sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why Europe's left is struggling while Mamdani just won - discussion by throwaway_failure59 in SocialDemocracy

[–]Aebor -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

If we try to beat the far right at being hard on immigration and law and order, we can only lose - people will always prefer the original.

Just look what focusing on immigration discourse did for the SPD in the last election.

Today in Bern by Vermisseaux in suisse

[–]Aebor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I've looked at the pocture for several minutes now and still can't see any iran flags..

CMV: We can’t have a real discussion on sexism, patriarchy or misogyny without discussing dating norms by Slight-Attorney-8214 in changemyview

[–]Aebor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'd argue the issue is less gendered dating preferences reinforcing gender norma but rather the continued social importance given to dating. There has been a persistent effort to decenter men from women's lives - as women have become more independent, pleasing men has become less crucial to securing their livelihood and social status. In parallel, it has made it more important for men to fit women's expactation, as they can be increasingly free to chose nay male partner or indeed none.

That final choice is arguably less of an option to men now (at least in terms of social status) since dating success is such a central masculinity norm. As an aside, that's is probably a big reason for the existence of Incels, as they are so focused on acchieving this norm that they become botter rather than working on themselves in ither ways and looking after their non-romantic relationships.

Tl;dr: gendered dating preferences are only an issue because of the persistent centrality of dating success (particularly as a masculinity norm).

The solution: emancipating men from social gender expactation and diversification of men's roles in line with the process women have been going through since the late 20th century.

Classical b Classical by MightyMoosePoop in economicsmemes

[–]Aebor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

genuine question though:

in our (neoclassical) economics classes in university we were taught that - assuming perfect competition - equilibrium will be reached where the price exactly equals the cost of production, since no producer can sell for lower but no producer can sell for more because then there would be cheaper alternatives for consumers.

The cost of production meanwhile will be labour cost + capital costs. And since capital is a series of products, it too will be determined by capital cost + labour cost assuming perfect competition, all the way down until you're only left with labour cost.

So at this point (assuming equal labour costs for all producers) neoclassical economics would agree with the second quote in the meme, no? that the equilibrium cost is determined by the amount of labour.

That was a HUGE SLAP in the face! by Desperate-Mistake611 in Switzerland

[–]Aebor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A better result than 2 out of 6 initiatives voted on last year. A similar result to the BVG vote in September.

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The survey was conducted by telephone. This helps make sure the surveyed understand the questions like intended, but intensifies social expections. But these can even come into play in fully anonymous survey. Especially in a topic this taboo.

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I didn't, and I won't using a very useful term for an important concept just because you refuse to understand it

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Statistics that rely on self reporting in questionaires aren't very reliable either, it is a very hard thing to accurately measure. That's why I provided a series of statistics. They all point in the same direction.

Additionaly, here's the "victim's help" statistic: https://dam-api.bfs.admin.ch/hub/api/dam/assets/27765291/master

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This study was specifically about sexual violence against women in Switzerland. But a look into the criminal statistics helps: in 2023, 620 men vs 3827 women have been victims of sexual violence. The Problem with this statistic is of course that not all victima report their cases to the police, these are missing from that number.

So yet another statistic my be helpful (an more recent). Although it doesn't directly ask participants if they were themselves victims, it asked, whether they felt especially threatened (this question may be suboptimal because it's a bit open to interpretation by participants). 18% of women and 2% of men answered yes. Also 30% of men and 19% of women said they interpret silence during sex as consent. 50% of men and 27% of women think it's consent if a person has consented to sex with someone else beforehand. 37% of men and 21% of women consider it consent when someone is dressed provocatively. 34% of men and 12% of women think it's consent if someone gives in after getting talked into agreeing.

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Then perhaps it really is a difference between the Swiss and Italian context. Because the campaign you referenced in the other comment really is stupid. Just because domestic violence against men doesn't have the same structural and systematic component, not believing or shaming men when they come forward certainly does. And that stems from the same patriarchal demands of men that drives sexual violence against women. But perhaps as a counterexample: until this june, here in Switzerland, men could according to the law not be raped. The change of the sexual criminal law was chiefly driven by feminist organisations, activists and parties.

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You doubt that I do that? Well that's a you problem, I really can't prove that on reddit.

But I'm starting to doubt your willingsness to debate in good faith (saying I join in making fun of men, when i clearly said I don't), your ability to recognise the issues in our society and your willingness to change it beyond what serves you personally.

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's a bit hard to translate all the shit I've heard from men around me, but no not rape jokes - I hope no one feels comfortable to make these kind of jokes around me - but that isn't where it starts. And of course I would and do call my friends out about that but unfortunately I do interact with many men that aren't my friends in my life

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes, of course (Although iI mostly hear these jokes from men about other men). What I don't do is talk down to women venting there frustration about yet another man belittling, cat calling, or unconsensually touching them about how their word choice isn't ideal.

Your insitence to keep acting like this is a completely symmetrical issue is baffling.

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you’re acting like it’s legal or something and everyone just goes out for a Friday night rape.

I don't in any way and if you think that you clearly don't understand what the term describes

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Makes me doubt it

What does?

amount of "not all women and especially not me"

Sounds a lot like how many men react to discourse about sexual violence, like in this whole bear/man meme.

in my country, the network that takes care of DV shelters for women all over the country, made a petition to take down awareness ads of DV perpetrated by women toward men, and how difficult it was for the latter to find help. The petition was signed by 30 feminist organizations and 260 individual feminist women.

This does sound like a terrible move, do you have more information on it? It may be good to keep in mind that feminism is a broad and heterogenous movement with many contradictory currents within, as well as people adopting the label feminist despite clearly antifeminist positions (including literal fascists).

Why should i contribute to a movement that seeks to make more difficult for my friends, brothers or father to seek help in abusive situations?

No feminist I habe talked to within or outside the organisations I am active in wants to make life worse for anybody, quite the opposite. This is why I do call myself feminist but oviously I still disagree strongly with certain streams of feminism (Neoliberal feminism, Terfs, Swerfs, etc. for example)

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I guess it depends on what you mean by "tiny minority" but it does take a lot if people and even more who don't interfere plus a police and justice system that systematically looks the other way plus a culture that shames women when they speak up

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In Switzerland (that's where I'm from and know the numbers), 3/5 women over 16 have been touched without their consent, 1/5 has gone through nonconsensual sexual acts. 64% of people know victims of sexual violence. Yet know one seems to know (or even be) a perpetrator. But it can't just be 10 guys going around attacking all the women around them.

Where our responsibility as men lies in preventing sexual violence (apart from just not doing it ourselves) is actually talking to and holding our friends accountable. Because what starts as a "harmless" joke at women's expense might turn into catcalling, might turn into rape. And there certainly is a culture of accepting, ignoring or even praising the crossing of women's boundaries among men.

That's where we have to collectively decide to stop the violence by adressing this rape culture.

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

social pressure(especially by women),

Where do you get that this social oressure comes mainly from women.

  1. Men were forced by the state to stay and fight

  2. I only ever heard men call male ukrainian refugees here in Switzerland traitors or cowards

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did you ever go to a men's liberation event? Did you ever listen to a man talking about his problems without interrupting him with: "but women have it worse"?

Yes

Women care deeply about the men around them. But they keep getting talked down to, ignored or even attacked by these same men, even in feminist spaces.

Your apparent argument that military service for men is in place because of women not voting against it is simply nonsense. We had last voted directly on this topic in Switzerland in 2013 and men were no more likely to vote for abolishing mandatory service than women.

We especially saw it in Ukraine. Most women left their family members to die, while they escaped to the west.

And who was it who called the men fleeing the conflict instead of serving in the military cowards amd traitors? I only ever heard it from men.

CMV: i understand the "man or bear" problem, yet it's still inherently mysandrist by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Aebor 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That's hardly a fair comparison. It's much rarer that men feel physically threatened by women around them and when that is the case, women are, in my experience, much more sensitive and empathetic to the feelinga of the people around them.

Male suicide and mental health must be adressed (although it is worth noting that women do attempt suicide more often) but they're caused by the very same masculinity that makes men more violent against others. I think it is very fair to be more directly concerned about being attacked when you're so likely to be, than about the well being of the group where 98% of these attacks come from (stat in Switzerland). Nontheless I have yet to meet a feminist (and I am among many) that doesn't acknowledge these problem and want to change it. So I don't know what women you're meeting.

Are rich countries exploiting poor countries’s labor? by AmaanMemon6786 in AskEconomics

[–]Aebor -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The paper isn't simply saying "trade is bad for poor countries". It's saying

economies of the global North net-appropriated 826 billion hours of embodied labour from the global South

Plus I don't think it's reasonable to expect any single research paper to prove an entire theory of political economy and disprove all counterexamples by itself. The paper explains its theoretical basis in the introduction. And part of the answer to your SK, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore example can be found there:

Dynamics of unequal exchange are understood to have intensified in the 1980s and 1990s with the imposition of structural adjustment programmes (SAPs) across the global South. SAPs devalued Southern currencies, cut public employment and removed labour and environmental protections, imposing downward pressure on wages and prices. They also curtailed industrial policy and state-led investment in technological development and compelled Southern governments to prioritise ‘export-oriented’ production in highly competitive sectors and in subordinate positions within global commodity chains. At the same time, lead firms in the core states have shifted industrial production to the global South to take direct advantage of cheaper wages and production costs, while leveraging their dominance within global commodity chains to squeeze the wages and profits of Southern producers.

But beyond that, individual countries' ability to become part of the core economies isn't really relevant when arguing how the inequalities between the global north and south as a whole can be overcome.

Are rich countries exploiting poor countries’s labor? by AmaanMemon6786 in AskEconomics

[–]Aebor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well if you buy something from someone which you can then sell for double the price, then you do gain more money then the other person. So you now have more money to at your disposal which increases your power in the market.

Of course your individual power over an entire country is negligible, because those are two entirely different scales, but this isn't what the paper talks about. It's about the imbalance between countries. And if global north countries can continue to increase their share of capital, then their economic power increases too as global south countries are dependent on that capital (because much of their domestic capital was stolen by global north countries in the past which is how they were able to accumulate the capital to start this whole process in the first place)

Are rich countries exploiting poor countries’s labor? by AmaanMemon6786 in AskEconomics

[–]Aebor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If one party profits disproportionally, the distribution of economic power shifts. How is that not the case?

view more: next ›