a guy, and when I read this I felt a connection with it - I didn’t even think about how it only mentioned women, as if that should mean it can’t apply to me.
I would rather instill a mindset in all people that would allow for situations where, for example, a man can find relevancy in a post about women, rather then try to get all people to only share content that specifically addresses who all is intended to be able to relate to it. A woman saying things are hard for women isn’t making any comments about whether or not it’s hard for men, just like a black guy saying black lives matter isn’t making any comments about whether or not all lives matter.
fem guys already relate to content targeted toward women since their lived experience is closer to that than to the typical man, so no exclusion.
men often do this. post is about something women related -> “but what about the men?”. we don’t have a duty or obligation to include men in every single conversation. men can also create their own content/conversations, and they should. hijacking/inserting themselves just reeks of insecurity and misogyny.
edit and just to be clear: anyone who finds this post relatable is more than valid and welcome, regardless of gender. it’s just the act of explicitly turning it into a “won’t somebody please think of the men?” thing that really grinds my gears.
fem guys already relate to content targeted toward women since their lived experience is closer to that than to the typical man, so no exclusion.
Shit like this makes my blood boil… “oh, you’re struggling with acceptance and your identity? Well, people ridicule you for not adhering to what boys should be, but the best we can do is offer you stuff targeted at girls because, you know, you’re essentially a girl anyway”. Fuck that. And then telling me about misogyny. Ridiculous.
we don’t have a duty or obligation to include men in every single conversation.
This isn’t a female safe space. Posting something here that deliberately leaves out half the population and then complaining that people bring up the stupid line you’re drawing between boys and girls where none is necessary is laughable.
This isn’t a female safe space? Holy shit, way to tell on yourself.
It’s not just men here and this community isn’t a male safe space either. It’s a shitposting community and you couldn’t handle a woman making a post about a woman’s perspective.
They never said “the best we can do is offer you stuff targeted at girls because, you know, you’re essentially a girl anyway”, you did. If you think there should be more stuff for certain men, you’re free to make it. If not all men relate to that content, I hope they are more capable of nuance than you seem to be. The idea that relating to the experience of another group somehow takes away from your actual identity is not how someone who has a normal relationship with their identity would work.
I date women as a woman and sometimes men will be talking specifically to other men about dating women and I will find what they say relatable. It does not make me question my gender or sexuality. I just think “wow! So true!” and move on with my day.
It’s ok to have a similar experience or understanding of the world as someone else, even if they are not talking directly to or about your personal experience.
They are not drawing a line. You’re welcome to comment what you like, but this is straight “so you hate waffles?” level of reasoning.
Quite right. I would also say there is definitely a stigma to men who do not present as fem doing the occasional fem thing, and it is more of a stigma than when a woman who generally presents fem doing the occasional male thing.
Way less, in my experience, than ever before, but definitely still there. You get less open mockery and more silent confusion these days.
Yeah a girl without makeup in a hoodie and sweaters wouldn’t really raise eyebrows as much as a guy in a dress and makeup, I would bet money on that. Perhaps not as much nowadays but I’m sure it still very much exists.
Especially if you live in rural areas instead of a large city. Probably people living in L.A. etc. can reasonably disagree with this, but in general.
Why would this apply only to girls?
No one said that it did.
Because that’s their lived experience. You want to post about guys, go ahead.
Girls was meant in a gender neutral way obv
It doesn’t say that it only applies to girls its a screencap of part of conversation from people we have little context about.
And “sir”
Shit like this makes my blood boil… "Trauma-dump”… Posting something here that deliberately leaves out half the population …
This is a shitpost community.
Yes, but why are we making fun of a guy for doing what he loves (posting “but what about men?” In a post talking about women)?
(This is a joke btw.)
If we don’t make fun of him for litterally everything he does he’ll never realize he has license to do what he wants
cause traditionally/stereotypically feminine things are seen as stupid, useless, and cringe while masculine ones are seen as serious, deep, and respectable.
trans people also show that being a man is seen as an “upgrade” while being a woman a “downgrade” (trans men don’t get a fraction of the hate trans women do). same thing with tomboys-femboys.
plus, a man and woman could do the exact same thing (being assertive for example) & the perception will be different (woman - bitch, man - boss).
If you think boys aren’t ridiculed (for literally anything) you’ve never been to school.
So, boys, might as well do what you want.
Boys already do what they want hahaha
The phrase “boys will be boys” is a thing that exists ffs
the experiences of boys and girls in society aren’t comparable.
this post is about girls, going “but what about the boys?” on it is just misogyny.
You’re fucking right. Experiences of men and women in society are absolutely not comparable when we’re talking about societal expectations.
You’re also right that women don’t have to center every conversation around men.
I can’t believe someone told you directly this isn’t a female safe space hahaha
I understand the feedback because there’s no need to distinguish between gender when you are talking about something as generic as personal empowerment. The post is not about girls, it’s about human psychology.
I’d disagree with this. Personal empowerment is universal and applies to everyone, sure. But its nature is personal, and shaped by a multitude of factors including (but not limited to) gender. That’s basically the idea behind intersectionality.
Along the various lines that make up someone’s circumstances, groups can share collective barriers to their empowerment. In this case, women face specific, gender-based obstacles (men do as well, but that wasn’t what was being discussed). So when you generalize a conversation about one group’s particular issues, at best you derail something that would’ve been helpful. At worst, you end up with an “All Lives Matter” bumper sticker.
ETA: And yes, I know all people face bullying/teasing. But the nature of the bullying/teasing is not universal, nor is the impact it has on the collective empowerment of specific groups.
Huh?
“These two things I’m comparing aren’t comparable!”
so why exclude men who are made fun of for feminine expression?
there are definitely socialized negative biases that specifically women deal with, but being exclusionary doesn’t actually help the cause, it just narrows the audience that is allowed to relate to the cause.
and it applies in gender neutral situations, like drawing literally anything in jr.high/highschool would grant the name ____fucker, no matter the benign nature of the variable being drawn.
it’s a good little rule that doesn’t need to devolve into a cultural battle about which group gets to identify with it more.
i constantly talk about the atheist/mra vs feminist war which just put everyone on the defensive, destroying active efforts in fighting groups like the heritage foundation, who are now doing unimaginable systemic harm to women through destruction of academic spaces and scientific efforts around women’s health largely propped up by religious fundamentalist efforts.
sometimes you have to be like “there’s something specific about this group which we don’t want being lost in the current conversation,” but also sometimes it’s good to be less rigid about which generalized group is allowed to identify with or benefit from progressive ideals.
Making a post about women doesn’t - and shouldn’t - mean you’re excluding men. I feel like excluding should only be defined as an active attempt to prevent people from associating with the post, rather then a failure to include men and enbies and every other gender in existence in the body of the post.
I feel like leftist spaces have gotten a bit too expectant that everything relevant to an individual must be explicitly stated to be as such, rather than encouraging people to simply find relevancy even in things that are not explicitly made for them. I’m a guy, and when I read this I felt a connection with it - I didn’t even think about how it only mentioned women, as if that should mean it can’t apply to me.
I would rather instill a mindset in all people that would allow for situations where, for example, a man can find relevancy in a post about women, rather then try to get all people to only share content that specifically addresses who all is intended to be able to relate to it. A woman saying things are hard for women isn’t making any comments about whether or not it’s hard for men, just like a black guy saying black lives matter isn’t making any comments about whether or not all lives matter.
fem guys already relate to content targeted toward women since their lived experience is closer to that than to the typical man, so no exclusion.
men often do this. post is about something women related -> “but what about the men?”. we don’t have a duty or obligation to include men in every single conversation. men can also create their own content/conversations, and they should. hijacking/inserting themselves just reeks of insecurity and misogyny.
edit and just to be clear: anyone who finds this post relatable is more than valid and welcome, regardless of gender. it’s just the act of explicitly turning it into a “won’t somebody please think of the men?” thing that really grinds my gears.
Shit like this makes my blood boil… “oh, you’re struggling with acceptance and your identity? Well, people ridicule you for not adhering to what boys should be, but the best we can do is offer you stuff targeted at girls because, you know, you’re essentially a girl anyway”. Fuck that. And then telling me about misogyny. Ridiculous.
This isn’t a female safe space. Posting something here that deliberately leaves out half the population and then complaining that people bring up the stupid line you’re drawing between boys and girls where none is necessary is laughable.
This isn’t a female safe space? Holy shit, way to tell on yourself.
It’s not just men here and this community isn’t a male safe space either. It’s a shitposting community and you couldn’t handle a woman making a post about a woman’s perspective.
They never said “the best we can do is offer you stuff targeted at girls because, you know, you’re essentially a girl anyway”, you did. If you think there should be more stuff for certain men, you’re free to make it. If not all men relate to that content, I hope they are more capable of nuance than you seem to be. The idea that relating to the experience of another group somehow takes away from your actual identity is not how someone who has a normal relationship with their identity would work.
I date women as a woman and sometimes men will be talking specifically to other men about dating women and I will find what they say relatable. It does not make me question my gender or sexuality. I just think “wow! So true!” and move on with my day.
It’s ok to have a similar experience or understanding of the world as someone else, even if they are not talking directly to or about your personal experience.
They are not drawing a line. You’re welcome to comment what you like, but this is straight “so you hate waffles?” level of reasoning.
deleted by creator
“fem guys” are not even the majority of guys with so called feminine interests.
It’s not about a “duty to include” but there is a reasonable expectation not to exclude when there’s no good reason to.
deleted by creator
Quite right. I would also say there is definitely a stigma to men who do not present as fem doing the occasional fem thing, and it is more of a stigma than when a woman who generally presents fem doing the occasional male thing.
Way less, in my experience, than ever before, but definitely still there. You get less open mockery and more silent confusion these days.
Yeah a girl without makeup in a hoodie and sweaters wouldn’t really raise eyebrows as much as a guy in a dress and makeup, I would bet money on that. Perhaps not as much nowadays but I’m sure it still very much exists.
Especially if you live in rural areas instead of a large city. Probably people living in L.A. etc. can reasonably disagree with this, but in general.
It doesn’t, and they did not say it did.
Akshullee, they didn’t say it did - just that girls get “made fun of over everything.” I don’t have the correct parts to validate that, however.