I watched the 20 minute podcast you linked and I remain unconvinced by your position. I don’t shy away from the reality that men are disproportionality represented amongst those who have committed suicide. But this isn’t an anti-feminist position. The gendered nature of suffering and conditions that lead to suicide are precisely what feminism is about and works to destroy.
‘The feminists of today’ are not predominately radfems and terfs and Tumblr agitators. I can’t provide statistics on this, as I assume you also can’t, but they aren’t popular positions I regularly encounter in my life. Though I do also encounter them. Feminism is a mature movement with theory and scores of academic study. It’s not so niche that it can easily be co-opted by a few years of malicious branding. If you feel it has, I recommend changing your scene. If you do a good faith dive into feminist theory, feminist academia, or a local organisation, you’ll find empathetic people analysing through a lens of intersectionality or dialecticism.
While women’s issues get far more coverage and mindshare, that’s simply because women have a larger role in the movement than men, and women naturally are more cognisant and affected by women’s issues. Men’s issues are fully the responsibility and care of all feminists. Sometimes there are just biases and blind spots. Men don’t need their own movement, and neither does pretending patriarchy doesn’t exist solve any of men’s problems, or help your women comrades.
And I do recognise that the capitalist system both attacks and attempts to co-opt feminism. But they only do this because feminism is a threat to capitalism. By not engaging and fighting for feminism, that co-opting can take place.
With all of that said, I’m not hugely well read or invested in this area of the proletariat liberation. If another comrade would like to chime in, that would be helpful. But to cover my shortcomings, I’d like to point you towards the Revolutionary Feminism community on Lemmygrad. !feminism@lemmygrad.ml
Will you please consider visiting and having a chat with the folks there?
I already have my reasonable message removed above, and grad left a bad taste in my mouth last year regarding the situation of men and their rights. It is always about reading theory, which does not seem to concern men, or atleast in real world there is horrific treatment and intentional isolation of men. I do not think leftists care about men at all, and will only care as long as men socially remain inferior to women and trans people. It seems almost revengeful for something most men are not even responsible for.
I recommend changing your scene.
I am not going to surround myself with feminist yesmen that are thirsty to oppress men. It creates a massive problem of confirmation bias and a disengagement from the “enemy”. Men are not some group like Nazis or pedos. It is the exact same thing redpillers do, by surrounding themselves with medieval gladiator types of stories and animal kingdom lore to deny the existence of trans people and to enforce extreme oppression of women and subordination of men.
Men don’t need their own movement, and neither does pretending patriarchy doesn’t exist solve any of men’s problems, or help your women comrades.
Patriarchy exists. And now, matriarchy also exists, and is amplified by social media disease that also houses redpillers, liberals, fascists and other factions.
And why do men not need a supportive movement of their own? Women should not need a movement of their own either.
Feminist movement is not for men, and does not concern men. It is made for women, and to bolster and protect women.
The leftist movement has my full geopolitical support, but I will be on the fence as far as culture gender war goes, because there is negligible concern for men.
I already have my reasonable message removed above, and grad left a bad taste in my mouth last year regarding the situation of men and their rights.
I think your world view is common and one I’m completely empathetic towards, and that you expressed it reasonably, and that you didn’t violate rule 1. But it was deleted by lemmy.ml mods, not grad.
It is always about reading theory,
As with communism, you need theory to have a common understanding and starting place before discussions are fruitful. And the theory gives you the tools to analyse, and addresses the common situations and topics. The same way not reading economic theory makes it easier to become a liberal, not reading social theory leaves you vulnerable. When you preach communist principles to your friends and family, you probably don’t demand they read theory, but you yourself having read and understood theory is surely paramount. Consider all the cases where liberals would claim Marxist-Leninists ideas are only applicable in hypotheticals, where understanding theory allows you to apply the ideas to practical and real scenarios because you have a framework for addressing contradictions.
which does not seem to concern men, or atleast in real world there is horrific treatment and intentional isolation of men.
It does! It absolutely does. Isolation and atomisation are key topics. As is the gendered nature of what jobs are socially allowed to demand from workers with or without paying them.
I do not think leftists care about men at all and will only care as long as men socially remain inferior to women and trans people.
Men hold up half the sky. Men are not inferior to anyone. But the concerns of trans people especially, but also women are more dire and pressing and have more clear solutions. That’s why those issues are talked about more. But jihad for men’s liberation must continue as well. Until those issues have clear solutions, and then starts the jihad to implement the solutions as we strive to liberate trans comrades, as we strive to liberate women.
I am not going to surround myself with feminist yesmen that are thirsty to oppress men.
But you’re encountering those thirsty to oppress men now in your current scene. You feel they’re omnipresent. That’s what you described above. This is an illusion perpetuated to keep you out of the fight.
Patriarchy exists. And now, matriarchy also exists, and is amplified by social media disease that also houses redpillers, liberals, fascists and other factions.
I am not aware of matriarchy existing to scale anywhere.
And why do men not need a supportive movement of their own? Women should not need a movement of their own either. Feminist movement is not for men, and does not concern men. It is made for women, and to bolster and protect women.
The feminist movement isn’t a women’s movement. It’s a movement against patriarchy. Men and women need liberation from patriarchy and from capitalism, it’s the same struggle. Men’s unique issues, unique challenges and injustices done upon them are worthy of examining and eradicating. But it’s best done borrowing the existing knowledge and analysis of feminism.
The leftist movement has my full geopolitical support, but I will be on the fence as far as culture gender war goes
Okay. That’s your choice and I don’t fault you for making it. I believe this is the most popular position overwhelmingly. Imperialism and capitalism undoubtedly impact and devastate more people. I’m myself not very invested in culture war topics.
because there is negligible concern for men.
But I don’t think this is true. And even if there was, has there not been positive spill-over from jihad for gay people? From jihad for gender queer people?
And the end of the day, your geopolitical stance is what matters. But I would ask that you don’t launch criticisms of feminism without doing the proper reading. Most feminists are your comrades. Co-opters and specific grievances can be specified and attacked without sullying a popular movement.
I watched the 20 minute podcast you linked and I remain unconvinced by your position. I don’t shy away from the reality that men are disproportionality represented amongst those who have committed suicide. But this isn’t an anti-feminist position. The gendered nature of suffering and conditions that lead to suicide are precisely what feminism is about and works to destroy.
‘The feminists of today’ are not predominately radfems and terfs and Tumblr agitators. I can’t provide statistics on this, as I assume you also can’t, but they aren’t popular positions I regularly encounter in my life. Though I do also encounter them. Feminism is a mature movement with theory and scores of academic study. It’s not so niche that it can easily be co-opted by a few years of malicious branding. If you feel it has, I recommend changing your scene. If you do a good faith dive into feminist theory, feminist academia, or a local organisation, you’ll find empathetic people analysing through a lens of intersectionality or dialecticism.
While women’s issues get far more coverage and mindshare, that’s simply because women have a larger role in the movement than men, and women naturally are more cognisant and affected by women’s issues. Men’s issues are fully the responsibility and care of all feminists. Sometimes there are just biases and blind spots. Men don’t need their own movement, and neither does pretending patriarchy doesn’t exist solve any of men’s problems, or help your women comrades.
And I do recognise that the capitalist system both attacks and attempts to co-opt feminism. But they only do this because feminism is a threat to capitalism. By not engaging and fighting for feminism, that co-opting can take place.
With all of that said, I’m not hugely well read or invested in this area of the proletariat liberation. If another comrade would like to chime in, that would be helpful. But to cover my shortcomings, I’d like to point you towards the Revolutionary Feminism community on Lemmygrad.
!feminism@lemmygrad.ml
Will you please consider visiting and having a chat with the folks there?
I already have my reasonable message removed above, and grad left a bad taste in my mouth last year regarding the situation of men and their rights. It is always about reading theory, which does not seem to concern men, or atleast in real world there is horrific treatment and intentional isolation of men. I do not think leftists care about men at all, and will only care as long as men socially remain inferior to women and trans people. It seems almost revengeful for something most men are not even responsible for.
I am not going to surround myself with feminist yesmen that are thirsty to oppress men. It creates a massive problem of confirmation bias and a disengagement from the “enemy”. Men are not some group like Nazis or pedos. It is the exact same thing redpillers do, by surrounding themselves with medieval gladiator types of stories and animal kingdom lore to deny the existence of trans people and to enforce extreme oppression of women and subordination of men.
Patriarchy exists. And now, matriarchy also exists, and is amplified by social media disease that also houses redpillers, liberals, fascists and other factions.
And why do men not need a supportive movement of their own? Women should not need a movement of their own either.
Feminist movement is not for men, and does not concern men. It is made for women, and to bolster and protect women.
The leftist movement has my full geopolitical support, but I will be on the fence as far as culture gender war goes, because there is negligible concern for men.
I think your world view is common and one I’m completely empathetic towards, and that you expressed it reasonably, and that you didn’t violate rule 1. But it was deleted by lemmy.ml mods, not grad.
As with communism, you need theory to have a common understanding and starting place before discussions are fruitful. And the theory gives you the tools to analyse, and addresses the common situations and topics. The same way not reading economic theory makes it easier to become a liberal, not reading social theory leaves you vulnerable. When you preach communist principles to your friends and family, you probably don’t demand they read theory, but you yourself having read and understood theory is surely paramount. Consider all the cases where liberals would claim Marxist-Leninists ideas are only applicable in hypotheticals, where understanding theory allows you to apply the ideas to practical and real scenarios because you have a framework for addressing contradictions.
It does! It absolutely does. Isolation and atomisation are key topics. As is the gendered nature of what jobs are socially allowed to demand from workers with or without paying them.
Men hold up half the sky. Men are not inferior to anyone. But the concerns of trans people especially, but also women are more dire and pressing and have more clear solutions. That’s why those issues are talked about more. But jihad for men’s liberation must continue as well. Until those issues have clear solutions, and then starts the jihad to implement the solutions as we strive to liberate trans comrades, as we strive to liberate women.
But you’re encountering those thirsty to oppress men now in your current scene. You feel they’re omnipresent. That’s what you described above. This is an illusion perpetuated to keep you out of the fight.
I am not aware of matriarchy existing to scale anywhere.
The feminist movement isn’t a women’s movement. It’s a movement against patriarchy. Men and women need liberation from patriarchy and from capitalism, it’s the same struggle. Men’s unique issues, unique challenges and injustices done upon them are worthy of examining and eradicating. But it’s best done borrowing the existing knowledge and analysis of feminism.
Okay. That’s your choice and I don’t fault you for making it. I believe this is the most popular position overwhelmingly. Imperialism and capitalism undoubtedly impact and devastate more people. I’m myself not very invested in culture war topics.
But I don’t think this is true. And even if there was, has there not been positive spill-over from jihad for gay people? From jihad for gender queer people?
And the end of the day, your geopolitical stance is what matters. But I would ask that you don’t launch criticisms of feminism without doing the proper reading. Most feminists are your comrades. Co-opters and specific grievances can be specified and attacked without sullying a popular movement.