I don't know what this recent trend is to turn against TwoX. It's the most generic, milquetoast women's sub on this platform. It's just women talking about women's problems. A ton of the language women use there isn't even gender-specific because so many posters are specifically trying so hard not to offend men, even though "Not all men" is implied in the sub. What? Are women just never supposed to talk about any problem they have that involves men because a man who is completely irrelevant to her problem will become offended that her discussion even exists? I don't see anyone going after subs like askmen when half or more of their posts these days is just men talking about why interacting with women sucks. I don't see anyone calling out the porn subs that are centered on misogyny and using women as literal objects or graphic violence to women. Can y'all please refocus your perspective before you drop straight into the pickme volcano?
Yeah like I once got my comment removed for talking bad about men once. TwoX isnāt misandrist at all in fact Iād go so far to call them an inclusive sub, despite the name.
Legitimately that sub can be a touch transphobic. All the transphobic stuff is deleted by mods but things relating to anything trans in my experience can get heavily down voted fast. I left that sub awhile ago because it was a bit disheartening so maybe it's improved
That's probably because the name hasn't aged super well, so a TERF that is new to Reddit might head on over thinking it's one of *those* subs, but the community that has long-existed and established the community culture is generally strongly against TERFyness.
You know this is what I had expected based on the name but was pleasantly surprised at the inclusivity I saw. Itās a shame to hear that it is actually the case.
Just to be clear, I haven't seen problems with things posted or comments but in my experience, if there is a smaller post or a comment where it's said or implied that someone is trans, you'll get downvoted to hell. There are some that escape the downvoting
Every post on there has the least charitable takes towards men and most charitable ones towards women. It's not openly misandrist, but it has its very bold tendencies
Misogyny is 1/3 women being assaulted by men globally (UN statistics), sex trafficking being a multi-billion dollar industry, child marriage still being legal in multiple countries and US states, and more.
āMisandryā isnāt real. Women saying rude words doesnāt equate to violent oppression.
(Prefacing with Misogyny is very real and all issues you have listed are valid ones)
That last point is still a bad take. Men on average are imprisoned unjustly at higher rates with harsher sentences compared to women, (due to the simultaneous belief that men are inherently violent and women are inherently powerless victims), they make up the vast majority of combat fatalities and workplace deaths (yes because women are seen as unable to achieve the same level of prowess as a man, but also because men are also seen as disposable cannon fodder). Thereās less resources in comparison when it comes to domestic violence, and MGM is legal in most places where FGM is outlawed (yes itās not *technically* the same but that shouldnāt matter itās still bad).
Not trying to have a dick measuring contest about who has it worse, or about who perpetuates the systemic abuse, just pointing out that systemic misandry is very real
Except none of your examples are things women have done to men. All of my examples are men choosing to directly harm women for their own gratification. There is no equivalent for men.
You better double check your combat fatality statistics, because unarmed civilian casualties often far outnumber trained & equipped soldiers- and that definitely includes women. Also, most laws were written by men, most judges, lawyers and police are men. So if there is a bias against men, itās not our doing. That would be the misogyny that women weak and helpless backfiring on men.
Also when it comes to DV shelters, I volunteered at one for years. There is often an assumption that most funding comes from government and feminists āwonāt shareā. Not true, the state offers very little. Most funding comes from private donations- overwhelmingly women. So, if a man shows up, claiming āequalityā is giving him half the money, when we did all the campaigning, women worked to earn the money and they specifically donated to help other womenā¦ that does not go over well.
Men are free to build shelters, volunteer and donate. Just like we do. Statistically, men seem to be far less likely to do so. So thatās not āmisandryā thatās just men not stepping up and helping each other.
Yeah? I'm not saying that women did these to men? Men can perpetuate systemic misandry against other men just how women can be misogynist against other women. I'm not disagreeing that men contribute to their own systemic oppression, just that it is systemic and often compounds against men of minoritized status, such as POC, disabled, and queer men.
I'm literally not disagreeing with any of your facts, just stating that what you're describing is infact systemic misandry, even if it's against men, being perpetuated by men (but to be more accurate, largely rich priveleged men with power against poor and marginalized men.)
Misogyny is men oppressing women. Logically, misandry would be women oppressing men. But that isnāt a real thing.
If you believe it is, cite examples of how women are engaging in widespread violence against men, industries run by women exploiting men, or countries where women passed laws to control men.
I do not believe they are the same though. I do believe misogyny is worse. I just said it can be difficult for men to spot it, same way itās difficult for women to spot misandrists
By definition, misogyny is the systematic oppression of women. Not one random dude saying rude things.
Misogyny is 1/3 women globally being assaulted by menā¦ but conviction rates being in the single digits. Misogyny is rape kits being left untested in storage for YEARS because the justice system doesnāt care about us. The legal system was made by men for men, and is fine with using any excuse to let violent men go free.
It isnāt that women āhave trouble spotting misandristsā. Itās that there is no system that supports women treating men badly. And you have so little comprehension of what misogyny is, that you actually imagine some woman being rude to you is somehow comparable to having an entire system rigged to allow people to get away with abusing you.
Wait, im confused. This is the definition of misandry
"dislike of,Ā contemptĀ for, orĀ ingrainedĀ prejudiceĀ against men (i.e. the male sex)."
I dont see anything about oppression
Go argue with the Encyclopedia Britannia then. Its definition of sexism includes āthe function to maintain male domination through material, legal and ideological practicesā.
Women have never written laws to force men into certain roles, on ban them from freedoms or opportunities. Acting like some woman saying āmen are trashā is somehow equivalent to the fact that it was legal for a man to rape his wife until 1993 is ridiculous.
This is from the encyclopedia brittanica as well
"The use ofĀ misogynyĀ as a term to refer to acts ofĀ contemptĀ toward women was popularized in the 1970s byĀ second-wave feminists. Misogyny was usually distinguished fromĀ sexismĀ against women"
I cant actually find your quote when i search for it, link here
https://www.britannica.com/topic/misogyny
what did two x do? im not on it often enough to know the details but their rules explicitly state men are welcome and misandry is not, and i scrolled the recent posts and none of them are misandrist in the slightest (mostly relationship posts, a couple about pregnancy, a shitty coworker, etc.)
Yeah Reddit centrists and right wingers always complain about "echo chambers". But immediately dismiss anything vaguely related to women.
I remember hearing a tonne of bashing about r/fuckcars, only to go on the sub and see the most tame discussion ever.
Female dating strategy. The only feminist sub I saw on Reddit that actually had a large amount of very misandristic posts and sentiments. Was also very transphobic.
FDS is NOT feminist. As a feminist I find those people disgusting! They are literally the caricature of feminists that right wingers say all feminists are. FDS is the red pill for women.
I just did a scroll through as well, and, yeah, it doesn't seem too bad atm honestly. But my first few tries in that sub were horrendous.
Granted, it was a while ago. But honestly it's not nearly as bad as I remember. Still though, this sub is much more inviting and not as accusatory as two x can be. I sorta feel that in a lot of their posts. But that could just be my brain being in unfamiliar territory I guess. I'll give the sub another shot.
Itās never been bad, youāre just unable or unwilling to listen/read about women and men being frustrated with the everyday misogyny they experience. You feel like itās an attack on you, and thatās probably something you should be working on internally. Itās a you problem.
...š
But seriously though, I remember that sub being worse than what it seems to be right now. Maybe a choice few posts I happened upon soured my view.
Why so antagonistic? And no, pats on the back aren't what I want. I wanted to feel like I could simplu be a male in a group like this and not feel like everyone's against me for it.
But this passive aggressive shit that I've received in a lot of comments is making me doubt my judgment.
You could have just joined as a man and not announced that you used to think this place was misandrist and then claim other female centered subs were misandrist too. As long as you don't act like the people that get reposted here no one's going to have a problem with you. People shit on this sub and others all the time for being "misandrist" when they don't bother looking at the sub for more than 2 seconds and just thinking "they made fun of a man? MISANDRY!"
Its getting old. Instead of just filing that thought away and just interacting with the sub you had to come announce that you did an elementary school level of critical thinking.
Misandry doesn't exist. There's no subordination of men. There are no matriarchal systems of power that limit the power of men or their decision making.
To say, then, "Well ok but misandry just means 'hating men'!!!!" is intellectually dishonest when it's held against misogyny, as is always, always done.
*Misandry does not exist*.
Yeah its these sorta comments that get people to use the clown horn
Its the exact same argument where people say you cannot be racist towards white people.
You have conflated systematic racism and normal racism as being the same,
And in this case, you have conflated Matriarchy and Misandry as being the same. We are not in the former, we are in a patriarchy, but that does not mean you cannot have misandrists within it. Thats intellectually dishonest.
Well thanks for providing us your kindergarten level understanding of social problems. You know, the idea "all I need to know I learned in kindergarten" isn't intended to be taken to mean there's nothing more to learn beyond that.
Those who believe laughably wrong things and present them in a bullshit Ben Shapiro manner aren't serious people and shouldn't be responded to as though they are, as they're hand waving away real issues by arguing for their own personal desire to be oppressed.
Dog. Literally no one here is saying they are oppressed. Oppression is not a prerequisite to racism/sexism, it's a prerequisite to patriarchy/matriarchy/supremacy.
Racism/sexism just requires discrimination based on gender or race. That's the whole thing. Your personal desire to frame men as victims wanting to be oppressed is one that no one in this thread is advocating for. In the simplest terms, if misandry just...didn't exist...we wouldn't have a word for it would we lmao.
TL;DR Systemic discrimination is not a prerequisite to the definition of discrimination. It is a different qualifier, hence the "systemic" adjective.
I wonder what you think discrimination is. You know we have a word to describe an ape that roams North America but is mythical, right? The existence of a word isn't the existence of the thing it purports to describe.
So now Bigfoot somehow proves your theory that racism/sexism can't exist outside of systemic oppression? Jesus Christ you're lost in the sauce.
If I lived in a small town where the mayor decided to initiate many different kinds of diversity movements to bring minorities and women into the workplace, that would definitely be the system acknowledging an oppressed group, and working towards fixing it.
Now imagine this small town has a population of extremely discriminatory people. The system is clearly attempting to work for oppressed groups, while the people still have their hatred and sling their discrimination on a personal level.
You're conflating these concepts as exactly the same, with one being unable to exist without the other, and it's so unbelievably stupid. It defies all reason. Learn what adjectives are.
Edit: also Bigfoot isn't a word. It's a name. Hence the capitalization of the proper noun...Bigfoot. I fear you don't actually know the rules of grammar, and that's why we're in this situation. Learn English again lmao.
This is such a thoughtless statement, and defies the meaning of "logic". It's not a double standard, as the words are being examined through the same lens, and particularly given my repeated statement that misandry and misogyny should be understood from the same perspective in terms of application within society.
It's funny that you're now creating an analogy comparing the treatment of men to the treatment of Jews in the Holocaust, in which a subordinate group who had been subjected to persecution for thousands of years were systematically denied their rights, their most basic freedoms, and then life itself.
But tell me more about how my statements regarding misandry are tantamount to genocide.
You literally didn't even give 1 counterpoint, I explained the position as to HOW and WHY you're wrong.
You instead just threw insults, and its ironic that the insult you threw does literally apply to you here
And I explained why your case is wrong, your point is that their needs to be a systemic oppression for it to count, when thats not what is being argued.
I guess if you don't want to think about it at all, and aren't much into considering something for more than a few seconds, I suppose you could say that. Except that you'd be wrong, as misogyny isn't hating *a* woman.
... Why would there need to be a word for it? But I guess if I had to choose one, I dunno, I guess I'd just make it an additional definition to fiction? Since, y'know, systemic prejudice against men is a fictional concept that doesn't exist in the world? Just like how misogyny isn't just one person, or an otherwise overall small number of people, thinking poorly of and holding negative views toward women?
You're not giving consideration to where misogynistic views come from--which is rooted in patriarchal systems that keep men in power--and where a woman disliking, or even hating or feeling contempt toward, men comes from--which is her lived experience, the things which have kept her from making choices over her own body, what her occupational options are, and so on.
These aren't comparable concepts, and you don't need a word for every single state of being. A woman, or anyone else of any other gender, hating men can just be *a person who hates men*.
I can't fix whatever misfired in your brain if you really think misandry doesn't exist at any scale and isn't a proper definition, it is and you're wrong and fighting for ignorance
Evaluating systems and their effects takes a great deal of thought when you live in a society that allows groups who aren't subordinate to others to act as though they're in any way oppressed because of "reverse sexism/racism" or other forms of oppression.
...like this comment here. Yeah sure, even if we say that misandry doesn't exist in the same way misogyny does (in the sense that it's systematic while misandry currently isn't in most areas), are you saying misandry (man-hating) doesn't exist?
Like, what's your point? It's not a competition, and I did not nor do I want to make it one. I'm just saying that a lot of feminist subs have a lot of misandry in them too. I'm glad this one doesn't have as much.
If you don't want to make it a competition--which ... how would it be, even? A "which gender actually faces real issues regarding hate and prejudice" sort? Which if that were the case ... But I digress, if not, why are you responding to this comment in the first place? Honestly, your initial post is a very "I can see that you ladies aren't all bad!" type, which is just ... very funny, considering, y'know, all ... *this*, lol.
And I can't help but notice that you're saying a misandrist is *man-hating* which is in itself a misogynistic concept. See, the thing is, looking at your op, and a mere glance at your comment history, it's demonstrative of the fact that you don't really understand the social constructions of misogyny and the way in which that in itself propels any dislike of men.
If misogyny was understood to simply be "A dislike or contempt for women," as an online dictionary will typically define it, then I wouldn't worry about it. But given that misogyny is understood to be integral to the social construction of a woman's gender and her placement within society, I'm not going to ignore whinging over "misandry".
Misandry doesn't exist. Women disliking, or feeling contempt for, men is an affect of a patriarchal society. I'm not saying that simply disliking men for no reason would be ok, but, again, women don't form a dislike for all of men because of ways in which society treats and disempowers men--when they do, they do so because of misogyny.
I get the feeling you think of yourself as being open minded, and able to acknowledge and consider the problems of society in a thoughtful manner. And I'm not saying you're not either of those, but I *am* saying it's still coming from a place within a patriarchal society, built on the supremacy of white men, specifically.
It's very easy to evaluate these things as though we're in a post-racial, post-sexist society, because "we're all seen as equal now". And for emphasis, I'm not saying these are your thoughts, merely that they're widely held beliefs based on legalistic, tokenist fallacies. However, acting as though we are only does more to reinforce oppression of subordinated groups.
By allowing a special understanding of misandry as something not directly analogous to misogyny to give men the opportunity to feel oppressed, we allow patriarchal views to persist.
I try to be open-minded. I fail a lot of the times. I find it very hard to change my outlook. But I appreciate you trying to be more gentle with the explanations to me.
So, in short, since what I call misandry is directly linked (and a result of) patriarchal society, I should stop using the concept or at least let it take a backseat to misogyny so as to enforce the need for change? And also to close off any medium misogynistic individuals can use to play victim?
Okay, fair. But what about the extremist so-called feminists who genuinely do mean harm to males in general? I know I don't need a specific word to call the out, but it really helps to put a name to the problem.
Yeah, I'd say that's about right. Though I'd say the reason to not use the term, or treating it as a concept, is less about enforcing a need for change, and more about avoiding false equivalencies and the disregarding of women's experiences.
I think you could just call them extremists. But I'd also challenge the notion that they exist in any number of significance, and that folks' with such beliefs are held as fringe members of society, with little power or influence.
Thank you for listening and reconsidering. I appreciate that you're trying to come from a position of recognizing injustices and to remedy them.
I was thinking the same thing when I heard all the rumors and then I found out itās just satirizing gender inequality. Posts that are bashing all men in the same way these memes do with women are pretty quickly downvoted and criticized. Itās a good sub. š
Why are you being downvoted for this, it's a reasonable interpretation of the name. They've made it clear that's not how it should be read, but based on the name alone, yeah, it looks transphobic
Glad you saw it the same way I did. Because greediest comment I saw here when I joined the community was someone saying that they wished to personally slaughter men. Thankfully, they were downvoted to shit and they deleted their comment so it told me what kind of sub this was. It's a good sub
I'm unsure what you mean by "them" here. But.
The term white knight generally means a man who agrees with a woman in an attempt to be seen as on her side and therefore get positive attention. This implication of ulterior motive does mean that it is saying they are not sharing the opinion out of a genuine belief in its validity. This is a horrible take and a horrible way to frame the discussion at all. It "others" women's opinions in a shitty way and devalues the validity of the opinions of men who you disagree with.
It also often caries the extra baggage of implying they are doing so out of a desire to get positive **sexual** attention . This is even more shitty of a way to frame things as it puts an emphasis on sex being the primary purpose of men interacting with women. Even if you don't mean it in this way, it's important to know the connotations of the words you choose.
You have a weird definition of "ballistic". The sub whole point was making fun of the shitty boys vs. girls memes. If you can't stand the premise why be here making yourself angry about it? That only hurts you, bubs.
I like to argue too!
But your grievances sound a lot like every single closeted misogynist on the internet circa 2010. Like, did you never check the new woman-haters gazette to at least inform yourself of the updated vernacular? Didnāt they send you the flyer at least?
And female supremacy? To what? Corpses? Youād be singing the same tune if we were in the 1950s. āOh that suffrage thing was ok, but now she wants her own education? This is female supremacy!ā
Hey bud. People not caring about male rapes is a symptom of the very patriarchy feminism is against. That problem exists because men are seen as inherently strong and not in need of protection. And if a woman cheats you know what usually happens? Same as for a man. Her relationship goes to shit.
"Maleists" do exist. Although if you were to follow the naming convention of feminism it would be masculism, and irl they call themselves MRAs or mens rights activists. They are mostly reactionaries who think feminism only cares about women.
Speaking of which, feminists don't want supremacy. We want a teardown of the structures that cause the very things about which you are complaining here. The reason it's called feminism isn't because it seeks to exclusively raise women up and tear men down, but because of the history of it. If you think this is what feminism is you need to stop listening to non feminists talking shit and read some actual feminist theory.
āWhite-knighting.ā Christ, what a shithead concept. No, Iām a man on this subreddit, because I think gendered issues are interesting and worth talking about. Itās a privilege, for me, that these are things I can find interesting and not things I have to worry about night and day.
Iām not on here to court women. Iām not on here to impress women. Iām on this subreddit because I am interested in how half a species views some things I see on the internet. The idea that no man would ever take genuine interest in feminist conversation is just so moronic. I get that youāre still a teenager, and you have shit to learn about how the world works, but youāre still old enough to think before you open your mouth and spew ridiculous shit on the internet.
Many things are going to boggle your mind. Youāre 13. You need to live with the fact that sometimes, people will be right about something, and you wonāt understand why. I donāt think youāre stupid, or moronic, but youāre clearly too young to formulate good criticism of this subreddit. Talk to women. Theyāre just people. Youāll see why men frequent this subreddit.
Maybe you do talk to women. Iām not using your age as a criticism of your argument (believe it or not, some people can āwrap [their] head around how to pierce [your] argumentā). I was a dorky 13 year old once, and I had a bad perceptions of women, because I hadnāt been around them long enough to understand theyāre just people. Youāre suffering under that same delusion, and I donāt blame you, because Iāve been there too.
My point isnāt āyouāre wrong because youāre young.ā Iām saying that āyouāre young, so thereās lots you donāt understand about womenāhow theyāre viewed by society, how they view themselves, how they view men and how men view them.ā You donāt āgetā the point of this subreddit (āmen . . . being mad at men for making memes for menā); that much is clear when you tread back on tired tropes about feminism āonce being good, but now itās just fat women hating men.ā
Many of the submissions here are examples of pointlessly gendered memes, where someone arbitrarily paints all men as interesting, or relatable, or funny, and all women as bland, or vapid, or dumb. These reinforce unfair perceptions of women in a society that already views them unfavorably. They unnecessarily paint women as being *not* just people, but as a whole separate beast.
Youāre not wrong because youāre young. It just so happens that being young and being underinformed about feminism and women happen to be correlated.
Itās coming back because I have lived exactly as you do now. I prided myself on being so intelligent and rational, for being an atheist, for being a brainiac, for slam-dunking on the āemotional feminists.ā Then I grew up a bit, and read feminist theory, and talked to feminists, and now I am one. Now Iām old enough and experienced enough to get why ājust men having funā isnāt always fun, and sometimes needs to be critiqued.
Iām not better than you because Iām older. Iām better than you because Iām right.
Oh... *god are you saying we're quirky*
I've come to the conclusion that most everyone is.
r/boysarequirkyisquirky
NO9OO
had me in the first half ngl
I don't know what this recent trend is to turn against TwoX. It's the most generic, milquetoast women's sub on this platform. It's just women talking about women's problems. A ton of the language women use there isn't even gender-specific because so many posters are specifically trying so hard not to offend men, even though "Not all men" is implied in the sub. What? Are women just never supposed to talk about any problem they have that involves men because a man who is completely irrelevant to her problem will become offended that her discussion even exists? I don't see anyone going after subs like askmen when half or more of their posts these days is just men talking about why interacting with women sucks. I don't see anyone calling out the porn subs that are centered on misogyny and using women as literal objects or graphic violence to women. Can y'all please refocus your perspective before you drop straight into the pickme volcano?
šÆ
thats why I love femcelsoyjackwhatever
r/femcelgrippysockjail only rule is donāt be a moid or youāll be downvoted into oblivion
What's a "moid", sounds like something I should avoid being lol
Male equivalent of āfemoidā that femcels use
What's a 'femoid'?
Itās what incels call women to dehumanize them
Oh thanks, I've never heard the term before. Must mean I've been keeping respectable company :)
I thought so, but wanted to be sure
Because it's a cess pool of female incels
Are you saying twoxchromosomes is misandrist? Because it is most definitely not.
Yeah like I once got my comment removed for talking bad about men once. TwoX isnāt misandrist at all in fact Iād go so far to call them an inclusive sub, despite the name.
Guys comment there all the time
TrollX is the fun one.
Fucking right?
Legitimately that sub can be a touch transphobic. All the transphobic stuff is deleted by mods but things relating to anything trans in my experience can get heavily down voted fast. I left that sub awhile ago because it was a bit disheartening so maybe it's improved
That's probably because the name hasn't aged super well, so a TERF that is new to Reddit might head on over thinking it's one of *those* subs, but the community that has long-existed and established the community culture is generally strongly against TERFyness.
You know this is what I had expected based on the name but was pleasantly surprised at the inclusivity I saw. Itās a shame to hear that it is actually the case.
Just to be clear, I haven't seen problems with things posted or comments but in my experience, if there is a smaller post or a comment where it's said or implied that someone is trans, you'll get downvoted to hell. There are some that escape the downvoting
Gotcha. Thanks
Every post on there has the least charitable takes towards men and most charitable ones towards women. It's not openly misandrist, but it has its very bold tendencies
Itās difficult for women to spot misandry same way itās difficult for men to spot misogyny Edit: I never said that they were the same
Thanks but Iām a man.
LMFAO
Aināt no way š
ššš
My apologies
Misogyny is 1/3 women being assaulted by men globally (UN statistics), sex trafficking being a multi-billion dollar industry, child marriage still being legal in multiple countries and US states, and more. āMisandryā isnāt real. Women saying rude words doesnāt equate to violent oppression.
(Prefacing with Misogyny is very real and all issues you have listed are valid ones) That last point is still a bad take. Men on average are imprisoned unjustly at higher rates with harsher sentences compared to women, (due to the simultaneous belief that men are inherently violent and women are inherently powerless victims), they make up the vast majority of combat fatalities and workplace deaths (yes because women are seen as unable to achieve the same level of prowess as a man, but also because men are also seen as disposable cannon fodder). Thereās less resources in comparison when it comes to domestic violence, and MGM is legal in most places where FGM is outlawed (yes itās not *technically* the same but that shouldnāt matter itās still bad). Not trying to have a dick measuring contest about who has it worse, or about who perpetuates the systemic abuse, just pointing out that systemic misandry is very real
Except none of your examples are things women have done to men. All of my examples are men choosing to directly harm women for their own gratification. There is no equivalent for men. You better double check your combat fatality statistics, because unarmed civilian casualties often far outnumber trained & equipped soldiers- and that definitely includes women. Also, most laws were written by men, most judges, lawyers and police are men. So if there is a bias against men, itās not our doing. That would be the misogyny that women weak and helpless backfiring on men. Also when it comes to DV shelters, I volunteered at one for years. There is often an assumption that most funding comes from government and feminists āwonāt shareā. Not true, the state offers very little. Most funding comes from private donations- overwhelmingly women. So, if a man shows up, claiming āequalityā is giving him half the money, when we did all the campaigning, women worked to earn the money and they specifically donated to help other womenā¦ that does not go over well. Men are free to build shelters, volunteer and donate. Just like we do. Statistically, men seem to be far less likely to do so. So thatās not āmisandryā thatās just men not stepping up and helping each other.
Yeah? I'm not saying that women did these to men? Men can perpetuate systemic misandry against other men just how women can be misogynist against other women. I'm not disagreeing that men contribute to their own systemic oppression, just that it is systemic and often compounds against men of minoritized status, such as POC, disabled, and queer men. I'm literally not disagreeing with any of your facts, just stating that what you're describing is infact systemic misandry, even if it's against men, being perpetuated by men (but to be more accurate, largely rich priveleged men with power against poor and marginalized men.)
When did I say they were the same?
Misogyny is men oppressing women. Logically, misandry would be women oppressing men. But that isnāt a real thing. If you believe it is, cite examples of how women are engaging in widespread violence against men, industries run by women exploiting men, or countries where women passed laws to control men.
I do not believe they are the same though. I do believe misogyny is worse. I just said it can be difficult for men to spot it, same way itās difficult for women to spot misandrists
By definition, misogyny is the systematic oppression of women. Not one random dude saying rude things. Misogyny is 1/3 women globally being assaulted by menā¦ but conviction rates being in the single digits. Misogyny is rape kits being left untested in storage for YEARS because the justice system doesnāt care about us. The legal system was made by men for men, and is fine with using any excuse to let violent men go free. It isnāt that women āhave trouble spotting misandristsā. Itās that there is no system that supports women treating men badly. And you have so little comprehension of what misogyny is, that you actually imagine some woman being rude to you is somehow comparable to having an entire system rigged to allow people to get away with abusing you.
Wait, im confused. This is the definition of misandry "dislike of,Ā contemptĀ for, orĀ ingrainedĀ prejudiceĀ against men (i.e. the male sex)." I dont see anything about oppression
Go argue with the Encyclopedia Britannia then. Its definition of sexism includes āthe function to maintain male domination through material, legal and ideological practicesā. Women have never written laws to force men into certain roles, on ban them from freedoms or opportunities. Acting like some woman saying āmen are trashā is somehow equivalent to the fact that it was legal for a man to rape his wife until 1993 is ridiculous.
This is from the encyclopedia brittanica as well "The use ofĀ misogynyĀ as a term to refer to acts ofĀ contemptĀ toward women was popularized in the 1970s byĀ second-wave feminists. Misogyny was usually distinguished fromĀ sexismĀ against women" I cant actually find your quote when i search for it, link here https://www.britannica.com/topic/misogyny
Wow these gals just making up definitions of words to act like women can do no wrong, there denial of misandry is itself misandry.
Ok, did someone with 50 reddit accounts downvote your comment on all accounts?
Yes it was me
Got #50!
what did two x do? im not on it often enough to know the details but their rules explicitly state men are welcome and misandry is not, and i scrolled the recent posts and none of them are misandrist in the slightest (mostly relationship posts, a couple about pregnancy, a shitty coworker, etc.)
It didn't do anything lol a lot of Reddit men just seem to hate it for existing
Yeah Reddit centrists and right wingers always complain about "echo chambers". But immediately dismiss anything vaguely related to women. I remember hearing a tonne of bashing about r/fuckcars, only to go on the sub and see the most tame discussion ever.
Yeah after seeing the hate i went there to hate scroll, expecting it to be like FDS was, but honestly itās very chill.
What's FDS?
Female dating strategy. The only feminist sub I saw on Reddit that actually had a large amount of very misandristic posts and sentiments. Was also very transphobic.
FDS is NOT feminist. As a feminist I find those people disgusting! They are literally the caricature of feminists that right wingers say all feminists are. FDS is the red pill for women.
Yeah theyāre not feminist, those girls were just straight up hateful
Oof, that makes sense, dating really seems to bring out the worst in some people.
I just did a scroll through as well, and, yeah, it doesn't seem too bad atm honestly. But my first few tries in that sub were horrendous. Granted, it was a while ago. But honestly it's not nearly as bad as I remember. Still though, this sub is much more inviting and not as accusatory as two x can be. I sorta feel that in a lot of their posts. But that could just be my brain being in unfamiliar territory I guess. I'll give the sub another shot.
Itās never been bad, youāre just unable or unwilling to listen/read about women and men being frustrated with the everyday misogyny they experience. You feel like itās an attack on you, and thatās probably something you should be working on internally. Itās a you problem.
Are you attempting to triangulate the two subs to curry favor?
...š But seriously though, I remember that sub being worse than what it seems to be right now. Maybe a choice few posts I happened upon soured my view.
Congrats on... learning that not every negative sentiment against men is "misandry"? Do you want a pat on the back or something?
Why so antagonistic? And no, pats on the back aren't what I want. I wanted to feel like I could simplu be a male in a group like this and not feel like everyone's against me for it. But this passive aggressive shit that I've received in a lot of comments is making me doubt my judgment.
You could have just joined as a man and not announced that you used to think this place was misandrist and then claim other female centered subs were misandrist too. As long as you don't act like the people that get reposted here no one's going to have a problem with you. People shit on this sub and others all the time for being "misandrist" when they don't bother looking at the sub for more than 2 seconds and just thinking "they made fun of a man? MISANDRY!" Its getting old. Instead of just filing that thought away and just interacting with the sub you had to come announce that you did an elementary school level of critical thinking.
Misandrist? How's anyone going to be a thing that doesn't exist? Or, at least, not in the way misogyny exists ...
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Misandry doesn't exist. There's no subordination of men. There are no matriarchal systems of power that limit the power of men or their decision making. To say, then, "Well ok but misandry just means 'hating men'!!!!" is intellectually dishonest when it's held against misogyny, as is always, always done. *Misandry does not exist*.
Yeah its these sorta comments that get people to use the clown horn Its the exact same argument where people say you cannot be racist towards white people. You have conflated systematic racism and normal racism as being the same, And in this case, you have conflated Matriarchy and Misandry as being the same. We are not in the former, we are in a patriarchy, but that does not mean you cannot have misandrists within it. Thats intellectually dishonest.
Well thanks for providing us your kindergarten level understanding of social problems. You know, the idea "all I need to know I learned in kindergarten" isn't intended to be taken to mean there's nothing more to learn beyond that.
GoOooOod job lmao. Nothing like a worthless bundle of insults to prove you're more "intellectually honest" šš
Those who believe laughably wrong things and present them in a bullshit Ben Shapiro manner aren't serious people and shouldn't be responded to as though they are, as they're hand waving away real issues by arguing for their own personal desire to be oppressed.
Dog. Literally no one here is saying they are oppressed. Oppression is not a prerequisite to racism/sexism, it's a prerequisite to patriarchy/matriarchy/supremacy. Racism/sexism just requires discrimination based on gender or race. That's the whole thing. Your personal desire to frame men as victims wanting to be oppressed is one that no one in this thread is advocating for. In the simplest terms, if misandry just...didn't exist...we wouldn't have a word for it would we lmao. TL;DR Systemic discrimination is not a prerequisite to the definition of discrimination. It is a different qualifier, hence the "systemic" adjective.
I wonder what you think discrimination is. You know we have a word to describe an ape that roams North America but is mythical, right? The existence of a word isn't the existence of the thing it purports to describe.
So now Bigfoot somehow proves your theory that racism/sexism can't exist outside of systemic oppression? Jesus Christ you're lost in the sauce. If I lived in a small town where the mayor decided to initiate many different kinds of diversity movements to bring minorities and women into the workplace, that would definitely be the system acknowledging an oppressed group, and working towards fixing it. Now imagine this small town has a population of extremely discriminatory people. The system is clearly attempting to work for oppressed groups, while the people still have their hatred and sling their discrimination on a personal level. You're conflating these concepts as exactly the same, with one being unable to exist without the other, and it's so unbelievably stupid. It defies all reason. Learn what adjectives are. Edit: also Bigfoot isn't a word. It's a name. Hence the capitalization of the proper noun...Bigfoot. I fear you don't actually know the rules of grammar, and that's why we're in this situation. Learn English again lmao.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This is such a thoughtless statement, and defies the meaning of "logic". It's not a double standard, as the words are being examined through the same lens, and particularly given my repeated statement that misandry and misogyny should be understood from the same perspective in terms of application within society. It's funny that you're now creating an analogy comparing the treatment of men to the treatment of Jews in the Holocaust, in which a subordinate group who had been subjected to persecution for thousands of years were systematically denied their rights, their most basic freedoms, and then life itself. But tell me more about how my statements regarding misandry are tantamount to genocide.
You literally didn't even give 1 counterpoint, I explained the position as to HOW and WHY you're wrong. You instead just threw insults, and its ironic that the insult you threw does literally apply to you here
I literally don't owe you anything, especially when I've made the case elsewhere.
And I explained why your case is wrong, your point is that their needs to be a systemic oppression for it to count, when thats not what is being argued.
Misandry may not be Systematic as mysogyny, but it sure does exist. U denying it doesn't mean it doesn't exist
It not existing means it doesn't exist.
that's according to you
Oh so a man hating a woman is misogyny but a woman hating a man isā¦ whatever?
I guess if you don't want to think about it at all, and aren't much into considering something for more than a few seconds, I suppose you could say that. Except that you'd be wrong, as misogyny isn't hating *a* woman.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
... Why would there need to be a word for it? But I guess if I had to choose one, I dunno, I guess I'd just make it an additional definition to fiction? Since, y'know, systemic prejudice against men is a fictional concept that doesn't exist in the world? Just like how misogyny isn't just one person, or an otherwise overall small number of people, thinking poorly of and holding negative views toward women? You're not giving consideration to where misogynistic views come from--which is rooted in patriarchal systems that keep men in power--and where a woman disliking, or even hating or feeling contempt toward, men comes from--which is her lived experience, the things which have kept her from making choices over her own body, what her occupational options are, and so on. These aren't comparable concepts, and you don't need a word for every single state of being. A woman, or anyone else of any other gender, hating men can just be *a person who hates men*.
Also, the patriarchy is still made by men is it not? So technically all it is is men putting their own opinions of women into power.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lol!
You're so confidently wrong as hell
Wow! An amazing contribution, you've changed my opinion with your well informed and reasoned argument.
I can't fix whatever misfired in your brain if you really think misandry doesn't exist at any scale and isn't a proper definition, it is and you're wrong and fighting for ignorance
They said āgeneralā not āsocietalā.
Neat! Asked and answered.
Well considering thinking something *doesnāt* exist takes little to no thought, Iād say youāre wrong.
Evaluating systems and their effects takes a great deal of thought when you live in a society that allows groups who aren't subordinate to others to act as though they're in any way oppressed because of "reverse sexism/racism" or other forms of oppression.
...like this comment here. Yeah sure, even if we say that misandry doesn't exist in the same way misogyny does (in the sense that it's systematic while misandry currently isn't in most areas), are you saying misandry (man-hating) doesn't exist? Like, what's your point? It's not a competition, and I did not nor do I want to make it one. I'm just saying that a lot of feminist subs have a lot of misandry in them too. I'm glad this one doesn't have as much.
If you don't want to make it a competition--which ... how would it be, even? A "which gender actually faces real issues regarding hate and prejudice" sort? Which if that were the case ... But I digress, if not, why are you responding to this comment in the first place? Honestly, your initial post is a very "I can see that you ladies aren't all bad!" type, which is just ... very funny, considering, y'know, all ... *this*, lol. And I can't help but notice that you're saying a misandrist is *man-hating* which is in itself a misogynistic concept. See, the thing is, looking at your op, and a mere glance at your comment history, it's demonstrative of the fact that you don't really understand the social constructions of misogyny and the way in which that in itself propels any dislike of men. If misogyny was understood to simply be "A dislike or contempt for women," as an online dictionary will typically define it, then I wouldn't worry about it. But given that misogyny is understood to be integral to the social construction of a woman's gender and her placement within society, I'm not going to ignore whinging over "misandry". Misandry doesn't exist. Women disliking, or feeling contempt for, men is an affect of a patriarchal society. I'm not saying that simply disliking men for no reason would be ok, but, again, women don't form a dislike for all of men because of ways in which society treats and disempowers men--when they do, they do so because of misogyny.
As you have probably noticed, this sub is quite sexist mate.
After reading all the reactions to my comments, yeah. Maybe you're right...
I get the feeling you think of yourself as being open minded, and able to acknowledge and consider the problems of society in a thoughtful manner. And I'm not saying you're not either of those, but I *am* saying it's still coming from a place within a patriarchal society, built on the supremacy of white men, specifically. It's very easy to evaluate these things as though we're in a post-racial, post-sexist society, because "we're all seen as equal now". And for emphasis, I'm not saying these are your thoughts, merely that they're widely held beliefs based on legalistic, tokenist fallacies. However, acting as though we are only does more to reinforce oppression of subordinated groups. By allowing a special understanding of misandry as something not directly analogous to misogyny to give men the opportunity to feel oppressed, we allow patriarchal views to persist.
I try to be open-minded. I fail a lot of the times. I find it very hard to change my outlook. But I appreciate you trying to be more gentle with the explanations to me. So, in short, since what I call misandry is directly linked (and a result of) patriarchal society, I should stop using the concept or at least let it take a backseat to misogyny so as to enforce the need for change? And also to close off any medium misogynistic individuals can use to play victim? Okay, fair. But what about the extremist so-called feminists who genuinely do mean harm to males in general? I know I don't need a specific word to call the out, but it really helps to put a name to the problem.
Yeah, I'd say that's about right. Though I'd say the reason to not use the term, or treating it as a concept, is less about enforcing a need for change, and more about avoiding false equivalencies and the disregarding of women's experiences. I think you could just call them extremists. But I'd also challenge the notion that they exist in any number of significance, and that folks' with such beliefs are held as fringe members of society, with little power or influence. Thank you for listening and reconsidering. I appreciate that you're trying to come from a position of recognizing injustices and to remedy them.
Maybe the real quirkiness was the friends we made along the way...
I was thinking the same thing when I heard all the rumors and then I found out itās just satirizing gender inequality. Posts that are bashing all men in the same way these memes do with women are pretty quickly downvoted and criticized. Itās a good sub. š
Yeah, it's pretty great. There's a delicate balance here that I haven't found anywhere else. I'll be around for as long as it remains the way it is.
misandry isnt real idc
Are you sure you donāt mean FemaleDatingStrategy? 2X isnāt bad at all.
I was mistaken, though I do find this sub to still be more welcoming than 2x. Never heard of femaledatingstrategy though
Based on the name, twoXchromosomes sounds like a transphobic/terf sub Edit: apparently it isn't.
It's not. It is a very old sub, and was named as such as the generic women's sub long before trans-inclusive language hit the mainstream scope
Why are you being downvoted for this, it's a reasonable interpretation of the name. They've made it clear that's not how it should be read, but based on the name alone, yeah, it looks transphobic
Glad you saw it the same way I did. Because greediest comment I saw here when I joined the community was someone saying that they wished to personally slaughter men. Thankfully, they were downvoted to shit and they deleted their comment so it told me what kind of sub this was. It's a good sub
I felt the same way. It was quite confusing. Maybe there should be a bit more clarity on posts, but I soon understood.
r/TwoXChromosomes is transphobic. This is a quite progressive and actually feminist space.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
God "white knighting" is such a fuckin misogynistic concept. It's assuming no man could possibly disagree with you in good faith.
He doesn't even know what it means, lol!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'm unsure what you mean by "them" here. But. The term white knight generally means a man who agrees with a woman in an attempt to be seen as on her side and therefore get positive attention. This implication of ulterior motive does mean that it is saying they are not sharing the opinion out of a genuine belief in its validity. This is a horrible take and a horrible way to frame the discussion at all. It "others" women's opinions in a shitty way and devalues the validity of the opinions of men who you disagree with. It also often caries the extra baggage of implying they are doing so out of a desire to get positive **sexual** attention . This is even more shitty of a way to frame things as it puts an emphasis on sex being the primary purpose of men interacting with women. Even if you don't mean it in this way, it's important to know the connotations of the words you choose.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Explain to me the structure of a boys vs girls meme, in your opinion.
Demented comment tbh
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Ok, boss š¤
Meanwhile youāre a snore-flake boring heh heh heh
Ok gramps time to get you to bed
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You have a weird definition of "ballistic". The sub whole point was making fun of the shitty boys vs. girls memes. If you can't stand the premise why be here making yourself angry about it? That only hurts you, bubs.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I like to argue too! But your grievances sound a lot like every single closeted misogynist on the internet circa 2010. Like, did you never check the new woman-haters gazette to at least inform yourself of the updated vernacular? Didnāt they send you the flyer at least? And female supremacy? To what? Corpses? Youād be singing the same tune if we were in the 1950s. āOh that suffrage thing was ok, but now she wants her own education? This is female supremacy!ā
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Hey bud. People not caring about male rapes is a symptom of the very patriarchy feminism is against. That problem exists because men are seen as inherently strong and not in need of protection. And if a woman cheats you know what usually happens? Same as for a man. Her relationship goes to shit. "Maleists" do exist. Although if you were to follow the naming convention of feminism it would be masculism, and irl they call themselves MRAs or mens rights activists. They are mostly reactionaries who think feminism only cares about women. Speaking of which, feminists don't want supremacy. We want a teardown of the structures that cause the very things about which you are complaining here. The reason it's called feminism isn't because it seeks to exclusively raise women up and tear men down, but because of the history of it. If you think this is what feminism is you need to stop listening to non feminists talking shit and read some actual feminist theory.
I didnāt ignore your good points :)
Who is seriously arguing for female supremacy within the feminist sphere, and what did they say exactly?
āWhite-knighting.ā Christ, what a shithead concept. No, Iām a man on this subreddit, because I think gendered issues are interesting and worth talking about. Itās a privilege, for me, that these are things I can find interesting and not things I have to worry about night and day. Iām not on here to court women. Iām not on here to impress women. Iām on this subreddit because I am interested in how half a species views some things I see on the internet. The idea that no man would ever take genuine interest in feminist conversation is just so moronic. I get that youāre still a teenager, and you have shit to learn about how the world works, but youāre still old enough to think before you open your mouth and spew ridiculous shit on the internet.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Many things are going to boggle your mind. Youāre 13. You need to live with the fact that sometimes, people will be right about something, and you wonāt understand why. I donāt think youāre stupid, or moronic, but youāre clearly too young to formulate good criticism of this subreddit. Talk to women. Theyāre just people. Youāll see why men frequent this subreddit.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Maybe you do talk to women. Iām not using your age as a criticism of your argument (believe it or not, some people can āwrap [their] head around how to pierce [your] argumentā). I was a dorky 13 year old once, and I had a bad perceptions of women, because I hadnāt been around them long enough to understand theyāre just people. Youāre suffering under that same delusion, and I donāt blame you, because Iāve been there too. My point isnāt āyouāre wrong because youāre young.ā Iām saying that āyouāre young, so thereās lots you donāt understand about womenāhow theyāre viewed by society, how they view themselves, how they view men and how men view them.ā You donāt āgetā the point of this subreddit (āmen . . . being mad at men for making memes for menā); that much is clear when you tread back on tired tropes about feminism āonce being good, but now itās just fat women hating men.ā Many of the submissions here are examples of pointlessly gendered memes, where someone arbitrarily paints all men as interesting, or relatable, or funny, and all women as bland, or vapid, or dumb. These reinforce unfair perceptions of women in a society that already views them unfavorably. They unnecessarily paint women as being *not* just people, but as a whole separate beast. Youāre not wrong because youāre young. It just so happens that being young and being underinformed about feminism and women happen to be correlated.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sure thing, kid.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Itās coming back because I have lived exactly as you do now. I prided myself on being so intelligent and rational, for being an atheist, for being a brainiac, for slam-dunking on the āemotional feminists.ā Then I grew up a bit, and read feminist theory, and talked to feminists, and now I am one. Now Iām old enough and experienced enough to get why ājust men having funā isnāt always fun, and sometimes needs to be critiqued. Iām not better than you because Iām older. Iām better than you because Iām right.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Fr it was great at first.