This comment section: “Actually I’m pretty sure the bike fell over for reasons unrelated to the stick”

  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    9 months ago

    Ignoring the issues people face becuase they come from what you determine to be a “privileged” class is just another form of bigotry.

    Simply stating that the problems are not intrinsic to being male is not ignoring the problem.

    Young men don’t stand to benifit from the same patriarchal systems we do, nor do we stand to benifit from the patriarchal systems our fathers did.

    Who is we? What I’m saying is that young males are not being hurt anymore than any other demographic, they just aren’t culturally inoculated to it, and so they think they’re worse off.

    And even if it did, one privileged doesn’t nullify the issues faced by other inequalities such as race, wealth, class, ability.

    I never claimed it did?

    issues they face are real reguardless of what privilege they have or are assumed to have.

    Like? As I said, I keep hearing these blanket statements attesting to unique issues, but no one claims what they are or how they occur.

    Equality should be about giving every individual a fair chance at life regardless of who they are or what they came from.

    Do you think that we are living in some sort of post scarcity society? If there is an elevated class, its only means of elevation is to stand on the heads of it’s "equal"counterparts.

    Not some team sport where “one side” must be crushed under to goosestep of self proclaimed progress seekers.

    Lol, and those who stood on our heads suddenly proclaimed themselves victims. How do you think they stand elevated if not by crushing down the competition?

    It’s only goose-stepping when the boot is on your face, when its someone’s else’s face they’re told to turn the other cheek.

    • LazyBane@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Nobody is arguing for “elevation”, nobody in their right state of mind anyway, and I’m not asking anyone to turn their cheek to anyone wrong doings done to them. However, when it’s men who feel wronged you ask them to turn the other cheek. Man up. Deal with it.

      The fact of the matter is it’s exactly this dogmatic rejecting of men that pushes them towards people like Andrew Tate. If the progressive zeitgeist refuses to listen to someone, they will follow anyone else who will. We shouldn’t tolerate the intolerant, but if we truly seek to defeat it we must understand it and treat the systemic issues that cause it to arise. It’s not the romantic ideal of the rebel taking down the empire in a victorious display of self-satisfaction, but it is the method that gets lasting results.

      I’ve never stood on anyone’s heads, least of all yours. I’d appreciate it if you could at least treat the next generation with the same respect.

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        Nobody is arguing for “elevation”

        I think validating the claim that young men are specifically being treated worse than others in similar demographics is a tacit validation of allowing them to maintain their hierarchy.

        However, when it’s men who feel wronged you ask them to turn the other cheek. Man up. Deal with it.

        I can’t control how people feel? If someone feels wronged, but can’t explain how or why, am I supposed to genuflect in agreement? If two people are struck in the face, and only one of them cries, should I ignore the stoic? We should be improving the lives of all young people, not just the ones who shout about it the most.

        The fact of the matter is it’s exactly this dogmatic rejecting of men that pushes them towards people like Andrew Tate.

        I’m not rejecting that young men face problems, I’m just claiming they don’t face any problems more dire than anyone elses problem in the same demographics.

        You just interpret that as rejection because you don’t empathize with the others.

        We shouldn’t tolerate the intolerant, but if we truly seek to defeat it we must understand it and treat the systemic issues that cause it to arise.

        And we do that by being more concerned about the problems of young men than others?

        It’s not the romantic ideal of the rebel taking down the empire in a victorious display of self-satisfaction, but it is the method that gets lasting results.

        What do they want, what are you willing to give them? According to the men’s right movement, their problem is that women are too free to turn down their advanced, women are too educated, no one wants to be their trad wife, and that there’s just too much competition in the job place because of things like affirmative action.

        If that’s their problem, I don’t care, and I don’t really feel like he needs to validate their opinion.

        I’ve never stood on anyone’s heads, least of all yours. I’d appreciate it if you could at least treat the next generation with the same respect.

        You are an individual…we are talking about socioeconomics. We are talking about the systemic abuse that’s affected every demographic in America besides white men since the inception of this country.

        Do you think the golden era of American history that the men’s right wants to revert to was shared by everyone in the country? That black families were able to afford a spacious house and take care of a large family on one person’s income? No, that was only a possibility for certain demographics. White men were given free home loans from the government, black families were sent to the projects, and women weren’t even able to open bank accounts.

        You aren’t worried about the next generation, you’re only worried about the next generation of young white men.

        • LazyBane@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Progress isn’t a competition, there need not be losers. We can acknowledge two things being bad at the same time. As we type there are children being forced to mine toxic cobalt with no protection just so we can have these electronics to argue. How can we argue our lives are any bad compared to them? Might as well put off anyone’s progress until we finally beat out the modern salve trade. It’s a unproductive way of thinking.

          Do you think a newborn “white male” as your oppressor too? Someone who has never had the chance to do anyone wrong? Must they really be subject to your scorn?

          And what of the white men today? If they gain nothing from your progress, then why must they be concerned with it? After all you seem to think that white men as a class have the ability to crush others with their privilege. How could we expect these people to work in the interest of a movement that only seeks to take from them indiscriminately? And wouldn’t it be natural for them to simply follow the example that you have given them? Be wrathful, spiteful, hateful, boil down human beings to their perceived class, do anything to get a win for their own group. Hell just look at the news, abortion rights are being repealed in America. This is happening in real time, and I promise you neither of us are happy about it.

          Socioeconomics can say whatever it wants about groups and demographics and “numbers this” or “numbers that”, that doesn’t change the fact that we are individuals in a world of many other individuals. Privilege, true and quantifiable privilege, is always relative and we should listen when people tell us about their problems, since it will encourage and empower them to do the same.

          We can together to build a world that’s better for everyone, but that requires that we don’t waste our lives away trying to hold each other down out of a need for revenge. Every step we take for ourselves or our own perceived group is a step backwards, and it’ll be our children who will have to make up for that. Do you care for the next generation, and what you’ll leave them to deal with?

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            9 months ago

            Progress isn’t a competition, there need not be losers. We can acknowledge two things being bad at the same time.

            Then why do you insist that we divide class solidarity among gender? Why not advocate for improving life for all young people instead of insisting that men’s problems take priority?

            As we type there are children being forced to mine toxic cobalt with no protection just so we can have these electronics to argue. How can we argue our lives are any bad compared to them? Might as well put off anyone’s progress until we finally beat out the modern salve trade. It’s a unproductive way of thinking.

            Lol, what kind of rhetoric is that? Children in other countries work in cobalt mines, so it’s okay if American kids work at McDonald’s…

            We are talking about equity in our own country, we are talking specifically about whether young men in the west are really experiencing more or worse problems than their counterparts.

            Do you think a newborn “white male” as your oppressor too? Someone who has never had the chance to do anyone wrong? Must they really be subject to your scorn?

            Lol, we are talking about sociology, not an individuals psychology. I don’t scorn individuals for being a part of any class, but i do scorn individuals try and preserve the class hierarchy for their own benefit.

            And what of the white men today? If they gain nothing from your progress, then why must they be concerned with it?

            That’s the thing, when we protect the most disadvantaged class we help protect every other class perceived as better than. This is a foundational to ideologies like feminism. If you can’t charge a disadvantaged class with some accusation, then there is no fear for the classes perceived to be more valuable.

            This is one of problems with labeling white men as the most disadvantaged class. If we spend all our effort protecting A class that doesn’t really need protection, then we are leaving people actually in danger out on a line.

            After all you seem to think that white men as a class have the ability to crush others with their privilege.

            Do you think white men today as a class have not benefited from generational wealth created by systemic racism? What do you think slavery was if not crushing others with privilege?

            How could we expect these people to work in the interest of a movement that only seeks to take from them indiscriminately?

            So now equality is stealing? Just because I don’t think that white men are the most disadvantaged people in our country, I’m now taking from them indiscriminately?

            What is progressive to these young men, what else could they possibly want that other people have?

            And wouldn’t it be natural for them to simply follow the example that you have given them? Be wrathful, spiteful, hateful, boil down human beings to their perceived class, do anything to get a win for their own group.

            Yeah… Seems to be exactly what they are doing. You have heard of Andrew Tate, correct?

            Hell just look at the news, abortion rights are being repealed in America. This is happening in real time, and I promise you neither of us are happy about it.

            And your solution is to …validate the men’s right movement? You’re literally claiming that men are not privileged, yet they are able to pass abortion laws. Further more you are saying that they are doing this because we don’t baby them enough in progressive political spaces.

            Socioeconomics can say whatever it wants about groups and demographics and “numbers this” or “numbers that”, that doesn’t change the fact that we are individuals in a world of many other individuals.

            You do understand that we don’t make policies around individuals?

            Privilege, true and quantifiable privilege, is always relative

            Relative to what…?

            we should listen when people tell us about their problems, since it will encourage and empower them to do the same.

            Oh yeah, I’m sure that encouraging the klansmen to air his grievances will surely benefit me, a man of color?

            but that requires that we don’t waste our lives away trying to hold each other down out of a need for revenge.

            It’s problematic to me that you think equality euates to revenge. I’m not saying to be mean to young white men, or even judge them. My only claims is that we shouldn’t prioritize white men’s problems over other demographics. And to you that means I’m thirsty for revenge?

            Every step we take for ourselves or our own perceived group is a step backwards

            And how does that apply to your original claim?

            I still find it hilarious that you haven’t answerd my original rebuttal. How exactly are young men any worse off than anyone else in a similar demographic?

      • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        How many grants are designed to be awarded to exclusively females? I don’t know, but it’s more then 0.

        Because those grants are usually in fields where the demographics are skewed male and they want more women in that workforce. That’s motivated by owners who want to lower labour cost, not because anyone’s targeting men.

        How many grants are designed to be awarded to exclusively males? Including sports or fields mainly dominated by males?

        Pretty sure men and women get scholarships to play every sport in college? And I’m pretty sure there’s a lot more males getting those scholarships than women, football teams are pretty large.

        When a girl says they are suicidal how quickly do they get support? When a man says they are suicidal, how quickly do they get support?

        That’s just because women are better communicators than men. They seek help when it’s less severe and are more likely to respond to treatment. Most men who seek help before suicide so it as a last resort, and America has really shitty healthcare. Again, not targeting men.

        Anytime iv mentioned that iv been suicidal, the “help” I get was told to man up and not think about bad stuff. Iv been going to therapy on my own and at my own cost for years to help me give the strength to wake up tomorrow.

        Well, shame on whoever told you that and I’m glad you sought help yourself. However, that’s mostly something we men are doing to themselves. We can’t blame anyone else for that, nor can anyone else but us fix it.

        Why is it males still can’t talk about their thoughts and feelings without being considered a lesser man?

        Because of other men… Have you tried having a platonic friendship with a woman or maybe better quality not man, they don’t tend to think less of you because you talk about your feelings. I talk to my friends about my feelings all the time, no one thinks of me as a lesser man.

        Why is males have 3 times the suicide rate then females?

        Because we don’t communicate our feelings as well or as often as a whole. We also tend to be less squimish about our method of suicide, when women tend to think of the aftermath more.

        Why is it until very recently, women in a divorce would normally automatically be given full custody of their children?

        It used to be a common belief in family court that mothers were more important to child development than men. This was assumed to be true as men traditionally were away at work more often and children required a stay at home mother.

        This wasn’t targeting men, it was implemented by men who believed in the idea of the atomic family.

        Why is it, when a male calls the cops over domestic violence, it’s the male who still gets arrested a majority of the time?

        Who is making that discretion? The vast majority of police officers are men, they have the discretion to determine who gets arrested.

        Why is there sigma still around a male being gay?

        By who? And do those people think being a lesbian or bi is okay?

        But yep, my male privlage gives me such a massive advantage over females, or others who identify as female, or non binary.

        I mean just legally and economically…

        use animals as a reason to keep going because on a personal level, I have nobody. I literally have to pay someone $310 CAD every month to listen to my problems.

        You think that’s not happening to women?

        Most females do not understand the isolation most males deal with.

        Most men are not dealing with that kind of isolation, and I don’t think you have hung out with enough women to make that determination.

        It’s easy to get stuck in an echo chamber because of how connected we all are, try different groups.

          • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Again, there isn’t a single grant a female does not have access too, while males do not have the same access to all grants.

            And those grants are for what?

            But yes, males do get more grants for sports because, men play sports more often then females, and men normally enroll for sports mainly to get grants, not to become professional athletes.

            Lol, okay so men have more access, but you’re mad they don’t have exclusive access?

            third sentence, again no, men can communicate just fine, it’s just when we do, we are seen as lesser men. Stigmatization.

            And the consequences of that is…men not communicating.

            iv told close female friends and male friends of mine about me going to therapy and most times after iv done so, the people I told treat me differently. They treat me like a snowflake.

            Sounds like you just have shitty friends.

            Also, most of my friends are actually female belive it or not. I have a very small group of friends, and it’s nearly a 2:1 ratio of females to male. I love this so much, you don’t know fuck all about me, yet you assume so much

            Well, you were the one who said you were completely alone and isolated and only relied on the comfort of your cats for companionship. Now you say you have a bunch of gal pals, but they call you snowflake when you tell them you in counseling?

            Jesus christ you must consider yourself a victim.

            Lol, why? I have great talks about mental health with my homies all the time. I’m a happily married man, with a wife who cares about how I feel just as I care about how she feels.

            Also what echo chamber am I in? What gives you this impression?

            FEMALE! It’s a dead giveaway my friend. Also the whole grant and suicide thing is a pretty popular trope in those circles, despite being pretty easy to explain if you actually did a little research.

            never really had a father figure. I was the only male in a house of 4. 1 mother and 2 sisters. I raised with a female mindset, and did it ever cause me problems trying to make male friends.

            There is no uniform mindset for men or women. If you spend all your effort caring about what people think of you, or worrying if you’re being manly enough, you’re never going to find the time to actually find someone or something that makes you happy.

            is blaming men for everything.

            Alternatively who’s fault is it? Are women responsible for our mental health? Who else can be responsible for your mental health other than yourself?

          • Funderpants @lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            A gish gallop, easily googled, is when someone makes a large number of arguments regardless of quality instead of quality arguments.

            Other approaches to debate you should get familiar with are ad hominem and strawman, I won’t answer your questions about those though because, like the gish gallop, they are easily googled.

              • Funderpants @lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                You didn’t make objective arguments, you made ten assertions in the form of questions, without sources or papers or support, and then attacked me personally with a story you made up on the spot with absolutely no true knowledge of me or my background.

                You have no credibility, and nobody should listen to you, and certainly nobody should waste time cataloging, researching, sourcing and then articulating a response to that gish gallop.

                  • Funderpants @lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    Ah yes, classic gish gallop. You make 10 claims with no support and everyone else needs to do the legwork.

                    Yet I present you with a single term, gish gallop, and you ask me for the definition. Curious this double standard. Further demonstration that you are an unserious person making an unserious argument.

                    You’re picking fights, more or less.

                    Now, let me pick one of your points to counter and at the same time demonstrate why the gish gallop makes you unserious.

                    A serious person would, for example, not just ask why men have a 3x higher suicide rate, but would at least cover the gender paradox and therefore recognize that young women have higher rates of suicidal ideation and attempt suicide more often than men of the same age. Women overall attempt suicide 2 to 4x more often but have a lower completion rate. Gender discrepancies in suicide completion come down to myriad factors including the tool used and strength differences, not typically found to be due to men getting a bad deal from society though, or whatever point you wanted to make.

                    So here’s the thing, you get to make that 3x claim devoid of meaningful sources and context (and I will reply in turn ala Hitchens Razer) , and in a single sentence tucked in the middle of a pile of other claims. Me, on the other hand, have to write a whole paragraph to dispute it. Now imagine how long and involved a reply to the full gish gallop is. It will, in fact, be longer to address each and every talking point you make than it was for you to write it. Worse, you push the burden of finding evidence for your claims off onto others. Worse still, as you’ve already demonstrated, being called out leads you to ad hominem and strawman arguments.

                    You aren’t serious and nobody should feel obligated to reply to you as if you are.