Does ironic misandry trivialize the suffering of domestic abuse victims?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Does ironic misandry trivialize the suffering of domestic abuse victims?

«‹›6 »

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

TheWhiteNightmare posted:

What do you think they'd have to say about that

I don't know anything about cars, at all, and even I know that the stereotype is that guys in Miatas aren't picking up women.
It's a gay car, you see.

Or a car for ladies depending who you ask.

Stereotypes tend to use gays and ladies pretty interchangeably.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 17:51

Asiina: Apr 26, 2011; No going back; Grimey Drawer

Look at all the comments mocking Obama for crying about the murder of children.

I'll give you a preview, it's a lot about equating him to a woman.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 18:28

unlimited shrimp: Aug 30, 2008

I like that the "Does ironic misandry trivialize the suffering of domestic abuse victims?" thread is unironically debating the existence of toxic masculinity.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 18:43

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

Mmann posted:

I don't know anything about cars, at all, and even I know that the stereotype is that guys in Miatas aren't picking up women.
It's a gay car, you see.

Or a car for ladies depending who you ask.

Stereotypes tend to use gays and ladies pretty interchangeably.

I didn't ask what the stereotype was I asked what AI would say

# ? Mar 7, 2016 18:51

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

the trump tutelage posted:

I like that the "Does ironic misandry trivialize the suffering of domestic abuse victims?" thread is unironically debating the existence of toxic masculinity.

toxic masculinity is far more real and far more damaging than women posting "lol i want to murder all the men #MurderDicks" on twitter

# ? Mar 7, 2016 18:54

Mmann: Dec 1, 2007; Kyoon Was Right
12/21/12

TheWhiteNightmare posted:

I didn't ask what the stereotype was I asked what AI would say

I think they would probably say it was a stupid thing to make a thread about, probably.
I just figured the post was using AI as an offhand example of 'car culture as masculinity' in general.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 18:56

unlimited shrimp: Aug 30, 2008

Mmann posted:

I think they would probably say it was a stupid thing to make a thread about, probably.
I just figured the post was using AI as an offhand example of 'car culture as masculinity' in general.

Yeah I'm just being pedantic over a lazy post, I thought it was funny to bring up AI specifically because they're precisely the wrong example to use. The Miata is hugely popular in that community and they've put in a lot of effort fighting that stereotype.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 19:11

menino: Jul 27, 2006; Pon De Floor

I still don't get how acknowledging the downsides of patriarchy for men has to imply that women are not hugely adversely affected too.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 19:17

wiregrind: Jun 26, 2013

menino posted:

I still don't get how acknowledging the downsides of patriarchy for men has to imply that women are not hugely adversely affected too.

my theory of why it's actively avoided: maybe improving men's disadvantages would be creating "more patriarchy" as in helping the male gender. Men must lose privilege, or in the situations where they already have it bad, intentionally stay that way.
Maybe I'm too direct by writing this, I should word it more covertly and ambiguously dog-whistle-ish to fit the misandrist standard.

wiregrind fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Mar 7, 2016

# ? Mar 7, 2016 20:29

unlimited shrimp: Aug 30, 2008

menino posted:

I still don't get how acknowledging the downsides of patriarchy for men has to imply that women are not hugely adversely affected too.

Noted authority on gender issues Geek Feminism Wiki suggests it's because it's too-often used to silence or derail feminists talking about womens issues by centering the dialog on men. Similar to how #NotAllMen or #AllLivesMatter were attempts to defocus their respective debates.

Which to me sounds more like an issue of when or how it's brought up, not that there is anything necessarily wrong with the assertion that the patriarchy hurts men too.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 21:04

Brutal Garcon: Nov 2, 2014

For the sake of sanity, I feel there are two things we should appreciate before continuing this discussion. Feel free to call me wrong or stupid for either of them.

1. Gender norms, and how they are propagated and enforced vary from subculture to subculture (be it national, regional, socio-economic or whatever else). For instance, the arguments about what are permissable man-emotions, who will make fun of someone for breaking the "rules" and how will probably not have any answers that match the experiences of all the posters in this thread.

2. Dividing people up into teams and then adding up some sort of score is unhelpful, as is treating the groupings you have produced as homogenous. The men some are claiming are enforcing these attitudes and the men suffering the most from them are likely mostly not the same people. (I am also very doubtful about claims that it's only or mostly men, it doesn't match my experiences, but see point 1)

Also Homer-av-guy, is your shift key broken or something? It's very distracting.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 21:12

nigga crab pollock: Mar 26, 2010; by Lowtax

Mmann posted:

I don't know anything about cars, at all, and even I know that the stereotype is that guys in Miatas aren't picking up women.
It's a gay car, you see.

Or a car for ladies depending who you ask.

Stereotypes tend to use gays and ladies pretty interchangeably.

funny thing with the miata its actually a fantastic car so lots of people buy em, but thAT specific subset that CANNOT drive cars that are unmanly go out of their way to make their miata look aggressive. lower it, stance it, put racing stripes on it, and most importantly of all - you gotta get rid of the cute eyes. the cutesy eyes have got to go.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 21:47

RareAcumen: Dec 28, 2012

nigga crab pollock posted:

funny thing with the miata its actually a fantastic car so lots of people buy em, but thAT specific subset that CANNOT drive cars that are unmanly go out of their way to make their miata look aggressive. lower it, stance it, put racing stripes on it, and most importantly of all - you gotta get rid of the cute eyes. the cutesy eyes have got to go.

# ? Mar 7, 2016 21:55

wiregrind: Jun 26, 2013

wiregrind posted:

yeah, I mean those complaining should just suck it up already...

it's fine to complain about random people's internet opinions but it's pretty, weird, to build from that into rampant and violent misandry

i mean there are lots of not-internet, irl examples of entrenched misogyny but when it comes time to talk about how women damage men it's like "jezebel! cosmo! i got yelled at on tumblr once!"

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:15

menino: Jul 27, 2006; Pon De Floor

Talmonis posted:

I'd not claim violent misandry in my experience, ever. But the dismissal and trivializing of any emotional concerns I or other men have is a common occurance. Especially here, if you end up on the wrong end of whatever topic. "Your Fee-Fees" are often mocked and derided.

Don't forget yourself and those like you as well.

i'm not dismissing anyone emotions any more than is necessary to point out that you can't build coherent observations of society or politics based entirely on an emotional reaction to someone else's opinions, which is something i point out all the time. i picked up this red text av because i was trying to throw water on a bunch of goons calling for blood during the bundy standoff

# ? Mar 7, 2016 22:30

wiregrind: Jun 26, 2013

wiregrind posted:

my theory of why it's actively avoided: maybe improving men's disadvantages would be creating "more patriarchy" as in helping the male gender. Men must lose privilege, or in the situations where they already have it bad, intentionally stay that way.
Maybe I'm too direct by writing this, I should word it more covertly and ambiguously dog-whistle-ish to fit the misandrist standard.

It seems like a little more thought would tend to lead someone to the conclusion that helping men recognize the emotional harm they're doing to each other and the harm done to them would likewise result in men being more sensitive to the harm they're doing to women.

# ? Mar 8, 2016 00:23

menino: Jul 27, 2006; Pon De Floor

I think the standard liberal thinking on gender is a lot more prone to flaws and exemptions than race or class.

"White people have it better than black people" is with very few exceptions a pretty good way to look at how race works in the US, as is "Rich people have it better than poor people". These are clear cases of vertical inequity.

The statement "men have it better than women" however has a lot of exceptions and is mostly a concern of horizontal inequity. Yes all things being equal a man of the same social standing has it better, but all things are not equal in many cases. The most powerful group in this country is white men, but white women are a close second.

It is the ideology most prone to being co opted by capitalism. Still means that it's necessary and that women of all classes and races need specific relief in the form of changing norms and policies though.

# ? Mar 8, 2016 00:26

Railtus: Apr 8, 2011; daz nu bi unseren tagen
selch vreude niemer werden mac
der man ze den ziten pflac

menino posted:

I still don't get how acknowledging the downsides of patriarchy for men has to imply that women are not hugely adversely affected too.

Because patriarchy gets viewed as a system built for men's benefit at the expense of women, with �patriarchy hurts men too� being nothing more than a glib dismissal used to deflect any criticism of that view as �not my responsibility�. If patriarchy hurts men to a significant degree, then the system is not built for men's benefit (or at least not men as a whole or as a group or as a class), and therefore the concept of patriarchy as a system built for men's benefit at the expense of women starts to fall apart. And they cannot see themselves as good people for fighting that system if they start doubting whether there really is that system.

Ergo we must live in a patriarchy that benefits men at the expense of women, and the downsides for men must be minor and trivial and not worth talking about. If talking about those downsides is unavoidable, such in this thread, such talking must be limited to constant reminders that men are to blame for any downsides.

# ? Mar 8, 2016 02:25

WhiskeyJuvenile: Feb 15, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo

The Real Foogla posted:

I literally enjoy looking at my car, from different angles or under different lighting. I enjoy how it handles, the way it shifts with precision, and how swift it accelerates. I like that it has tons of room, thanks to being a station wagon, and cheap to drive since it's a diesel.

I don't give a gently caress what the car says about me, I drive the car for its "carness". And I assume many men feel the same way. It just sucks that this gets reduced to "drives a 3 series BMW, because he needs a manly man car" or whatever. I couldn't drive a "non-manly" car with the same attributes, because those don't exist.

wagons are for moms

WhiskeyJuvenile fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Mar 8, 2016

# ? Mar 8, 2016 02:37

WhiskeyJuvenile: Feb 15, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo

Mmann posted:

I don't know anything about cars, at all, and even I know that the stereotype is that guys in Miatas aren't picking up women.
It's a gay car, you see.

Or a car for ladies depending who you ask.

Stereotypes tend to use gays and ladies pretty interchangeably.

I'd drive it

# ? Mar 8, 2016 02:38

Luxury Communism: Aug 22, 2015; by Lowtax

the trump tutelage posted:

#KillAllMen doesn't leave much room for nuance. If your ironic edginess requires a parenthetical that explains you're not actually talking about the entire group but rather a specific subset of the group then maybe you're the problem, not the person misinterpreting what you're saying.

#KillAllMen is not equivalent to #GasTheKikes lmao

# ? Mar 8, 2016 02:47

menino: Jul 27, 2006; Pon De Floor

LOL learn to take a joke neckbeards

# ? Mar 8, 2016 02:52

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

Railtus posted:

Ergo we must live in a patriarchy that benefits men at the expense of women, and the downsides for men must be minor and trivial and not worth talking about. If talking about those downsides is unavoidable, such in this thread, such talking must be limited to constant reminders that men are to blame for any downsides.

is women's freedom of speech to say #KillAllMen really a downside for men? it hardly seems like a downside, at the end of the day i am not dead because of internet words

i mean gamergate was only so bad because it was backed up with actual targeted death threats towards women, if it was just general background grousing about women as most nerd forums tend to be then nobody would have cared

# ? Mar 8, 2016 03:45

unlimited shrimp: Aug 30, 2008

Luxury Communism posted:

#KillAllMen is not equivalent to #GasTheKikes lmao

Like I said, if your ironic edginess requires a parenthetical that explains you're not actually talking about the entire group but rather a specific subset of the group then maybe you're the problem, not the person misinterpreting what you're saying. It doesn't matter if #KillAllMen doesn't have the same weight as an antisemitic remark, it still normalizes the idea of collective punishment along in-group/out-group lines. It's humorous only because of the power imbalance and the knowledge that the threat is impotent. Shrink that power imbalance (never mind reversing it) and the jokes get a lot more uncomfortable. Nobody would be laughing if black people started tweeting #DieSpicScum.

It's a broken way of thinking.

# ? Mar 8, 2016 04:23

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

the trump tutelage posted:

Like I said, if your ironic edginess requires a parenthetical that explains you're not actually talking about the entire group but rather a specific subset of the group then maybe you're the problem, not the person misinterpreting what you're saying. It doesn't matter if #KillAllMen doesn't have the same weight as an antisemitic remark, it still normalizes the idea of collective punishment along in-group/out-group lines. It's humorous only because of the power imbalance and the knowledge that the threat is impotent. Shrink that power imbalance (never mind reversing it) and the jokes get a lot more uncomfortable. Nobody would be laughing if black people started tweeting #DieSpicScum.

It's a broken way of thinking.

you're right about this, #KillAllMen would probably carry more weight as a threat if there had ever at any point in history been a sustained program of violence and oppression targeted at men in general

# ? Mar 8, 2016 04:27

unlimited shrimp: Aug 30, 2008

I don't think anyone actually feels physically threatened by #KillAllMen, but that's not really the point in general or the point of this thread.

e.
Cattle ranchers start tweeting #ButcherAllVegans. It's a real gut-buster.

unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Mar 8, 2016

# ? Mar 8, 2016 04:33