I’d say the game was definitely rigged from the start, but perhaps not just in the way men are raised and socialised.
If you make a joke about the inadequacy of men, you’re a bold and insightful person. If you make a joke about the inadequacy of women, you’re a misogynistic pig.
Also, remember gents, you should be ok with automatically being considered a threat, because everyone knows men only think about one thing (this is technically true, normally it’s “how the feck do I pay my rent this month, I just spent all my money on <insert hobby keeping you sane here>”).
I’d agree that men are definitely not raised and socialised for that kind of system, but then again who wants to be?
women don’t want to view men as threats. yes, this problem cuts both ways. it ultimately still boils down to how men are socialized. what we see from women is just a response to that.
I think it boils down a lot further than just the socialisation of men. It boils down to how people see one another.
At the moment, the idea that men must be “defused” in some way, as if they might just “go off” is repugnantly offensive. It’s a line of thought that harks back to racist ideas of “uncultured savages” who could “regress” at any moment.
Similarly, the idea that everything is ok for women even now is bucolicly stupid. This is beyond simple socialisation to solve, and requires a solid bit of activisim.
The really sad thing is we all want the same thing - for people to care about us, and accept who we are. For people not to hurt us, and to feel like we’re part of the wider world about us beyond token consumption.
There’s definitely a relationship between the marginalization of dark skinned people (men and women) and the view of dark skinned people as more masculine (therefore more dangerous.)
I’m not sure I agree, but I’m also not sure what you’re talking about.
Is there a view that dark skinned people are more masculine? I might accept less feminine; such a view would serve the purpose of making the violence against them easier for people to stomach.
If you make a joke about the inadequacy of men, you’re a bold and insightful person. If you make a joke about the inadequacy of women, you’re a misogynistic pig.
I agree to some degree, but there’s also the fact that the socialization of men is the more dire problem in our current society by a significant degree.
Also, remember gents, you should be ok with automatically being considered a threat, because everyone knows men only think about one thing
I think this is an agree to disagree point - my view is that the need to socialise men is only half the solution, and that tackling the rampant socially acceptable iniquity would be a more urgent one (as the longer it goes on, the more disruptive the eventual correction).
Maybe we should try both, surely one dies not preclude the other? That way we’ll be sure to fix the issue!
I’d say the game was definitely rigged from the start, but perhaps not just in the way men are raised and socialised.
If you make a joke about the inadequacy of men, you’re a bold and insightful person. If you make a joke about the inadequacy of women, you’re a misogynistic pig.
Also, remember gents, you should be ok with automatically being considered a threat, because everyone knows men only think about one thing (this is technically true, normally it’s “how the feck do I pay my rent this month, I just spent all my money on <insert hobby keeping you sane here>”).
I’d agree that men are definitely not raised and socialised for that kind of system, but then again who wants to be?
women don’t want to view men as threats. yes, this problem cuts both ways. it ultimately still boils down to how men are socialized. what we see from women is just a response to that.
I think it boils down a lot further than just the socialisation of men. It boils down to how people see one another.
At the moment, the idea that men must be “defused” in some way, as if they might just “go off” is repugnantly offensive. It’s a line of thought that harks back to racist ideas of “uncultured savages” who could “regress” at any moment.
Similarly, the idea that everything is ok for women even now is bucolicly stupid. This is beyond simple socialisation to solve, and requires a solid bit of activisim.
The really sad thing is we all want the same thing - for people to care about us, and accept who we are. For people not to hurt us, and to feel like we’re part of the wider world about us beyond token consumption.
Does it? Does it really?
A question for you to meditate on, as my position is quite clear.
It’s clear.
Out of curiosity, how did you feel about man vs bear?
An excellent piece of ragebait, it became more than the issue it tried to raise though.
I mean, yeah, no shit?
Oh, you’re right, I forgot about the 100 years of uncultured, savage men being conscripted into slave labor to build rail roads or whatever.
The persecution complex with you people is astounding.
There’s definitely a relationship between the marginalization of dark skinned people (men and women) and the view of dark skinned people as more masculine (therefore more dangerous.)
I’m not sure I agree, but I’m also not sure what you’re talking about.
Is there a view that dark skinned people are more masculine? I might accept less feminine; such a view would serve the purpose of making the violence against them easier for people to stomach.
I agree to some degree, but there’s also the fact that the socialization of men is the more dire problem in our current society by a significant degree.
That’s not why women often consider men a threat.
I think this is an agree to disagree point - my view is that the need to socialise men is only half the solution, and that tackling the rampant socially acceptable iniquity would be a more urgent one (as the longer it goes on, the more disruptive the eventual correction).
Maybe we should try both, surely one dies not preclude the other? That way we’ll be sure to fix the issue!
But joking about and insulting them isn’t going to make anything better, it’s going to drive more impressionable young boys towards people like Tate.