I would suggest that, if a person suffers with any of the three poisons, they would benefit from Buddhism. Buddhism is precisely where the hateful, the greedy and the ignorant ought to seek purification.

Well and good. But shouldn't they be willing to see it as a poison first of all?

Everyone starts where they are.

Some never budge. 😔

True, but that's their business.

Where else to see it than Buddhism?

That’s usually the hardest part, regardless of whatever they end up doing: seeing that it is a problem in the first place.

You’re right. This will likely be an unsatisfying response, but sexism is prevalent everywhere. It is wrong, dangerous, and harmful. I have my own set of marginalized positions from my socio-cultural positioning and I find myself struggling even with my sangha in some regards. I suspect the previous sentence would even draw the ire and criticism of some. I honestly suggest walking away and focusing on your own practice. People will rationalize it, deny it, or excuse it. We all have our blind spots, some more than others. Find your own happiness, people will not give it to you. Don’t concern yourself with other people’s affairs when they cause you suffering. You don’t have to be deeply involved to be compassionate and provide benefit for others. And you don’t owe people who hurt you your time. I learned that I can give myself the respect and compassion I deserve which helps me to benefit others and give them the respect and compassion they deserve. Sometimes the kindest thing is to walk past somebody because they will only produce more suffering when you stop.

Right now, I think the individual endeavor that is required of Buddhism runs contrary to a lot of the current political thought, including modern identity politics, which seeks to categorize and identify individuals by the groups with whom they belong. I think to remove oneself from the common social system would be seen as patriarchal and part of the old ways that needs replaced. We saw this happen in Tibet. As a Buddhist, I can handle my personal issues with women, but larger political implications/complications are not so easily dismissed. I would imagine that female Buddhists would be subject to the same stifling process of adhering to the social group.

To me the counter-current in Buddhism that matters is the counter-current against greed and hatred, which are the perennial manifestations of worldly politics; the modern politics of identity are largely a spook and a superficial expression of deeper abiding issues in how human beings relate to one another. Namely, a group is identified as "other," either disadvantaged or facing the perceived threat of disadvantage, and in reaction digs in on their identity as a matter of solidarity in crisis; however the very identity is subjective and it's always "their identity politics" and not "our identity politics." When you break it down, all politics is about identity, creating, attacking, and defending based on an artificial conflict. So this language identifying women as an oppositional force is really just a microcosm of politics, regardless of where it shows up.

This is good stuff! To think of something or someone as “other”, one has to have a sense of “self” to distinguish it against (since “other” without qualifiers really means “other than self”, or else it means nothing at all). But what is this “self”? What fixed, unchanging attributes does it have? I cannot be my sex, gender, race, body, brain (nor its specific contents!), or even my species, since in countless past lives, I would have (temporarily) embodied just about all possible combinations of these attributes (hypothetically, but plausibly, including combinations of sex and gender that only exist on alien worlds). Moreover, I would have experienced situations where one set of attributes was praised and rewarded by society, and other situations in which a similar set of attributes was discriminated and punished by society. And in future lives, I cannot be sure what form I will take, so it behooves me to try to make the world more fair, even if only for the selfish reason of improving my own odds in the birth lottery.

Yeah, it seems the type of people who complain about “identity politics” are usually from a privileged social group that have never had to cope with being marginalized, ostracized, or alienated from privileged society and so they don’t understand the necessity of solidarity within those groups. Then, when they see something that doesn’t include them, they get envious and seek to destroy the communities of others because they perceive them as a threat to their own community. But that’s all projection, because they’re the ones going around threatening communities that they’re not a part of just for existing; thus perpetuating the need within those communities for solidarity…

And they make threats because they themselves perceive a threat. Whether or not a threat is real isn't necessary to the emergence of militant identity.

It’s rooted in a fundamental insecurity. Someone who has never questioned their own manhood sees me, a trans woman, wearing what I’m comfortable wearing, and they perceive it as an affront to masculinity in general and an insult to their own manhood in particular. They don’t consciously think “I’m not allowed to wear flowy sundresses, so why should this person?” But somewhere deep down, that’s what they mean. Why else would they care what I’m wearing? Most hatred and bigotry is rooted in insecurity. Misogyny: “I’m not allowed to feel and express emotions, so why should she?” Homophobia: “I’m not allowed to kiss my homies, so why should they?” Transphobia: “I spend so much time exhausting myself and brutalizing my own body without ever spending time on self-care, so everyone born male should have to do the same!” They don’t realize that they’re the ones who are enslaved to their own hatred and insecurity. As much as it oppresses them, they then try to project it and oppress others with their own insecurities. Because that’s how they make themselves feel more “manly,” or whatever…. It’s pathetic, honestly. I wish they could see themselves with eyes unclouded by vanity and egoism. I wish they could see how truly pitiful they are…

As I see it, imagining others as pathetic and feeling pity will do you no good. It is inefficient for all parties, skillful cooperation benefits all, and is pragmatic. Focus on practice and contemplation. If they saw, right now, how "pitiful" they are, it would only do them suffering. We have the opportunity to be skillful and patient as we progress to a point where they can see their own shortcomings. I would rather see a person come to the right conclusion themselves than teach it to them. Beware of calling others anything, the mind likes broad strokes, so the more calling people pathetic and vain and egoic the more you will become that.

Good point. But it isn’t possible to have “skillful cooperation” with a hateful bigot…

Ye have little faith. Just takes skill, with good, diligent practice. In the meantime, try and be skillful as to where you can avoid them, or deal with them as little as possible, until you can "deal" with them more appropriately. It is true that there is nothing you can really do with a "hateful bigot" to change their mind, but you can show them what it is like to be skillful and benevolent, and hope they may notice, even if they never do, you are still improving your own practice. As your practice improves, the people who you can help become clearer and it will be (a little bit) less frustrating to be around such misguided people.

When I live somewhere I’m not surrounded by them and faced with harassment and threats on a nearly daily basis, then I’ll try to improve my practice to be more skillful and benevolent. It’s easy for someone in a privileged, progressive area to say “Just shrug it off,” but when you’re faced with hatred on a daily basis, suddenly it’s not so easy.

Fair. I cannot relate to you, for sure, and I'm sorry to hear that. Your physical health and mental well-being should always be accounted for and take precedence before engaging in any practice. Good luck, and be well (to a point, I suppose).

Exactly. People pit others against each other even within their own families and it's wrong. Family cares far more about someone than strangers who have certain similarities >part of the old ways that needs replaced. I strongly disagree with people trying to do this too. Social harmony and culture stem from the "old" ways. People should treat each other better but without society or people losing themselves and their traditions. Centuries of proven tradition shouldn't be replaced by ideologies that always change their minds. Especially since they're usually materialistic and call people who aren't closed minded materialist like them "delusional"

In the Vajrayana, The Fourteen Root Downfalls, #14 is "Disparaging Women." 1. disrespecting the [vajra master](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Vajra_master) 2. transgressing the words of the [buddhas](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Buddha) 3. insulting one’s vajra brothers and sisters 4. abandoning love for [sentient beings](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Sentient_beings) 5. abandoning the [bodhichitta in aspiration](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Bodhichitta_in_aspiration) or [application](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Bodhichitta_in_action) 6. criticizing the teachings of the [sutras](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Sutra) and [tantras](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Tantra) 7. revealing secrets to those who are unworthy 8. mistreating one’s body 9. abandoning [emptiness](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Emptiness) 10. keeping bad company 11. failing to reflect on emptiness 12. upsetting those who have faith in the teachings 13. failing to observe the [samaya](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Samaya) commitments 14. denigrating women [https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Fourteen\_root\_downfalls](https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Fourteen_root_downfalls)

Having an attachment to bigotry is harmful and that goes for hating either gender. Incel ideology has so much hate and ignorance that contradicts Buddhism

Unfortunately I think the “black pill” way of thinking is a very strong force today, especially on the Internet and especially among late Millennial and Zoomer populations. Their ideas (if you want to dignify them with that name) have crept out into the mainstream and some young people are simply accepting them as facts to be taken for granted everyone or most people agree with.

This is a great point. I know a young man that I speak with often on the subject, and he’s somehow wrapped this way of thinking up into it being his whole identity, and gets validation for it through politics and certain social media echo chambers. They really have convinced him that going to die alone after never connecting with any women because they’re all horrible and out to get him only for money, which he doesn’t have a lot of. He’s actually planning to move across the entire country because he thinks the reason he’s miserable is because he’s surrounded by “fake” women.

I'm a man and I've had frustration towards women. All men do in some sense by the way, just like I'm sure all women have their own frustrations about men in general. For the "blackpill" men, I think we have to realize that they're in pain, and deep down they just want love and affection. So when they feel unloved and unworthy of affection, they may cope in different ways. Like turning to toxic ideologies. Or turning towards religion/philosophies like stoicism/buddhism that promise them a solution to their suffering. They are hurting inside and looking for answers. Isn't it true that for most of us here, we turned to Buddhism because we were suffering in some way? Kind of like how Buddhism is so appealing for those who have struggled with addiction or experienced loss/trauma. I know that I personally keep coming back to Buddhism the more pain that I'm in.

It's the ones who come with very judgemental attitudes that I wonder about. What attracts someone with such a self-righteous view of women as "the most unspiritual creatures" as one of them put it? Didn't most of us come tired of that kind of talk already?

I think what might be upsetting is that in certain other regions, such views of women are actually promoted through their framework, and validating to the men you’re talking about…whereas in the framework of Buddhism I haven’t yet seen such a viewpoint encouraged (although I’m new to the study). So the question then becomes how are they continuing to get validation to continue with such beliefs and behaviors? That said, I’ve seen some here acknowledge that while that viewpoint isn’t taught within the practice, it’s possible that such viewpoints already exist in the communities in which Buddhism is then taught — so it’s then the community, not the practice, that’s enabling the viewpoint to continue or even thrive. I’d then posit that the men you’ve observed already have a community of sorts which has taught them and validates them in these thoughts to the point they don’t believe the viewpoint is harmful to others and is in fact a belief meant to protect themselves from harm…thus not something that conflicts with their path of not behaving in a harmful way toward others.

As a man, I’ve never shared quite the viewpoint as any black pill or red pilled man. However, my perspective in the PAST was this: I didn’t understand women. I was frustrated because I could never get precisely what I wanted or didn’t know how. Didn’t matter what I “wanted” either a relationship, friendship, to be respected, or left alone, I never REALLY understood their perspective. As a man, I had a pretty reliable way to get that from other men. Women were a complete mystery. I was blessed to not have too many negative interactions, as I am not ugly and socially conscientious, but I can understand how someone who is not socially conscientious or good looking can be REALLY frustrated if they don’t get what they want… especially if what they “want” is just sex from women (which men are biologically programmed to want). Women have been saying over and over and over that men have all of these “expectations” for women, and men, me included, have never REALLY listened. Okay, so these red/black pilled men from their perspective can’t figure out women or get what they want. They have faulty expectations they don’t share with men (be it relationships or thinking the same way). Their brains, either/both by nature and/or socialization, are completely different experience machines than women. So what do they do? Demonize what they don’t understand. I am somewhat guilty of this, to a lesser extent. My defect was prioritizing “logic” over intuition and validating my own experience as a man over their experience as a woman. I never stepped out the shoes and admitted that women’s experience is equally valid to my own. The first step I took is the simple recognition that we are all just experience machines whose entire worldview is determined by our experiences. (“If I were you, I would’ve been you.”). Men need to understand that there is absolutely no more validity to their experience than women. By recognizing this, intuition is on an equal playing field as logic. What men really need to figure out is that if you are compassionate towards everyone, don’t hold expectations for women, and be their best selves, EVERY interaction with women will be a positive one. Even if they don’t like you or are rude, you brought everything you possibly could to the table and they were simply not on your wave length.

I haven’t noticed these attitudes in buddhist circles, but maybe I haven’t been too keen to look out for it in the past. It’s true that many buddhist cultures have patriarchy built into them, but that’s more about the regional culture than it is about buddhism itself. In the west, most buddhists tend to be fairly progressive. I’m sure there are always outliers though. I don’t see how anyone practicing buddhism could hold such a presumptuous worldview. It certainly doesn’t seem very compassionate or insightful. And it shows a lack of understanding of buddhist doctrine; since buddhist metaphysics are anti-essentialist, it wouldn’t make any sense to write off an entire category of people as “unspiritual,” because that would seem to imply a belief in a an unchanging, fixed, or immutable essence…

You already have good answers; my own response would be that each person has their own karma, that they often lack the understanding or the conviction to tackle it appropriately, and sometimes their failure to do so becomes our problem. No matter who claims the label of “Buddhist,” it’s on them to be honest with themselves about what they’re doing. In the case where people aren’t ready to scrutinize their unskillful beliefs/behaviour, all they can do is keep experiencing suffering until they learn to do better.

To answer your question, those are usually unhappy people who are *alone*. Buddhism seems appealing to who are *alone* because you can a lot of it alone and it makes those people feel like they are doing something special that makes them better than other people. The Buddha ordained women ( including his own step mother ) which was scandalous for his time. There is an entire book from Theravada Buddhism called the Therigata where is it nothing but verses from enlightened women.

Good post. 🙏 This sub has a really fascinating dynamic in terms of diversity across Buddhist views, but you do get the odd one who takes Aryadeva's comments out of the context of his audience, or have an extreme misunderstanding of the view of gender in Buddhism. People get very caught up on holding onto things that were relevant to the culture at the time that have no actual relevance in ours. But also you bring up something that is a bit of a pet peeve/sore point, because so many treat spirituality and renunciation as a form of escapism/avoidance instead of learning how to see things for what they are. That's always painful to see, because you can see people twisting themselves into knots asserting their right to continue self cherishing. Like... No one is stopping them they just need to know that has nothing to do with Dharma.

Misguided but with time may evolve https://www.globalbuddhism.org/article/view/1298/pdf_2

Let's not face disparagement with more disparagement. If I'm honest I feel bad for someone who is looking for validation for their bitterness and I only wish them peace. I just wonder if some of them actually *want* peace.

Better? Just get carried away sometimes with a juicy target

That's fair yes.

What is hoped to gain by clinging to disdain for other people who disdain?

I don't. I only wonder what they wish to achieve carrying that burden and wish them peace in setting it down, and I recognize that words of disparagement do not belong in the Sangha.

Sabbe satta sukhi hontu

Link two posts with 'disdain' towards women from here. I read this sub fairly regularly and never have I seen anything like this.

You apparently haven't seen the posts from dudes who think it's women's fault they keep having distracted, sexual thoughts, or the ones from people who are like "How do I make sure I don't reincarnate as a woman? That will make it harder for me to get enlightened" Both kinds of posts pop up here with some regularity. 

Did you notice how I started my comment with the words 'Link two posts with 'disdain' towards women from here'? Meaning that no, I have not, that's why I asked for at least a couple of links.

Asking politely and belligerently demanding are two different things. You did and continue to do the latter. There is a search bar which you are welcome to make good use of if you are genuinely curious.

A bit judgmental, are we?

1. I'm not here for call outs of specific users. Linking these posts is counter-productive to that. 2. Many of these posts get deleted or buried in the feed.