Amazing how either, so many people are missing the point, or pretending to so they can strawman the argument.
Literally all this graffiti says is that men who catcall can’t do that any more if they’re dead.
The point being, either stop catcalling on your own or people who have to experience that shit would love to stop you instead. It’s not about all men, just the ones who catcall, so either you feel called out, you’re missing the point or you’re pretending to.
Literally all this graffiti says is that men who catcall can’t do that any more if they’re dead.
I don’t think that’s quite right. Very close, but not it. It may be what was meant, but it’s not what it’s actually saying. It’s saying dead men can’t do bad things, which is like saying there are perks to men dying, it’s kind of a good thing. There’s someone who already responded to you who clearly favors that interpretation.
There are only perks to any group or individuals dying because they keep doing harmful things, if they would stop then there would be no more perks to them dying.
Personally we do not want them dead, merely to stop living in a society where they both harm and are harmed.
Yes, we know, but we had already blocked one such person, so we had to log out to see, we are glad we did block them because we don’t at all agree with actual misandry, or other bigotry.
This still ignores the implication that men dying is a good thing. I understand that’s not what YOU mean by it, but… That’s what it says. That’s the implication of the statement in a vacuum carried to its logical conclusion. That’s how a non-negligible portion of people are going to interpret it.
It comes across as having an overall favorable outlook on men dying, and most people don’t want to associate with someone who views their death as a net positive.
Well, we think they should think about it more then, we know critical thinking is not taught much in schools, but it might help with such tasks. It also might help them think about the things they could do in order to avoid having this kind of thing said in the first place, we hope.
From the way you’ve spoken so far, it seems to me there’s still some misunderstanding or miscommunication.
The more optimistic take is that we use the word “men” differently. You use it to mean “problematic men” where I use it to just mean “men”. You don’t mean all men, but you don’t communicate that effectively. If you’re the type to roll your eyes when someone complains that “not all men”, those sorts of people are ALWAYS hypocrites because I guarantee they won’t want the same nuanced understanding if someone said “dead women can’t <problematic thing>” or if something similar was said about a minority instead of women. Only when it’s about men is this level of nuance and subtle understanding required. Be more specific and don’t shit on the people you don’t intend to shit on. Don’t expect them to know your intent when it doesn’t align with your actual words.
The pessimistic take is that you think it’s true to some extent of all men, so all men deserve it to some extent. It’s similar to the male incel who thinks all women are gold digging bitches and whores, but once again, the people who think it’s true of all men would be absolutely appalled to hear a man say something is universally problematic about women. It’s sexist, it’s untrue, and it alienates people who want to help.
I don’t think it’s a an inherent trait or anything. Just that men can be problematic in two ways either they do or say <bad thing> or they don’t stand up to refute/challenge when other men do or say <bad thing>. If they aren’t either of those then that’s good then.
I’m not interested in talking about other groups at the moment as this is only about men, please stay on the subject, if you intended to compare or contrast that isn’t helpful and is just a distraction.
Ultimately what I want is for men to work on themselves and each other without either blaming other groups of people, or requiring other groups to sort out their problems for them, and for them to stop harming others. Yes I don’t think that this should stop other groups or individuals from those groups caring or helping if they want to but it shouldn’t be an expectation.
allies are always decided by the opressed group, not the person themselves, otherwise they can make it too much a part of their ego and start arguing with individuals or part of the opressed group when called out or in for harmful shit they are doing because they are “an ally” so how could they possibly getting it wrong!?
I 100% agree with this, but the burden should not be placed on the oppressed. Men must dismantle patriarchy too. They don’t get to sit around and do jack shit.
Obviously you don’t want the privileged to steal the cause and speak for the oppressed and marginalized, and this has always been an issue. But it’s not because of ‘men’ but because of capitalism and patriarchy that declaws any effective challenge to oppression. There are similar examples to this like green washing and the environmentalist movement.
But it is men, what you’re saying is the equivalent of passive voice when employers say that someone lost their jobs, it ignores that men do do this and tries to blame a system, which yes, is to blame but the individual men also have to take responsibility for themselves and other men too.
yes i definitely agree with your point here, systems don’t just live in the abstract, but are carried out by people who carry on fucked up prejudices, and all that.
Absolutely, kind internet stranger - I don’t want it any other way, I also appreciate your kind comments to me and willing to engage with my viewpoint, however imperfect they can be (no one is perfect, except for cats, of course).
I try my best to signal my intentions, and that any disagreements or points I make are in good faith and it is in the struggle against all forms of oppression, like sexism, ableism, racism, classism, and all sorts of hierarchies we experience in the workplace, public or private spaces, etc. that are well known, or also not well known, unwritten and novel.
Or let’s take it a step further, neurodivergents who are already suffering from constant anxiety and false guilt that they feel like collateral, even if it’s baseless.
Amazing how either, so many people are missing the point, or pretending to so they can strawman the argument.
Literally all this graffiti says is that men who catcall can’t do that any more if they’re dead.
The point being, either stop catcalling on your own or people who have to experience that shit would love to stop you instead. It’s not about all men, just the ones who catcall, so either you feel called out, you’re missing the point or you’re pretending to.
Which is it?
I don’t think that’s quite right. Very close, but not it. It may be what was meant, but it’s not what it’s actually saying. It’s saying dead men can’t do bad things, which is like saying there are perks to men dying, it’s kind of a good thing. There’s someone who already responded to you who clearly favors that interpretation.
There are only perks to any group or individuals dying because they keep doing harmful things, if they would stop then there would be no more perks to them dying.
Personally we do not want them dead, merely to stop living in a society where they both harm and are harmed.
Yes, we know, but we had already blocked one such person, so we had to log out to see, we are glad we did block them because we don’t at all agree with actual misandry, or other bigotry.
This still ignores the implication that men dying is a good thing. I understand that’s not what YOU mean by it, but… That’s what it says. That’s the implication of the statement in a vacuum carried to its logical conclusion. That’s how a non-negligible portion of people are going to interpret it.
It comes across as having an overall favorable outlook on men dying, and most people don’t want to associate with someone who views their death as a net positive.
Well, we think they should think about it more then, we know critical thinking is not taught much in schools, but it might help with such tasks. It also might help them think about the things they could do in order to avoid having this kind of thing said in the first place, we hope.
From the way you’ve spoken so far, it seems to me there’s still some misunderstanding or miscommunication.
The more optimistic take is that we use the word “men” differently. You use it to mean “problematic men” where I use it to just mean “men”. You don’t mean all men, but you don’t communicate that effectively. If you’re the type to roll your eyes when someone complains that “not all men”, those sorts of people are ALWAYS hypocrites because I guarantee they won’t want the same nuanced understanding if someone said “dead women can’t <problematic thing>” or if something similar was said about a minority instead of women. Only when it’s about men is this level of nuance and subtle understanding required. Be more specific and don’t shit on the people you don’t intend to shit on. Don’t expect them to know your intent when it doesn’t align with your actual words.
The pessimistic take is that you think it’s true to some extent of all men, so all men deserve it to some extent. It’s similar to the male incel who thinks all women are gold digging bitches and whores, but once again, the people who think it’s true of all men would be absolutely appalled to hear a man say something is universally problematic about women. It’s sexist, it’s untrue, and it alienates people who want to help.
I don’t think it’s a an inherent trait or anything. Just that men can be problematic in two ways either they do or say <bad thing> or they don’t stand up to refute/challenge when other men do or say <bad thing>. If they aren’t either of those then that’s good then.
I’m not interested in talking about other groups at the moment as this is only about men, please stay on the subject, if you intended to compare or contrast that isn’t helpful and is just a distraction.
Ultimately what I want is for men to work on themselves and each other without either blaming other groups of people, or requiring other groups to sort out their problems for them, and for them to stop harming others. Yes I don’t think that this should stop other groups or individuals from those groups caring or helping if they want to but it shouldn’t be an expectation.
Hope this clears that up.
or, you know, men who don’t cat call and consider themselves feminists and allies? This is not hard.
allies are always decided by the opressed group, not the person themselves, otherwise they can make it too much a part of their ego and start arguing with individuals or part of the opressed group when called out or in for harmful shit they are doing because they are “an ally” so how could they possibly getting it wrong!?
I 100% agree with this, but the burden should not be placed on the oppressed. Men must dismantle patriarchy too. They don’t get to sit around and do jack shit.
Obviously you don’t want the privileged to steal the cause and speak for the oppressed and marginalized, and this has always been an issue. But it’s not because of ‘men’ but because of capitalism and patriarchy that declaws any effective challenge to oppression. There are similar examples to this like green washing and the environmentalist movement.
But it is men, what you’re saying is the equivalent of passive voice when employers say that someone lost their jobs, it ignores that men do do this and tries to blame a system, which yes, is to blame but the individual men also have to take responsibility for themselves and other men too.
yes i definitely agree with your point here, systems don’t just live in the abstract, but are carried out by people who carry on fucked up prejudices, and all that.
Thanks for discussing things in good faith, a rare occurrence, we have not often encountered here. We really appreciate it!
Absolutely, kind internet stranger - I don’t want it any other way, I also appreciate your kind comments to me and willing to engage with my viewpoint, however imperfect they can be (no one is perfect, except for cats, of course).
I try my best to signal my intentions, and that any disagreements or points I make are in good faith and it is in the struggle against all forms of oppression, like sexism, ableism, racism, classism, and all sorts of hierarchies we experience in the workplace, public or private spaces, etc. that are well known, or also not well known, unwritten and novel.
Ever heard of the concept of collateral?
Or let’s take it a step further, neurodivergents who are already suffering from constant anxiety and false guilt that they feel like collateral, even if it’s baseless.
There’s no such thing as neurodivergents, there are neurodivergent people, but saying “neurodivergents” is othering.
We should know, we are.
Honey, stop. Men aren’t people, theyre huge bundles of irrational outrage looking for an outlet. They literally can’t hear what youre saying.