I think you’re pissed off at bourgeois feminist theory and bourgeois race theory, which are deserving of criticism, especially since they’re used as class weapons against non-whites both within the imperial core and the periphery. But you don’t get to use these bourgeois theories as an excuse to dismiss the proletarian ones, or as an excuse for bigotry. For example, just because a liberal Critical Race Theory was created and promoted to subsume/recuperate the original socialist theory doesn’t mean we can ignore the original.
Unfortunately ProleWiki doesn’t have much in this area as yet.
Much more often than not, “not all men” is used as a cudgel, similarly to how “not all whites” is, and the same goes for “men are oppressed” / “whites are oppressed.” How bad they are in comparison I don’t care to argue; it’s enough to say that they’re also bad. They are not false statements in themselves (as proletarian theories show), but they’re usually either misapplied or applied in bad faith.
Outside of gender topics, I personally have very much appreciated your contributions to the site in my comparatively short time here so far. Thank you. We have desperately few Global South voices here, never mind leftist ones, so that is a treasure, and I want this to be a welcoming space for such voices, so we can be exposed to more & more of them.
But this must also be a welcoming space for women. Because we’re intentionally not belligerent toward intellectually honest, good-faith liberals, creeping bourgeoisified feminism & CRT will sometimes surface contradictions between these two goals, which in my mind shouldn’t otherwise contradict. I don’t mean to imply that I’m an expert in this area, but I don’t think you’re equipped to resolve those contradictions, and I’m not sure you’re trying to. Whether or not they come from manosphere/MGTOW brainworms, your takes sound like they are, and we can’t have that.
We as men are not the baddies. And I am not even going to phrase it as a question, because it is a fact. Neither is it our fault, nor is it our doing.
Then where is your ministry towards those who are perpetrators, who have created the conditions you complain about?
I have never seen a piece of content removed for misandry at all. NEVER. It is always about misogyny. Why is that?
Considering misandry tends to not leave men in SA’d and left in a chalk outline where misogyny very frequently does, I imagine that’s the answer to your question. It’s genuinely mindboggling to me that every time discussions or een metadiscussions of misogyny see you pull up on your #NotAllMen shit; right down to getting your lemmygrad account banned over it.
If we’re to accept your #NotAllMen spiel, then where was the #NotEveryMan like you to stop the man that happened to me? Where was the #NotEveryMan like you to stop what happened to my mother? My aunt? My grandmother? My little cousins? The point is this shit will not stop until our ministry isn’t aimed at women, but other men.
You’ll get nowhere complaining at the people our socialization wounds.
I could go on and on, but I am pretty sure all this is just “misogyny” and I need to read certain theory and I need to surround myself with feminists who are thirsty to oppress men at all costs.
Feminists are not “hungry to oppress men at all costs”. You have no idea what feminism is, and its clear you’re getting all your information about it from right-wing chuds. I recommend reading more books and actually engaging with feminist theory, rather than watching anti-feminist / manosphere troll channels. There are plenty of resources we can recommend, that you should read before going on these rants.
Tread carefully, because we will not hesitate to issue temp ban for misogyny. Follow Mao’s advice here: No investigation, no right to speak.
So am I; and I’ve even heard some of the same shit. Difference is, I have enough discernment to know that any “feminist” telling a male CSA survivor that they should never have spoken out, or that it "wasn’t rape because you liked it’ (that’s the variant I’ve personally heard, multiple times) is probably a radfem or a trad wearing kayfabe; who shouldn’t be looked to as an example of the broader movement.
Further, I refuse to let it poison my views of the movement as a whole because there is still a mass disparity between what WE have to go through and what THEY have to go through, and what THEY go through is infinitely worse. Discernment and empathy go a lot farther than “but what about MY feelings”.
oh sorry I am so misogynistic, I will shut up
Honestly, at this point, I do think you’re a misogynist on some level, because this isn’t the first time this discussion’s been had with you, and I’m not the first one to do it. Frankly, considering you’ve done nothing but intensify your debate perversion about this since getting banned from Lemmygrad over it, I find it deeply fucking ironic that you talk about ‘critiquing oneself’. Pot, kettle, hello!
I don’t think you can even parse how much it disgusts me that you’d quote Mao to justify the patriarchal policing of wounds to your own ego.
there are laws, but all of them favour women over men.
Wildly false on its face, and you know it. You’re universalizing something that you know damn well has historically not been so and currently is not so. Where can this come from but unexamined misogyny?
Removed by mod
I think you’re pissed off at bourgeois feminist theory and bourgeois race theory, which are deserving of criticism, especially since they’re used as class weapons against non-whites both within the imperial core and the periphery. But you don’t get to use these bourgeois theories as an excuse to dismiss the proletarian ones, or as an excuse for bigotry. For example, just because a liberal Critical Race Theory was created and promoted to subsume/recuperate the original socialist theory doesn’t mean we can ignore the original.
Unfortunately ProleWiki doesn’t have much in this area as yet.
Much more often than not, “not all men” is used as a cudgel, similarly to how “not all whites” is, and the same goes for “men are oppressed” / “whites are oppressed.” How bad they are in comparison I don’t care to argue; it’s enough to say that they’re also bad. They are not false statements in themselves (as proletarian theories show), but they’re usually either misapplied or applied in bad faith.
Outside of gender topics, I personally have very much appreciated your contributions to the site in my comparatively short time here so far. Thank you. We have desperately few Global South voices here, never mind leftist ones, so that is a treasure, and I want this to be a welcoming space for such voices, so we can be exposed to more & more of them.
But this must also be a welcoming space for women. Because we’re intentionally not belligerent toward intellectually honest, good-faith liberals, creeping bourgeoisified feminism & CRT will sometimes surface contradictions between these two goals, which in my mind shouldn’t otherwise contradict. I don’t mean to imply that I’m an expert in this area, but I don’t think you’re equipped to resolve those contradictions, and I’m not sure you’re trying to. Whether or not they come from manosphere/MGTOW brainworms, your takes sound like they are, and we can’t have that.
Then where is your ministry towards those who are perpetrators, who have created the conditions you complain about?
Considering misandry tends to not leave men in SA’d and left in a chalk outline where misogyny very frequently does, I imagine that’s the answer to your question. It’s genuinely mindboggling to me that every time discussions or een metadiscussions of misogyny see you pull up on your #NotAllMen shit; right down to getting your lemmygrad account banned over it.
If we’re to accept your #NotAllMen spiel, then where was the #NotEveryMan like you to stop the man that happened to me? Where was the #NotEveryMan like you to stop what happened to my mother? My aunt? My grandmother? My little cousins? The point is this shit will not stop until our ministry isn’t aimed at women, but other men.
You’ll get nowhere complaining at the people our socialization wounds.
Removed by mod
Feminists are not “hungry to oppress men at all costs”. You have no idea what feminism is, and its clear you’re getting all your information about it from right-wing chuds. I recommend reading more books and actually engaging with feminist theory, rather than watching anti-feminist / manosphere troll channels. There are plenty of resources we can recommend, that you should read before going on these rants.
Tread carefully, because we will not hesitate to issue temp ban for misogyny. Follow Mao’s advice here: No investigation, no right to speak.
spoiler
So am I; and I’ve even heard some of the same shit. Difference is, I have enough discernment to know that any “feminist” telling a male CSA survivor that they should never have spoken out, or that it "wasn’t rape because you liked it’ (that’s the variant I’ve personally heard, multiple times) is probably a radfem or a trad wearing kayfabe; who shouldn’t be looked to as an example of the broader movement.
Further, I refuse to let it poison my views of the movement as a whole because there is still a mass disparity between what WE have to go through and what THEY have to go through, and what THEY go through is infinitely worse. Discernment and empathy go a lot farther than “but what about MY feelings”.
Honestly, at this point, I do think you’re a misogynist on some level, because this isn’t the first time this discussion’s been had with you, and I’m not the first one to do it. Frankly, considering you’ve done nothing but intensify your debate perversion about this since getting banned from Lemmygrad over it, I find it deeply fucking ironic that you talk about ‘critiquing oneself’. Pot, kettle, hello!
I don’t think you can even parse how much it disgusts me that you’d quote Mao to justify the patriarchal policing of wounds to your own ego.
Edit to add:
Wildly false on its face, and you know it. You’re universalizing something that you know damn well has historically not been so and currently is not so. Where can this come from but unexamined misogyny?