Here’s the basic line of thought:
Men occupy a more powerful position in society due to the generally patriarchal structures. Women occupy a less powerful position than men, even when a particular women holds more overt power (e.g., a woman that’s a CEO). As a result, sexual relationships between men and women always have a power imbalance; that imbalance of power means that women can never really be consenting, since there’s always some form of ‘threat’ involved. A woman that believes she wants sex believes that way because society has conditioned her to be that way, rather than that being something she chose in a vacuum.
And theoretically, this is all true, kind of. But it also isn’t, because that would mean that women can never have any agency over their own body or their own sexual choices. …Unless they “choose” to be lesbian, which isn’t actually a choice at all.
No, it’s not all true, not even theoretically. The idea that women can’t consent to sex is complete and utter horseshit, not to mention insanely sexist.
I mean it is true to an extent, it is just treating consent as an absolute and not a spectrum. Power imbalances absolutely impact where that needle is.
I’ve had lots of sex like “yes please”. I’ve had sex where I was like “ill probably enjoy enjoy this” or “I genuinely don’t really care one way or another and it will please my partner” (who I’m not vulnerable to in a societally enforced way) and all of them would fit the binary of consensual but are at various points on the spectrum.
The last example is an illustrative example where it would clearly fall at different points on the spectrum if I was more or less dependent on/vulnerable to my partner.
Sex negative feminism had some points that were correct to some extent, sex negative and sex positive feminism both synthesized into a more sex neutral position for a reason.
Okay, let’s put it this way.
Let’s say you’re a woman, and you’ve been pulled over by a male cop. He’s got you dead to rights on possession of cocaine with intent to distribute after spotting the bales of cocaine in your back seat. He’s willing to just give you a ticket for a burned out tail light, but only if he can fuck you, right then and there. Can you, in that moment, morally and ethically consent to sex with him, when he has the legal authority to arrest you and ensure that your life is fucked forever if you do not consent? Most people would say no, that entire environment is coercive, so there’s no way that, within that framework I’ve presented, that the woman could morally or ethically consent to sex in order to make her ‘little problem’ go away.
2nd wave feminism presented all male-female relationships in that way, although usually with a less blatant abuse of power going on. If you assume that patriarchy stacks the power deck in favor of men, then there’s very little basis for women to ever consent to sex with a man, because she is never able to have an equal position of power within society from which to consent. But that’s also a problem, because it abstracts people to the point where it’s almost meaningless on an individual level.
Right, and that stance is complete and utter sexist horse shit for both genders. It’s saying that women don’t have any agency over their actions at any time, and that all straight men are guilty of raping their partners. It’s also discounting the fact that women can and have raped men.
I’d be willing to bet that most people who believe this have some form of PTSD from the actions of a male, which would be a completely understandable viewpoint to have in that situation.
But, a viewpoint being understandable doesn’t make it reasonable, valid, or healthy. If someone truly believes that no women can ever consent to intimacy with a man, they need to speak to a mental health professional.
It’s no more valid of a viewpoint than saying all white people are racists.
Wouldn’t that line of thinking imply that women don’t have any agency about anything? Whatever they decide can be framed as a reaction to internalized fear.
Not to mention that gender roles also affect men.
Yeah it does and you couldn’t really change it. As women would act based on internalized sexism and even if a man wants to respect the wish of a woman and give her 100% control, she would act in the sexist norms, which would signal to the men that women want those sexist norms. So men would continue to “enforce” those norms as women would fear to stop the men.
So sexism can’t be solved; and then we can ask why bother trying to change it then?
Stupid line of thinking that is insulting to both, women and men. No means no, my friends. No means no. Respect your fellow humans.
I assume you’re excluding all the men who prefer a femdom ? IDK if many women know this, but men’s sexuality is often a LOT looser then Media lets on. There’s plenty of men who’d absolutely love to be thrown around like a rag doll.
I didn’t exclude them. And I want to make clear that I strongly believe women to be equal to men. Ofc there are men who want to be dominated.
But I was giving a critic to the idea that women wouldn’t be able to freely consent due to some vague sense of possible abuse from a man. Because that would imply that e.g. if a man chains himself on a board and give a woman a cat o’ nine tails, the woman couldn’t freely choose to hit him as the man is still a source of some vague sense of possible abuse in the future as a consequence of her decision. Which isn’t completely wrong, of course there are women to are in such a situation, but as a general condition, it heavily implies that women can’t consent to anything, even to anything that would less the threat of abuse. Which is simply insulting to women, and invalidating any woman’s opinion on these things, especially those who prefer something that it viewed as possibly abusive.
Like take people seriously, and support the creation of supportive structures for those who need them to get out of a situation where leaving is difficult.
Yes, I understand. And it’s indeed a possible situation. But have you ever heard the phrase “they’re more afraid of you then you are of them”? Women have more social power than they realize, and the fear is due to specifically manipulative female individuals abusing that social power, even to the extent of violence. So the fear of abuse is a mutual feeling. There will always be bad people. Just please use your power carefully and honestly and work together to reduce evil people. Imo, addressing social economical problems will help greatly reduce the tensions between genders, and the only way to do that is by communicating in the first place.
Sounds suspiciously like insanity to me.
A lot of 2nd wave feminism does sound weird now, yeah. But at the time–this would have been the 50s-70s or so–it was a novel way of viewing power dynamics and what consent meant.
But also they shame lesbians when we actually fuck because we’re “imitating male behavior”. Like, girl, I assure you that while some men offer to take turns performing oral this is far from us imitating them. We’re just horny
Wait wait wait, does that mean that being gay is the ultimate straight behaviour? Like, it’s gay to like women, because only a man knows what a man wants? ;)
I’ve heard the argument based not on structural power but average physical capabilities and biological structures. [I’m going to use the terms meaning sex and not gender]. The man is most likely the person that can gain control during the act, and he doesn’t risk being in pain as much as the woman. Therefore, the man holds more power and is more of a threat on average.
This is also technically true, and I don’t think it is about consent but freedom. [I’ll keep using the words for sex and not gender]. Sexuality becomes another form in which women can become subjugated, so it’s a matter of precaution, I guess (especially since men are being socialized to be entitled or even violent, which is the other part of the picture).
I’ve also heard the extreme version of this argument saying that penetration is what I just described, always, without exception.
In both cases and in yours and in others, I don’t think the meme is correct because the reasons are very different from puritanism.
deleted by creator
Oh hey guys what’s going on in this thre…
deleted by creator
Unfortunately, sometimes the impact of trauma (especially early childhood trauma) can cause misperception of aggression in statements not intended to be aggressive. I think your comment was unintentionally triggering, in the true sense of the term, not the colloquial and derogatory sense. This, in turn, leading to “friendly fire” from people who actually seem to be wanting the same things.
I’m generalizing here, but men’s lib looks VERY different to women’s lib. Women started from a position of very low power, liberation was nearly a continuous improvement for all but the most privileged women.
Men’s lib requires first giving up a lot of patriarchal power before gaining the benefits of men’s lib, which in my opinion far surpass those of patriarchal power. There are a lot of barriers to this. First, most “online” feminists talk only about giving up patriarchal power. This feels hostile to most men and has bolstered misogynist influencers like tate et al. Second real life men and women are typically both complicit as men in enforcing patriarchal views of what a man is supposed to be. You can see experiences of men crying or expressing real emotion in front their prospective significant others as a prime example of this. Third there is no easy to access popular description of the benefits to men of men’s lib. There are great examples, but they aren’t as culturally relevant as patriarchal influencers yet.
The path to men’s lib is complex and has very different challenges than women’s lib. I think we’re getting there, but it’s certainly a slow process and at this time I think the counter reaction is more prevalent and popular.
deleted by creator
Men are welcome to do the same whenever they’re ready, but for now a lot of men are just coping by crab bucketing this shit and bringing women back down.
Stop pretending like you know jack shit about men’s issues.
It’s only to/about men do you mfs say this type of shit.
“Oh, men are depressed and have insanely high suicide rate? Have they tried smiling more?”Men are welcome to do the same whenever they’re ready
We’ve been ready for a very long fucking time.
When will society be ready to actually fucking listen for once?
It’s fuckin sad that the only people able to talk about men’s issues are either fucking grifters (Andrew you know who) or aren’t even men.
Just STFU with your copout bullshit.Hey, what’s up with the tone my guy? Message me if you need to talk fr
Regarding the subject at hand,
Evidently women still have many issues coming from male dominant culture formed before the industrial revolution, there has been good progress but there’s still a long path ahead.
Men have issues coming from cultural norms too. imo the biggest hindrance for men at the moment is not nearly enough people talk about men’s mental health.
MOST IMPORTANT NOTE IS:
Promoting solutions for women doesn’t mean ignoring men’s issues.
Promoting awareness to men’s issues is not against women’s interests.
When someone is promoting progress, let’s not jump to “there are bigger problems elsewhere”
If you want to promote change via debate, being aggressive is the worst strategy. Why not say “hey, I hear your argument for women, and on this note I’d also like to raise this other related subject about men’s issues.”
That’s a win win conversation
It is, but there are a ton of people pushing for women’s issues and other currently hot button social topics who are incredibly aggressive themselves, and pretending those people don’t exist, or that it’s okay when pointed at the non-marginalized group is a problem.
Let’s not pretend that explicit misandry doesn’t exist just because it frequently comes from people hiding behind the shield of championing women’s rights. Let’s not brush off misandry because men aren’t marginalized.
Go to town about whether or not it’s worse, but I find very often that people want to pretend it simply does not exist.
Most posts like the one you’re responding to would get a lot of support if it were flipped to be a woman going off on a guy, but generally when things like thay are brought up you get decried for whataboutism.
Would you belive if I tell there are men problem even in “Male-dominant society”? In a male dominant society men are supposed to be dominant and they have pressures to do certain things. Also there are many cases in which women are given more previlages even in laws(atleast here), which makes no sense to distinguish people by sex in laws. You may argue its still due to male dominant culture we previously had but that is one of the men’s problem too. Just reminding
Hey, what’s up with the tone my guy?
How else am I supposed to react to a hyper simplification of the multifaceted problem that is men’s issues?
Evidently women still have many issues coming from male dominant culture formed before the industrial revolution, there has been good progress but there’s still a long path ahead.
Yes, that’s true.
Men have issues coming from cultural norms too. imo the biggest hindrance for men at the moment is not nearly enough people talk about men’s mental health.
True.
Promoting solutions for women doesn’t mean ignoring men’s issues. Promoting awareness to men’s issues is not against women’s interests.
Yes. That’s why the most prominent men’s rights activists are also women rights activists.
When someone is promoting progress, let’s not jump to “there are bigger problems elsewhere”
That’s not what’s happening here.
If you want to promote change via debate, being aggressive is the worst strategy. Why not say “hey, I hear your argument for women, and on this note I’d also like to raise this other related subject about men’s issues.”
The problem is that they brought up men’s rights issues in the most passive aggressive snarky way possible while hyper-generalizing and hypersimplifying it.
As a man, I’ll confirm that we have issues, but, most of them are self imposed.
I could do without toxic masculinity, and the social rules that say we cannot empathize, cannot have emotion, we must eat raw meat and punch each other so we can pick up heavy things and smash even heavier things.
But, I don’t know who you are crying victim to. Men set these rules for other men, and I can’t really wrap my head around the concept of men asking men to stop taking away the rights of men.
You’ve miss interpreted my words.
Nobody is crying victim.
This is not about weather or not men’s issues are self imposed. It’s about the consistent oversimplification of the multifaceted problem that is men’s issues.Men set these rules for other men
That’s not entirely true. There’s plenty of other factors you’re not taking into account. Fatherlessness, poverty, the lack of men’s mental health infrastructure and funding, the chosen ignorance of domestic violence against men & boys, the hashtag #killallmen trending on Twitter back in May 2014, the sexualization of boys getting molested by women like some how that’s supposed to normal, female SO’s getting categorically lighter sentencing for the same crime, entrenched societal biases, the dismissal or trivialization of issues affecting men and so so much more. Then there’s the intersection of men’s issues with other marginalized identities, such as race, sexuality, and disability, creating additional complexities. Men’s issues are multifaceted and go beyond simplistic narratives like “men hurt men” copout bs.
and I can’t really wrap my head around the concept of men asking men to stop taking away the rights of men.
It’s easy once you realize that the problem with the “gender war” is not women vs men, it’s the poor vs the government + the rich.
Please consider watching :
Pt.1 & Pt.2 , I know they’re long, but you’ll have a much deeper understanding of my perspective.If it’s poor vs rich, why even mention gender?
I agree we are all getting fucked by the system. The results of that in my life are different than how it affects your life. The system screws men in a different way than it screws women. It screws black people different than white people. It screws this religion different than that religion.
It just sounds selfish to me when you acknowledge that the problem is bigger than “Men’s issues”. And although it’s not quite as bad, it reminds me of All Lives Matter.
Cancer has MANY symptoms. When someone is complaining about how they lost both their legs to cancer, and you’re like “But MY cancer occasionally makes me feel dizzy”, yeah, it sucks that you have cancer, and I wish you didn’t, but trying to equate your dizziness with amputation just makes you sound ignorant and desperate for attention.
By all means, let’s cure the cancer for everyone, but until we can do that, we should triage, and treat the most severe symptoms before we start worrying about the occasional dizziness.
If it’s poor vs rich, why even mention gender?
Because the gender war is a symptom of poor vs rich + government and is the entire topic of this thread.
I agree we are all getting fucked by the system. The results of that in my life are different than how it affects your life. The system screws men in a different way than it screws women. It screws black people different than white people. It screws this religion different than that religion.
Exactly the point. Continuing that line of thought. Do you think, a solution for one group is just going to magically work for another?
It just sounds selfish to me when you acknowledge that the problem is bigger than “Men’s issues”. And although it’s not quite as bad, it reminds me of All Lives Matter.
How is this at all related?
Cancer has MANY symptoms. When someone is complaining about how they lost both their legs to cancer, and you’re like “But MY cancer occasionally makes me feel dizzy”, yeah, it sucks that you have cancer, and I wish you didn’t, but trying to equate your dizziness with amputation just makes you sound ignorant and desperate for attention.
By all means, let’s cure the cancer for everyone, but until we can do that, we should triage, and treat the most severe symptoms before we start worrying about the occasional dizziness.Again you’re misinterpreting, using your cancer analogy, this is like :
P1 : “I have cancer and made huge strides to beat it, I know you have cancer too, use this and this and do this and this and take theses supplements & drugs, eat this diet, smile more, do this exercise, blah blah blah”
P2 : “We don’t even have the same type of cancer, you have Rhabdomyoma, I have Leukemia, what you’re suggesting doesn’t work or isn’t nearly as effective, cancer is way more complex than that.”
P1 : “Fuck you then.”Again, Please consider watching :
Pt.1 & Pt.2 if you want a deeper understanding of my perspective.
I understand that you’re angry. Sure the initial comment was slightly snarky, and yes, a lot of frustration is caused by a large lack of willingness to address men’s issues.
But I’d just like you to find out what you want to achieve with your commentary.
If your objective was to raise an argument and change someone’s mind, then starting a conversation with
Stop pretending you know jack shit
And
STFU about your cope bullshit Will never convince anyone
If you just wanted to express your anger, then I think it’s unjustified to direct it so intensely to the initial comment. The intensity does not match the casual tone of the comment and it’s uncalled for.
Maybe you just wanted to spend some idle time by commenting on posts. Sure that’s fair, but considering the stress you put into this I’d say that’s probably a net loss for your mood
That’s not what’s happening here
Sorry if I misunderstood that. But your tone did not help with my understanding of your point
The problem is that they brought up men’s rights issues in the most passive aggressive snarky way
Sure I agree that the initial comment deserves some correction, but You will never get your point across by insulting someone. often to convince someone you should talk to them like they’re your friend. I know the insults might come more naturally than friendship, but respect is what effectively causes change.
I’m just suggesting you use your energy and patience more efficiently
I enjoyed this conversation, and hope you did too. Cheers
You bring up good points, and you’re right. I acted irrationally out of anger.
The insensitivity of the way she presented men’s issues… Tbh, it hurt me and it came out as intense anger that clouded my judgement and muddied the point I was trying to get across.
In retrospect, I should’ve handled it better and voiced my frustration more clearly and (much) less offensively. Sorry I blew up like that.
Thank you for your understanding and consideration. You’re quite kind hearted & empathetic, and have restored some of the little faith I have left in humanity. You keep on being you, you’re wonderful.Great to know that you can recognize your imperfections. I’m sure you have a good character. And i’m glad you’re feeling better. Cheers!
The suicide rates have become one of the most popular arguments, which is a shame because it is incomplete. More men complete the suicidal act, but more women attempt it (apparently, they just own less guns, less substances in the garage, etc.). In other words—because I explain like sh*t in English: women are more suicidal, but less lethal in their attempts.
Both sexes, and intersex people, suffer a lot. The various genders suffer a lot.
I know influencers that talk about this problem without being Andrew Tate, but when I recommend them, I get downvoted as if they were worth nothing. I disagree. Of course, it is not a solution because life is always hard and confusing, but to listen to leftist men who understand feminism and other current social movements, and speak of the role of masculinity today considering those is very refreshing and it definitely helps and it is a step forward.
In a nutshell, they talk about caring about mental health. Many of them already are through their own journeys via psychotherapy or other means of introspection and emotional awareness. They talk about feelings and beliefs within the people that were told that they need to be a cartoon, an action figure, because vulnerability is for the lesser sex and a real man™ despises those things. They talk about healing, understanding, cooperation, etc. I don’t know if you’re a leftist, but that’s behind other concepts such as anarchy or social welfare. It is nice to see the line of thought from healing the personal to healing the communal, and viceversa.
So… yeah, ostracism is not the solution. It’s funny because I’ve suffered from agoraphobia and things like that in other moments of my life, and I understand the dysphoric feeling brought by just thinking about society. I have rejected society time and time again, but we are social creatures and we need each other.
I need you because writing this comment is something that I feel I have to do. You’re giving me some minutes of purpose and even hope that I can make you feel less alone in this world. We both need the person that is making Lemmy possible, and our instances, and many other people on that chain. We like having friends and romantic relationships and random interactions on social media. We like going to events and activities in our towns or cities.As I see it, If society is not ‘rejectable’ without hurting ourselves and others, the next thing to do would be to interact healthily with our fellow human beings. It is an available journey, there are people willing to help in each step, but you need to trust and trust is hard as f*ck.
The focus was less on the suicide rates argument and more on the “have they tried smiling more?” response you’ll often hear from certain parties in an attempt to get across the insensitivity of the way OP presented men’s issues. I know I didn’t present that very clearly. Other than that, I agree with you.
deleted by creator
Case and point
deleted by creator
did you really need to come say “not all men” to a comment that didn’t even say “most?” Are you THAT insecure about the possibility that other men are unpleasant to women sometimes that you need to come and do this and keep replying and even draw pictures about it?
You didn’t even read the argument. It’s not about “not all men” , it’s about your hyper-generalization and hypersimplification of men’s issues and acting like there’s a silver bullet solution that men are (implied) to lazy to do. Hence the “have they thought about smiling more” example, emphasizing the ridiculous copout response that solves nothing and actively hurts men. Which btw, is an actual IRL example.
We can ignore the fact that you are currently being the man being unpleasant to women for the moment if it makes your continued trolling easier.
You’re literally a woman hyper generalizing and oversimplifying men’s issues while being unpleasant to a man. Hypocrite.
deleted by creator
So… you didn’t read anything. Not even the comment you just replied to.
For fuck’s sake, just block people. You aren’t some hero protecting the innocent.
I sincerely hope you find more important things in your life to consider accomplishments and valuable uses of your time.
Okay troll
To be fair I’ve been called puritanical for pointing out that people shouldn’t sexualize minors. It’s the ultimate thought-terminating cliché.
That’s… Genuinely complicated.
Kids aren’t asexual, and then BOOM they’re sexual the second they hit 18. I was very interested in sex from an age that would make most people deeply uncomfortable to think about. Romeo and Juliet laws exist because we recognize that first, kids are going to be sexual, and second, it’s not always going to be with peers that are exactly their own age, and that prosecuting minors for statutory rape–since neither party could legally consent–is a little crazy.
So there needs to be some kind of line between recognizing that kids are sexual, and adults not treating them in a sexual way.
Clearly what we need to do is a bunch of gene editing so that humans go through a cocoon phase where they sexually mature and emerge as a fully-formed adult.
It’s not complicated you’re just a pedophile. And I think you would have found that person doing the sexualizing was well past their 30s.
Wow, what a completely unhinged reply to what was simply stating the obvious.
The person you replied to didn’t see the scenario you imagined in your head. They replied to the words you wrote.
And I think you would have found that person doing the sexualizing was well past their 30s
…What are you even talking about?
deleted by creator
Sometimes you get something more blended. Dworkin was great at that because you can absolutely see where she’s coming from and get her line of thinking, but also she totally missed the part where most women want to have sex.
ITT: men somehow making this about themselves
You mean one guy who is getting a little too heated? Try harder lol
Oh, more will come
and in greater numbers?
