You haven’t addressed anything the other person has said.
So?
My point is about the nature of their statement and how it centers women in a topic that is about how when men speak about feelings women center a feminine perspective.
Just because you’re not listening doesn’t mean others aren’t.
I’m going to assume you meant listening (and agreeing). Because there are people listening and disagreeing, for example me. But how do you know anyone else is agreeing with you? Do you have anything empirical to show that would indicate what you believe or is it just something you want to believe?
My point is about the nature of their statement and how it centers women in a topic that is about how when men speak about feelings women center a feminine perspective.
And if you were listening instead of just screaming you’d notice that their statement does not center around women. Their argument is that patriarchal beliefs can be adopted by both women and men and in this case the patriarchal belief is that men shouldn’t express their emotions and in the image it is a woman perpetuating that belief by refusing to accept what was said.
I like to imagine they’re one of those “I agree with what you’re saying as long as you don’t mention socialism” kind of people, except for them the big bad taboo word is patriarchy.
I’m not saying that patriarchy centers women, I’m saying its invocation here centers feminism in a topic about a masculine issue, which is to, say, it’s rude and counterproductive.
Talking about the patriarchy is feminism. Feminism necessarily centers women, or it’s not really feminism, degraded into an all-encompassing ideology devoid of its intended purpose.
(PETA isn’t feminism just because it can invoke the language of oppression.)
So yes, I advance this notion that talking about the patriarchy in a topic about male pain is centering feminism and therefore centering women. I don’t see that this should be controversial.
Except, of course, to those who universalize feminism into a cure-all ideology, which is shorthand for broken thinking which diverts feminism from its purpose.
You can’t fix men with feminism: that’s an incoherent idea.
And yet every reply is in disagreement and almost every follow-up reply made by you is heavily downvoted.
People who disagree with me right now are still in a backlash phase. They’ll either listen and think about it and accommodate the obvious truth that feminism isn’t a panacea for men’s issues because that’s just stupid.
Another argument that was never made. You’re the one who brought up feminism in the first place and nobody said feminism should solve men’s issues.
I’m not screaming, I’m lecturing.
The lecturers I remember would address questions instead of ignoring them.
The centering of women in a topic about men’s feelings being undermined by women centering their perspective is an obvious problem. It’s not that difficult to understand that if a woman were talking over a Black woman’s experience to talk about patriarchy instead of racism, that woman would be out of line.
So if it was another woman talking over a White woman’s experience that wouldn’t be out of line? It wouldn’t be a patriarchal issue if the person talking over had been a man instead of the woman?
The argument you’re refusing to address is that the gender does not matter when it comes to patriarchy.
Your patriarchy concept isn’t working. You can’t reach men by talking about the patriarchy. Joe Rogan doesn’t talk about the patriarchy. It’s not that complicated, you just hold to your ideology hoping that if everyone nods their heads and says “yes the patriarchy is to blame” the problem will get fixed. That’s stupid.
Just because the vast majority of people are unwilling to question their beliefs does not mean the concept is wrong. That’s like saying socialism is wrong because the large majority of society is taught “capitalism good, socialism bad” so they wouldn’t question capitalism and would view socialism as something bad.
And once again, nobody said if everyone agree patriarchy is to blame that would solve the problem. It wouldn’t, but it would at least be a step in the right direction because people would at least acknowledge there’s a problem.
Anyway. I’m done with your comments. As I said in the very first comment, you’re not here to listen. You just want to get on a soapbox and scream about your deeply rooted personal beliefs you refuse to question. I feel I’ve made my points about how you don’t listen and your points are nonsense and I really have no desire to talk to you because you won’t actually address the core arguments anyone is making. You’ll just pile on irrelevant information to try and shift the discussion to something adjacent and it’s just not worth the effort.
But people are listening to me.
So?
My point is about the nature of their statement and how it centers women in a topic that is about how when men speak about feelings women center a feminine perspective.
Just because you’re not listening doesn’t mean others aren’t.
I’m going to assume you meant listening (and agreeing). Because there are people listening and disagreeing, for example me. But how do you know anyone else is agreeing with you? Do you have anything empirical to show that would indicate what you believe or is it just something you want to believe?
And if you were listening instead of just screaming you’d notice that their statement does not center around women. Their argument is that patriarchal beliefs can be adopted by both women and men and in this case the patriarchal belief is that men shouldn’t express their emotions and in the image it is a woman perpetuating that belief by refusing to accept what was said.
He’s not going to accept the concept of patriarchy as anything other than a feminist idea that centers women.
I like to imagine they’re one of those “I agree with what you’re saying as long as you don’t mention socialism” kind of people, except for them the big bad taboo word is patriarchy.
Removed by mod
I’m going to have to give you a break for a few days to settle down.
Why shouldn’t feminist ideas center women?
I’m not saying that patriarchy centers women, I’m saying its invocation here centers feminism in a topic about a masculine issue, which is to, say, it’s rude and counterproductive.
Ok, let me rephrase. You aren’t going to accept that talking about the patriarchy is anything other than feminist and centering women.
Talking about the patriarchy is feminism. Feminism necessarily centers women, or it’s not really feminism, degraded into an all-encompassing ideology devoid of its intended purpose.
(PETA isn’t feminism just because it can invoke the language of oppression.)
So yes, I advance this notion that talking about the patriarchy in a topic about male pain is centering feminism and therefore centering women. I don’t see that this should be controversial.
Except, of course, to those who universalize feminism into a cure-all ideology, which is shorthand for broken thinking which diverts feminism from its purpose.
You can’t fix men with feminism: that’s an incoherent idea.
Wow those are some trash takes
Removed by mod
I agree with them, for one.
Removed by mod
And yet every reply is in disagreement and almost every follow-up reply made by you is heavily downvoted.
Another argument that was never made. You’re the one who brought up feminism in the first place and nobody said feminism should solve men’s issues.
The lecturers I remember would address questions instead of ignoring them.
So if it was another woman talking over a White woman’s experience that wouldn’t be out of line? It wouldn’t be a patriarchal issue if the person talking over had been a man instead of the woman?
The argument you’re refusing to address is that the gender does not matter when it comes to patriarchy.
Just because the vast majority of people are unwilling to question their beliefs does not mean the concept is wrong. That’s like saying socialism is wrong because the large majority of society is taught “capitalism good, socialism bad” so they wouldn’t question capitalism and would view socialism as something bad.
And once again, nobody said if everyone agree patriarchy is to blame that would solve the problem. It wouldn’t, but it would at least be a step in the right direction because people would at least acknowledge there’s a problem.
Anyway. I’m done with your comments. As I said in the very first comment, you’re not here to listen. You just want to get on a soapbox and scream about your deeply rooted personal beliefs you refuse to question. I feel I’ve made my points about how you don’t listen and your points are nonsense and I really have no desire to talk to you because you won’t actually address the core arguments anyone is making. You’ll just pile on irrelevant information to try and shift the discussion to something adjacent and it’s just not worth the effort.
Removed by mod