First, second, and some of third wave feminism were about equality and I'm all for it. The social media wave (2008 and on) of feminism is anti-male and I don't support it. 57 yo male raised by a second wave feminist lesbian couple.
Itās that modern feminism isnāt an attack on all men. Hence, ānot all menā.
And no. Men are allowed to defend them selves, but nothing ever stopped that. But when someone is like āmen are oppressiveā and your response is ānot all menā the point of the response is to invalidate the statement.
But feminism disrupts traditional hierarchies that benefited men. If we allow feminism to grow, then men would have to compete directly with women for jobs, money, and accomplishments. It hurts men to have to compete with women on merit alone
yeah but also no. feminism challenges institutions that oppress both men and women. it's not aimed exclusively at women being treated unfairly in the workplace and other competitive spaces. it's aimed at patriarchy which, while it does include unfair treatment of women in competitive spaces, also includes the subsystems of patriarchy which oppress men and boys and others which oppress women and girls.
It's not exactly been debunked, but it also isn't as big as it seems. Most numbers include people who aren't currently employed, and generalizes pay across positions instead of the same work, then gets misinterpreted as x% less for the same work.
There's still a pay gap, though. If I remember correctly, the unadjusted gap is ~83 cents per dollar, and when adjusted, it's ~97-99 cents per dollar.
The adjustment isolates same pay for the same work while removing other variables like:
Occupational Segregation: This goes both ways. Women are often under represented in higher paying fields, like engineering and finance, but men are often vastly over represented in the most dangerous fields. There's also a pretty big imbalance when it comes to home makers by gender.
Maternity Leave: This also goes both ways. For women, society expects you to spend the time taking care of, and bonding with your child. Men are not expected to do this and are disproportionately unable to use accommodations that allow this. It gives them more career opportunities but comes at that cost.
Hours Worked: Men on average tend to work longer hours than women on average and take on more overtime. I'm not really sure why, but there's probably some studies out there. If I had to guess, it ties neatly into the imbalance of gender for home makers. Having someone at home to handle more of the domestic labor likely enables people to put more time and effort into external labor, though I can't imagine that tracks when you look at income by household.
I say this as someone who thinks what many would call "actual feminism" good, but at a certain point, enough people label themselves as feminists that don't fit your definition, that the word changes it's meaning.
It's similar to why being a men's rights activist has such a negative connotation; The people who participate in those communities are often genuinely vile.
Real, public discussions are often filled with misandry. They often use rhetoric that's easily understood to be a valid reason to fear half of the population by many. Discussions around problems men have often get interrupted by someone shifting the topic to issues women have.
Hell, I've had people try to co-opt my personal trauma into their ideology without solicitation.
I say this from experience. Respecting people's boundaries and being open minded are not some magical shield from this sort of stuff.
That said, the men that come out swinging with "Not all men" are usually the men to whom women are explicitly referring when discussing problematic gender dynamics.
Everyone else understands it implicitly, much like how most people understand "Black Lives Matter" means "Black Lives Matter [as much as any other life]" and don't need to counter with "All Lives Matter."
"Not All Men" is invariably used to diminish and distract from real grievances women experience at the hands of men the same way "All Lives Matter" diminishes and distracts from real grievances experienced by black people.
Because context matters and usually the people saying not all men also donāt understand why women would pick the bear over them. The say it out of fear not understanding.
The men who don't understand women picking the bear over them comes from men not understanding illogical thought processes. 100% of bears will kill you if you get too close to them in the wild, at best they will wander off and avoid you leaving you to continue to be lost and starving in the woods until you die.
A tiny percentage of men are predators who will harm you in the woods, the vast majority are normal people and are either lost like you or know the way out. So opting for the bear reads like: "I would rather die than trust in the 99% of non-predatory men" which of course leaves men dumbfounded
I donāt know when critical thinking and nuance died in certain groups but it definitely makes it next to impossible for people to understand context that is directly in front of them.
Donāt know if itās because they genuinely donāt care about others or the ego takes such a hit being open and understanding but itās rather harmful to having any meaningful conversation when the other side not only doesnāt seem to be able to understand but straight up refuses join in any proper discussion.
Some people are so angry that they feel like they are grouped in with predators they donāt care to stop and understand why that might be in the first place.
Context matters at the end of the day even if you refuse to understand it.
Not worried about them picking the bear but then again I also never got so emotionally worked up over the phrase to behave like this online.
A little compassion can go a long way. Stop and be curious once and a while. Other than showing itās not all men you choose to criticize and put down women. Kind of proving the point they are making in the first place. All because you choose to not understand something.
Saying "Not all men" is functionally self implicating. It prioritizes a man's need to be recognized as innocent over women's need to end the systemic problem. It protects the problem at hand. You implicate yourself.
This is just a Kafka trap. Your argument is that denial of an accusation is proof itself of that accusation.
It is perfectly normal human behavior to challenge false accusations. I donāt know how you get this idea in your head that only people who are guilty of whatever generalizing accusation thatās being thrown out would take offense to be a member of the accused.
Letās take your logic and apply it to race: any minority who objects to a racial stereotype actually fits that stereotype, cuz why else would they object to the generalization if they themselves were not guilty of it? Do you see why the logic of āproclaiming your innocence=proof of guiltā is nonsensical?
(Not person you replied to) - It is heavily context dependent.
It's a perfectly OK response if a woman said "Man - yes all men, every single man on earth - are all rapists." Like yeah, WTF is that, normal response to say not all men.
But if a woman says "Men make it so hard for me to feel safe out alone at night" I think everyone kinda knows it isn't all men. You're basically constructing a strawman which is beside the point, making it about you, and arguing with a woman who's discussing a legit issue.
The idea is if you disagree with the established discourse that means you are condoning the behavior. It also doesn't work in the reverse. If i said that a majority of children under 3 who are murdered are killed by women. It's perfectly acceptable to discuss the nuance of the issue but if you do that in the reverse you hate women for simply not agreeing that everything they're trying to blame on men is warranted.
Saying "Not all men" is functionally self implicating.Ā
That's a kafka trap, they are never a valid argument. They make anyone who uses them look ridiculous and you're no exception.
it prioritizes a man's need to be recognized as innocent over women's need to end the systemic problem.
Except that there's no correlation there. Demonizing all men does not help the cause, nor does calling someone out for demonizing all men hurt the cause. Like your kafka trap, this is bullshit logic.
Haha youāre really reaching for that one arenāt you lol. No what it means is stop using the world All, bc whatever the case may be itās almost never All of anything but fanatical nuts like to say All to fit their narrative. That doesnāt make it less at all lmao
Solving one systemic issue by supporting another is also functionally self-implicating. It undermines credibility and alienates allies. Itās difficult to ally with people that constantly blame and shame you for crimes youāve never committed, and a history you did not partake in. I grew up in the modern era where women are killing it. Women donāt seem like oppressed victims to me, they seem powerful, influential, and capable.
Not all men" is a stupid response to anything, but somehow you outdid that.
You're basically advocating for violating the basic right to be innocent until proven guilty. You tell people that they're implicated just because you feel that they don't agree exactly with what you say... Congratulations! You're trying to violate another person's rights. Which makes you no better than the people that you're trying to say are implicating themselves.
And after having worked around women so much in my life, I have found that so many of the problems that they face are put on them by other women. You won't even be able to overcome a systemic problem when you don't even know what it is
That other women happen to uphold the same systemic problems we are facing is not the main concern--it is A concern, but the most pressing one is that the systemic problems are caused by men, it is a culture that teaches men to do this, that it is rewarding to do this, both in their ingroup and to any watching outgroups.
The systemic problem is hierarchical patriarchy and how it is reproduced in men specifically through a culture of directed violence, repression, and fear, perpetrated by a relatively small subsection of the population, with the rest as its victims, so desperate to defend themselves that they would then turn their shame, fear, and repression outward to direct violence at others to secure their own position.
There are ways to solve the problem in a more permanent fashion but unfortunately they would be rather illiberal even, frankly, if deserved.
The task is finding a permanent solution that is neither violent nor oppressive, for what use is a better world if still founded on violence and oppression, if all you are doing is trading one for another?
Of course, it is a reliable fallback. If all else fails, the die can be cast.
That's weird, I don't remember being taught that rape is OK
Edit: since comments are locked and I cannot reply to u/QaraKha I'll edit it in:
You are taught that women are lesser
false
that their consent means nothing and their lack thereof similar
false
You will be taught the justifications. She wanted it, she asked for it, she dressed for it, she should be flattered, because he's popular, he's famous, he's rich, he's powerful.
false
You will never even realize that it's a fucked up thing to do to another person
false
Many of these are never told to you like exposition in a book, they are shown to you
false
by a culture of fear, knowing that the only thing stopping you from being a victim just like them is that you shut your mouth and avert your eyes and let it happen and never, ever, try to stop it.
false
Your entire premise is based on complete nonsense, the conclusions you draw from it after are invalidated.
Insidious as it is, you are never actively taught in so specific a manner that rape is okay.
You are taught that women are lesser, that their consent means nothing and their lack thereof similar. You are taught that this is the way of the world, that a woman needs a man, that they should be thankful for one. For you. You will be taught the justifications. She wanted it, she asked for it, she dressed for it, she should be flattered, because he's popular, he's famous, he's rich, he's powerful.
You will never even realize that it's a fucked up thing to do to another person because these justifications fill in all the blanks without ever actually telling you.
Many of these are never told to you like exposition in a book, they are shown to you. By a culture of letting men escape justice, by a culture of treating women as liars, by a culture of victims being less than people and perpetrators being the best among you, by a culture of fear, knowing that the only thing stopping you from being a victim just like them is that you shut your mouth and avert your eyes and let it happen and never, ever, try to stop it.
That is why it's all men.
Even if not all men rape, there are the ones that do and the ones that cover it up and the ones that hide it and the ones that know about it and never speak up and the ones so afraid of being ostracized that they will go along with the charade.
And then the ones that feel attacked and who desperately proclaim "not all men!" as if his cowardice was a virtue. As if he did not know this was what he was steeped in when his peers joke about rape as if it were nothing, or talk about the women they'd target. Or treat women like garbage in private. Talk about women like they're sexual objects, trophies to be shown off to other men, never people, but meat. Means to an end.
You are taught this based on who becomes popular and why. Who is openly desired and why. But it's not JUST you. It's everyone.
And it doesn't affect some people. It normally doesn't affect the victims, but it certainly can. The queer people who get smeared to make sure the rest fall in line, shut their mouths, and avert their eyes. The women who are directly harmed from the culture of fear as victims of violence of all kinds. Those lower on the hierarchy who must learn how it works more directly to avoid as much of the consequences of being who they are as possible.
The rest of you though, who never have to consider it, even if you are not actively contributing, you passively do. Your barefaced attempt at innocence fools nobody, not even yourself--else why would you be here at all?
Feminism is about equality but cuckservatives will always make everything about themselves or how they are so persecuted when they are simply intolerant dipshits.Ā
I suspect Iāll get downvoted for this, butā¦ maybe we just shouldnāt make any sweeping generalizations about a whole group of people?
If someone says āBlacks are criminalsā itās perfectly valid to say āNot all black people are criminals.ā If the first person comes back and says āI never said all black people,ā theyāre being intentionally obtuse and should be told theyāre full of shit. That goes for any similar statement; women are bad drivers, men are rapists, etc. Being slightly more precise is ridiculously easy, thereās no reason to accept generalizations.
And someone downvoted you for pointing that out. Itās crazy. But the fact that people just downvote and donāt respond is telling: Iāve yet to hear a logical rebuttal to the argument I made above.
Your example holds a key difference though: who is holding power. Black people are a minority, and the rate of incarceration is directly tied to systemic r*cism.
Women are a minority. They do not hold power over men. There is no history of systemic abuse from women to men. Men today still hold the vast majority of public office and make laws that take away womenās rights. In some countries worse than others, but in the us theyāre even trying to take away womenās rights to vote. Men hold power in most religions, and teach women they will go to hell if they do not āobeyā the men in their life. Men sexually assault women and get away with it the VAST majority of the time. Anything a woman says about āmenā doesnt actually hurt them in any meaningful way. Unlike the rhetoric that men are spewing that gets women raped, killed, and rights taken away. Aka real world consequences bc men as a whole have power over women and USE it to benefit them.
This is a gendered issue. Point blank period. And wanting to pretend like its not only protects men and hurts women. Bc you are telling women to stfu and stop trying to talk about the root of the issue. Men. Men as a whole need to change. Not just the ones raping and killing women. They need to hold their friends and family accountable. They need to educate their children properly. They need to do the work to make sure they are not acting on biases they may not have even realized they had. They need to actively do work to make sure women start to regain some power in society. They need to make sure they are educated on rapeculture and consent so they can nip it in the bud when they see it. And as a whole, men are NOT doing that. There is no need to package it up all sweetly w a little bow on top as to not hurt menās feelings. When the good ones arenāt getting their feelings hurt, bc they understand the issue. Itās a cultural issue, with men being responsible and men being the ones w the ability to change it.
Policing how we express something to better suit your sensibilities misses the point being made, however. So no, you're not saying stfu but you are plugging your ears and making it about your feelings instead of acknowledging that women (and Black people or any political minority) face some really horrible abuse and threats to their bodily autonomy and lives.
Language being what it is, saying "men do this..." can be taken as all men, men in general, or the people who do this tend to be male. Usually women complaining about a behavior are trying to express that in their experience the people who have done x have been male. Not all male people in their lives have done x to them.
Instead of considering that, someone always has to rush in and be like, "Wah! Not all of us!" And it changes the conversation about x to placating someone's feelings over wording.
The issue isnāt that the statement is inaccurate. The issue is that it detracts from the real issues that are being discussed. Women know not all men are rapists. They also know that not all men hate women. However, all men benefit in some way from systemic misogyny regardless. And when women are discussing the the issues they are facing everyday, and someone, out of anger/frustration, makes a comment that generalizes men in some capacity, responding to that comment with ānot all menā is problematic for multiple reasons. One, as I mentioned, it detracts from the conversation being had. Two, it serves no purpose because, as Iāve already said, women already know itās not all men. Lastly, three, you read the post, you read the comments, you read multiple different accounts of women fighting an oppressive system and being dismissed, gaslit, ridiculed, etc and, instead of offering words of support or encouragement, you chose to say ānot all menā, once again centering menās issues over womenās.
What you're describing is accurate for why "all lives matter" is a racist response to "black lives matter." However, despite your framing, there are far more discussions on the internet than just women sharing their stories of surviving thru violence and disrespect at the hands of men. And despite your claim, some women truly do believe that all men are rapists at heart.
We have been told to stop generalizing women, and good men and women have been policing the "make me a sammich" type of meme you'd see even just 15 years ago. There's still plenty of misogyny and misandry around, but at the end of the day, <6% of men commit violent crimes and you can't expect me to let it slide when men are generalized as violent. Yes, 1/20 is enough to be worried and to teach women to vet men thoroughly before being alone with them. Yes , I have empathy for victims and am doing my best to police behavior. But surviving violence is not enough to justify misandry or generalization, and at some point I will derail your story if you keep saying things like that.
If women already know it's not all men, then why say it? Why should anyone be expected to guess that someone might not mean all men when they don't clarify. If the reason is speaking out of frustration or anger, then don't bring it to a nuanced conversation.
It's all semantics, but semantics can matter a lot when trying to have a conversation that goes beyond emotional venting.
There are ways to say how one feels about rapists without flippantly including every other man who isn't one.
Iām glad to hear that I was benefitting from the patriarchy when I was raped in 2003 and again in 2011 and nobody took me seriously until I tried to unalive myself this year. Is it part of the benefits to be laughed at by self-proclaimed feminists and told it was my fault for putting myself in that situation and when I tried to argue that I was hit with āthatās what they tell womenā?
Weirdly the people who have been the most understanding in my ptsd treatment this year have been men and the most belittling ones, specifically thinking about a therapist who tried to start a pissing contest with me over how I have it easy, have been women.
Since the post is discussing whether itās ok to generalize, is it fair for me to say all feminists and all women downplay men getting raped by other men and blame the one getting raped for it?
In before the downvotes and the āhaha you got raped by a man so that proves our point checkmate [insert f-slur here]ā
I never really understood the hate for 'not all men' responses. I've seen it condemned in situations where someone would say something like "Men are rapists." ... and the response comes: "Not all men are rapists."
And then they get slammed.
But ... I mean, we all know know that not every guy in the world is a rapist. Not even most guys.
I also know that I have to protect myself from the ones that are or might be. But some people think that it's just some underlying programming and that all it would take is the right situation to bring out the 'rapist DNA' embedded in all men and I just ... don't get that at all.
Itās easy to see that it only applies to men for some reason. If you make categorical accusations about any other group of people, itās totally fair to say ānot all X.ā But for some reason itās bad when you say it about men.
Because their arguments are rarely based in logic or facts, usually they are based in emotion. So they require uniform acceptance, because any push back or counter no matter how nuanced weakens the emotional impact of their argument. Also they are not used to being openly criticized or held accountable in any way, so that adds to it also...
Saw this one quote that was like 'When women say all men, they don't mean the Cornell 7, they mean the 50 men in the groupchat who saw her nudes posted and didn't say a thing.'
It's not that women think all men are rapists, just that almost every man has done something to perpetuate or ignore rape culture and violence against women.
Is it really? In a world full of 'that one uncle we don't let kids too close to,' 'oh that guy just says stuff like that, he's harmless,' and everyone who ever voted for 'grab em by the p****?'
Itās not insane. Itās just vague and broad enough so that it can apply to literally anyone. Anyone can be accused of āignoring somethingā about the issue of rape culture and violence against women.
I think the ānot all menā responses are just men being defensive because they are looking at it from their perspective rather than the womanās. Like to women I would assume most men have the potential to harm them in some way. Obviously every single man isnāt a rapist but shouldnāt it be on the man to prove heās not that type of person and that heās a safe person to be around? And also call out that behaviour from men in his life? I think history has shown that being skeptical of men is a pretty rational thing.
Iām a dude so Iām not entirely sure what women are thinking when they say itās all men but to me they are pointing out that to them we all have the potential to be dangerous and your words and actions should prove the opposite.
Iām rambling now but thatās how Iāve always viewed it
I think the ānot all menā responses are just men being defensive because they are looking at it from their perspective rather than the womanās.
Well yeah because when people make those big sweeping statements they literally are calling people whove done nothing rapists. Of course people get defensive.
If I were to say "Women are whores" there are going to be women who aren't whores that are going to be offended by it. Then imagine I have the audacity to get pissed off because someone comments back "not all women".
Maybe the problem is we shouldn't be making big sweeping statements like that.
Holy fuck Iām gonna loose it if I see another gender war post. Feminism is not an attack on men and it shouldnāt be one, because at the end of the day the only way we find a solution is if men and women cooperate together on finding one. But also, not all men are part of the problem and itās tiring as fuck to see that just generalizes any group of people regardless of power dynamics. Matter of fact, all it does is hurt feminism because when all the women who are vocal about feminism also make shitty jabs at men in the process, all it does is put them on the defensive instead of creating a space for self reflection. If youāre in a healthy relationship and your partner is doing something you donāt like, what di you do? Do you talk down to them and make them feel like shit or do you try to communicate the problem in a way where you can cooperate on a solution?
Na, actual feminists support equality from men and don't engage in the gender war nonsense. They pay attention to what they say so they never even hear the response "not all men". "In the US, sexual assault is a huge issue. The majority of the perps are male" vs "It's so gross how men are rapist pigs" -- one is an informed adult response, the other is ignorant prejudice.
The toxic kids on social media that post man or bear stuff or the women joking about men being pigs over cocktails aren't feminists. They're just assholes.
If you're out there stating complaints about men as if they are some giant group, you're just adding to the gender war. Which harms feminism.
There's certainly a big difference between real life feminists and reddit feminists though. It's about living what you believe vs performing for upvotes. Ironically all the subs with "feminist" in their name tend to be toxic as hell and anything but. My assumption is they draw the most extreme types of people, and the mods are often the most polarized of the lot.
edit: Also, feminism is a giant group of beliefs. Some feminists believe trans women aren't women and that women who make porn should be sent to jail. It's a wide spectrum. Western feminism is also mostly about promoting what white straight affluent women want/view as fair, which is another issue often brought up by women of color or lgtbq or poor women.
The post says that statement is the only place where ānot all menā works as a response. Mine was just another example of where it works bc not all men are born with penises if a person born as a female transitionsā¦oh f*ck it why am I arguing with bots
Yeah, this is classic internet brain rot. You need to understand the standard internet talking points in the "gender wars." Like a woman will complain about a legitimate problem and blame "men" in general. A man will almost always respond with "not all men" as a way to undermine the discussion and excuse the behavior.
It certainly does apply to many situations in the real world but this is the internet
Iām a part of a few feminist groups and subs that are open to male support. While there are women who are, understandably, fed up with and losing hope in men as a result of their experiences, I have never been made to feel unwelcome in their circles. Feminists arenāt the problem.
Feminism and red pill are two sides of the same useless coin. Gender supremacy disguised as gender equality. Yes, both āmovementsā are dumb and do nothing but divide
I don't think it's entirely true. Its just that some people dicided to come into it without understanding that what feminists have done historically. Has been a lot of hard work. So they have just degenerated to writing hateful things about men on social media, and becoming a mirror of the misogyny that feminism has worked against. Happens with all social movements. Where some people get into a social movement, without understanding it. It's always just a small minority, that gets blow up by proppene with an agenda against the movement.
People have been saying a lot of the same shit ("gone too far", "whining about nothing") about feminism since the Suffrage movement. Have you seen some of those anti-Suffragette cartoons? Not that different from the stereotypes that people have about feminists now.
I've always felt that women had their shit together much more than men. If women ever quit fighting amongst themselves, they would rule the world.
I don't feel that men who are threatened by feminism are really men in the first place.
Nobody should be ruling anything. That's the crux of the problem.
If you want a world where someone does rule, you're inviting a world controlled by violence (because that's what rule means). Which men are better at - part of how we got here in the first place.
We cant even stop fighting and trolling online. (Were the number 1 cyber bullies and trolls) what makes you think were gonna get along and rule the world? Samantha from my yoga class got her period and decided to alienate her friend of 3 years. Were not emotionally capable enough for that lol.
Word of advice: next time you wanna pretend to be a woman online to sow misogyny, you should probably hide your post history where you admit to being a man first
I feel like feminism is something different than it's strict definition. I agree that men and women are equal, but this doesn't mean we're equal in abilities. I'm generalizing, obviously, but men, for example, tend to be stronger. We're going to do better at things that require strength. Does this mean we should include women in these tasks? Well, sure, if they can compete at the same level. Research shows that patients of female doctors overall tend to live longer. Female doctors tend to spend more time with their patients, and as such, this means they make less money. That's messed up. They're doing a better job.
I also think that taking care of the kids and such was an important job, but now women want to work instead. I don't care if it's a man or a woman, but I feel like someone should be more dedicated to the family. It's an important role that's been phased out.
I also find that it seems like, these days, feminists just hate men. They're not asking for equality. They're asking for superiority.
And there are the majority who donāt call that shit out and let it fester in their communities and friend groups. Yes, ānot all menā, but letting it continue and grow and eventually hurt someoneā¦ then they go āwell how would I know my creepy friend would touch you inappropriately! Maybe you shouldnāt wear that around him!ā And so on.
āNot all menā is an excuse to make you feel better about yourself and to wash your hands of accountability.
The Cornel 7 case as a glaring and recent example. Over 100 men in a group chat and none stepped up to speak on Jane Doeās behalf. Over 100 men refused to hold those 7 accountable. Those are the ānot all menā.
But sure, letās ignore the obvious issues in our society.
102
u/The__DonaldTrump 6h ago
I personally never felt victimized by feminism. I think itās because Iām open minded and have a respect for personal boundaries.