• PunnyName@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    “Political” is not white, or male, or straight, or Christian.

    “Woke” = accepting of events and / or circumstances that have had in-/direct influence on their lives, likely preventing then from reaching parity.

    So you’re pretty much spot-on.

    • too_high_for_this@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      Hey so I’m a straight white male (not by choice) and I’d like to stop being lumped in with assholes.

      Like, lots of assholes are straight white males, I get it. But we’re overwhelmingly decent dudes.

      Also, dude, “male” is not the preferred nomenclature anymore

      • beetus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Why do you think they are talking about you? Projecting insecurities? That’s what your reply seems like

        And yes, “male” is still the preferred way to refer to… people who identify as men.

        • too_high_for_this@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          That was a joke, Susan

          And no, “men” is actually the preferred term for people who identify as men. Male and female refer to biological sex characteristics. Man and woman are gender identities.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        “NoT aLl Men”

        If you don’t do the bad things then they’re not talking about you. But they say “men” because it’s almost always men.

        Example: men are rapists. => Not all men are rapists, but the vast majority of rapists are men.

        So you don’t need to feel sensitive about this, unless you somehow think you’re guilty of whatever they’re talking about.

        • stonedemoman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          “Some men”. Fixed. Just add one word. The fact that you’re so fixated on gaslighting people into thinking that generalizations are only okay when it targets the correct sex is very telling of your ignorance.

          • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            No one says “all men”. You’re implying it.

            Dogs bark. Not all, of course. But no one says some.

            • stonedemoman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              “Men” is a classification set that includes all individuals of a sex. You’re wrong categorically and philosophically, and the more you suggest otherwise the more you just look like a bigot.

              • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                “Men” is a classification set that includes all individuals of a sex.

                Gender, actually. Men/man is a gender, not a sex. Male is a sex. If we’re going to be pedantic, let’s be properly pedantic about all of it I guess.

                all individuals

                I can’t help if you see the world in strict absolutes. Most people don’t do that. Most people understand that you can refer to a category without meaning literally every thing in that category 100% of the time.

                Like when you said: “Other people have kind of touched on this already, but clients prioritize connections based on…” You clearly didn’t mean ALL other people. Not every human on earth, surely. You meant some other people, but that those people were ‘other’. Likewise, when people say men are the problem, they’re talking about toxic/harmful men. Not all men, but they’re all men.

                Also, your post history is … interesting. You are quite argumentative. There’s an old saying, “If everything around you smells like shit, check your shoes.” Maybe, just maybe, you’re not surrounded by jerks.

                • stonedemoman@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Gender, actually. Men/man is a gender, not a sex. Male is a sex.

                  Ackchyually, both of these are true. If you agree that male is a sex, and “men” includes all males, then I think that means we’re all squared up. Just because you’re prejudiced doesn’t mean you have to be obtuse as well.

                  I can’t help if you see the world in strict absolutes. Most people don’t do that. Most people understand that you can refer to a category without meaning literally every thing in that category 100% of the time.

                  You can refer to a category in this way. It’s easy. You add a quantitative adjective. Everybody knows this from Kindergarten. I can’t help if you’re so bigoted that you object to the effort of adding one. single. clarifying word to distinguish correctly between all and some. IDGAF about whatever normative assertion you’re pretending to be true, that doesn’t make it correct.

                  Like when you said: “Other people have kind of touched on this already, but clients prioritize connections based on…” You clearly didn’t mean ALL other people. Not every human on earth, surely. You meant some other people, but that those people were ‘other’. Likewise, when people say men are the problem, they’re talking about toxic/harmful men. Not all men, but they’re all men.

                  “Other” doesn’t classify all. It means additional. This is such a ridiculously asinine tangent designed to detract from the simple fact that you want to perpetuate bigotry.

                  Also, your post history is … interesting. You are quite argumentative. There’s an old saying, “If everything around you smells like shit, check your shoes.” Maybe, just maybe, you’re not surrounded by jerks.

                  This is my favorite part of dealing with people that know they’re incorrect but bury their head in the sand anyways. It’s outrageously funny. You can’t support your statements with any coherent logic? Quick, press the “whatever the hell irrelevant ad hominem I can think of at the time” button! You’re stuck in this foolish position now of arguing that I’m argumentative because you are incapable of making the effort of adding a single, 4-letter word as to not generalize people.

                  And it’s nice that you think push back on misandry is pedantic and all, but I’m gonna keep telling it how it is. I’m definitely sensing an unusual waft of shit at the moment.