Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)R

ronigami

@ ronigami @lemmy.world

Posts
1
Comments
292
Joined
8 mo. ago

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • Second, and pretty unrelated, I think feminism is a dishonest platform and has far exceeded its mandate. Women are oppressed in the Middle East. To say they’re oppressed here currently, relative to males, is somewhere between dishonest and delusional.

    First wave feminism had a very strong reason to exist. Second wave as well. But intersectionality is a complete mess that only creates problems instead of solving them, and ideas like antiracism are positively counterproductive

    Anyway, feminism doesn’t have a monopoly on egalitarianism. You can be pro-equality without being feminist, despite what feminism would say.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • I guess your mind lacks the ability to imagine implied punctuation:

    And in your book, incels can have sex — right. We can skip all the mental-institution-worthy nonsense, then.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • Saying someone is mansplaining is a normative statement. You’re stating a moral position by using the word. One aspect of that moral position is the use of this obnoxious spelling, “splaining,” which is clearly meant to denigrate the desire to explain things. This is anti-intellectual, yet it’s couched in the oh-so-innocent veneer of being pro-feminism.

    To contrast, calling someone a bigot is stating a moral position, but the only moral position it states is that bigotry is bad, which isn’t anti-intellectual.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • Yes, likening one person saying to another that they are mansplaining, to defending oneself from literal death by chemical weapon, is misrepresenting my argument. If you are being threatened with death, defending yourself is not punching up or punching down, it’s not even a voluntary action at all, it’s just human instinct and you can’t even call that a choice.

    Also, are you trying to paint a random commenter on the Internet who probably didn’t even fully read the post they’re replying to, as an “authority?”

    (re edit: thanks, I appreciate that)

  • Florida taxpayers may lose $218M on empty 'Alligator Alcatraz' as judge orders shutdown

    Jump

  • State of morons. They deserve it.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • It’s tempting to see authority as an ordering of humans, but it isn’t. Anthony Fauci is not more of a human than you are. And it’s not okay to punch Anthony Fauci for the same reason it’s not okay to punch you. But we still need authorities and so it can’t be the case that every person in the country is the authority on diseases.

    No, punching back is not the problem. The problem is the idea that there exists something called “punching up” that is more excusable generally than “punching down.” THAT idea reinforces social hierarchy and oppressive structures. Particularly if you believe that “punching up” will always be punching up, invariant of what happens in the world, because that asserts that the hierarchy is fixed which even further reinforces it.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • And in your book incels can have sex, right, we can skip all the mental institution worthy nonsense

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • Are all your comments that low-effort?

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • Why is it wrong to punch up? Because there being “up” requires an ordering of humans, so speaking in feminism terms that would be reinforcing the patriarchy, in regular terms people aren’t above or below each other, they’re all people. Punching up is still punching, is destructive and not constructive. Destruction isn’t becoming of anyone.

    To draw a specific example, the fact Taylor Swift is a billionaire doesn’t mean it’s okay to treat her like a piece of shit and insult her to her face, make up mean names for her, etc.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • Why widespread? Well because it’s “punching up” and catchy and plays in to the traditional feminist narrative that women are oppressed in $WESTERN_COUNTRY particular in science even though women regularly outperform their male counterparts in terms of college grading and admissions. You’re basically asking why feminism is popular.

    Wouldn’t it be natural that having existed as an idea for over 10 years I would have a preconceived notion of it?

  • RFK Jr. says agency will reveal causes of autism in September

    Jump

  • RFK’s meat curtains

  • Trump serious about pursuing a third term, Gavin Newsom warns

    Jump

  • True, except the guy can’t read so he’s not getting it from the playbook. He’s just being a standard narcissist and doing things that a narcissist would do.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • It wasn’t rude at all, it was one of the most neutral ways of “correcting” someone (in quotes because yes the correction was wrong) but it was basically “I think it’s actually X” which is about as non-aggressive as it can get.

    The issue I take with it is not at all about group dynamics. Even if it’s one guy saying this to another, if someone is going to call that “mansplaining” I have an issue with it because it’s just explaining. Incorrectly, and maybe very slightly patronizingly (but only because the person being spoken to is a scientist and not because of the way it’s said), but still at its core simply explaining something they think is true. That is the core of scientific discourse and I don’t care what the genders are, giving it a stupid name and using that as an insult is antithetical to the open and curious exchange of information.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • It also has an anti-intellectual aspect to it. People like to explain things, that’s sort of the whole idea behind science, is to be able to do that. Sometimes people try to explain things and they’re wrong. And that’s okay, it’s part of the process of science. Further, the notes of patronization are subjective and not everyone would agree they’re present here.

    So to automatically label things like this as “mansplaining” makes a few unfair assumptions.

  • 2hot2handle

    Jump

  • People say the same thing to other men. Is it mansplaining then too?

  • All while the skeletal, crumbling, dusty bones of an econ major pulls business backwards into hell.

    Jump

  • Everyone who makes money in this country exploits someone or something

  • Teen killed himself after ‘months of encouragement from ChatGPT’, lawsuit claims

    Jump

  • Automated misinformation

  • Top Florida official says 'Alligator Alcatraz' will likely be empty within days, email shows

    Jump

  • They don’t just invest in them, they build them.

  • What will MS do when Linux becomes a serious threat to their monopoly ?

    Jump

  • Mostly die.