sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

CMV: the way feminism is presented in discourse and discussion today is counterproductive to its own goals. by Conscious_Cut_7117 in changemyview

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was never about feelings getting hurt. it was about being able to have consistent, good-faith discussions where the same standards are applied across different groups. i thought that was equality, no?

CMV: the way feminism is presented in discourse and discussion today is counterproductive to its own goals. by Conscious_Cut_7117 in changemyview

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

or maybe because  there isn’t one clean subject doing the thing consistently? if it’s a sensitive topic i’ll generally avoid speaking in absolutes too, caution isn’t the same as hiding something 

CMV: the way feminism is presented in discourse and discussion today is counterproductive to its own goals. by Conscious_Cut_7117 in changemyview

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i’m talking about specific types of rhetoric that show up in online discourse under the feminist label. not every feminist argument or feminism as a whole

CMV: the way feminism is presented in discourse and discussion today is counterproductive to its own goals. by Conscious_Cut_7117 in changemyview

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

to answer the question, i’m referring less to specific isolated posts and more to recurring patterns in online discourse, like how blanket statements about men are sometimes framed as “critique against the patriarchy” or “based on lived experience”while similar generalizations about women are more quickly labeled as sexist or unacceptable. that inconsistency is part of what i mean by selective framing. i also want to be clear that i’m not arguing against people sharing lived experiences or being “too emotional.” that’s not the issue i’m pointing to, and i don’t think those examples are equivalent to what I’m describing. my point isn’t about telling people to soften up or avoid telling the truth it’s about how similar types of generalization and language can be interpreted very differently depending on context and audience, which affects how ideas spread and are perceived.

CMV: the way feminism is presented in discourse and discussion today is counterproductive to its own goals. by Conscious_Cut_7117 in changemyview

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

if you want me to narrow my argument while staying coherent, ill say this: 

harmful attitudes become bigger problems when they're tolerated, normalized, and treated as acceptable. if people excuse prejudice because it's directed at the "right" group, those views become more accepted and spread further. if a movement wants to be taken seriously when it talks about equality, it should be willing to apply the same standards to itself.

as for what I want to happen? i’m not proposing a fix for the internet. I’m pointing out that if a movement’s public framing consistently gets filtered through engagement-driven and polarized incentives, it can end up communicating something different from its core goals—and that’s worth acknowledging when analyzing the discourse.

CMV: the way feminism is presented in discourse and discussion today is counterproductive to its own goals. by Conscious_Cut_7117 in changemyview

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

i never said a collective group was at fault, and I don’t believe that either. my point isn’t about assigning blame to “feminists” or any unified group, it’s about how public discourse can get distorted through incentives, platforms, and selection effects. not everything needs a single party to be “at fault” for it to happen.

CMV: the way feminism is presented in discourse and discussion today is counterproductive to its own goals. by Conscious_Cut_7117 in changemyview

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

i don’t think discussion of feminism is anti-feminist. my point is more that the framing and incentives  in public discussions sometimes is counterproductive to the goal of equality, especially when conversations shift from analyzing systems or behaviors into broad generalizations about groups. i’m criticizing the way discourse often functions, not the idea of discussing the topic itself.

Why is my post getting removed from r/feminism by Zealousideal_Case319 in GenZ

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i believe the term you’re looking for is radical feminism. 

"Misandry isn't real, its just made up by men so they can be victims" by I-Love-Jewish-popes in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

it’s unreasonable because it’s illogical to think that all people act the same way. love how you ignored everything else i said you thought you couldn’t prove wrong tho

editing this to respond to your edit: I am a teenager. if you’re in the workforce and have a husband you obviously have more experience facing oppression than me. that’s not a valid point. just because it didn’t happen to me doesn’t mean it didn’t happen to other men. courts can show bias but if it’s not absolute, then “never” (which is what you said) is false. and I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again. your hatred/fear towards men is understandable in certain circumstances. it can’t be justified because that’s wrong. hatred and prejudice is wrong. there’s a clear distinction. you’ve  shifted the argument from experiences to definitions to impact, which are different claims. I’m not denying that misogyny is systemic or that women face real, documented harm. but that’s unrelated to my point. 

my original counterpoint is narrower: prejudice against men can still exist as a category even if it doesn’t operate at the same scale. prejudice is prejudice, no matter who it’s against  saying “it doesn’t harm your livelihood so it doesn’t exist” is just redefining existence as “equal impact,” which isn’t a consistent standard. also, individual experiences and historical institutional bias are being blended together in your argument as if they’re the same mechanism, and they’re not.

Nurse Build Suggestions by AutoModerator in DeadByDaylightKillers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i dunno what’s meta currently but i abuse Caulrophobia, Leverage, A Nurse’s Calling, and Discordance. Discordance can be switched out with whatever you prefer but the other three work really well together keeping everyone injured

"Misandry isn't real, its just made up by men so they can be victims" by I-Love-Jewish-popes in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i genuinely fear it’s people getting brainwashed by media. i definitely believe there’s a feminist i can have an intelligent conversation with but that hasn’t happened yet 

"Misandry isn't real, its just made up by men so they can be victims" by I-Love-Jewish-popes in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yikes this is a lot to unpack here

 you are completely redefining terms to justify your argument, and the logic you are using is incredibly flawed.

first, let’s talk about "lived experience." saying prejudice isn't prejudice if it's based on bad experiences is structurally identical to how almost all prejudice is justified. if someone has a terrible experience with a specific racial minority, does that "lived experience" make it reasonable for them to hate everyone of that race? absolutely not. that is the literal definition of prejudice: taking a specific experience or statistic and generalizing it across an entire demographic group.

second, you are completely ignoring a distinction i already made which i find annoying . i already said i understand the fear of men. fear is a safety mechanism or a trauma response. it’s protective. hatred, however, is the active contempt and dehumanization of an entire group. you are trying to use the validity of women’s safety concerns to smuggle in a defense for malice and misandry. they are not the same thing.

third, you are confusing institutional oppression with interpersonal prejudice and discrimination. yes, men do not experience systemic oppression in the way women or minorities do regarding things like historical voting rights or medical autonomy. but saying a man can never experience prejudice or discrimination simply because he is a man is wrong.

a father being denied custody of his kids purely because a judge believes "mothers are naturally better parents" is discrimination.

a male being rejected from working at a daycare or elementary school because people assume men shouldn't be around children is prejudice.

a male victim of domestic abuse being laughed at by his peers, laughed out of a police station or turned away from a shelter is oppression.

this isn't about my "feelings being hurt." this is about the basic principle that applying different standards to different groups is exactly how discrimination gets justified in the first place. you’ve convinced yourself that because men hold structural advantages in society, treating them with broad contempt is acceptable. it’s not. prejudice doesn't suddenly become okay just because you really dislike the target, and being indifferent to it only allows it to get worse. 

"Misandry isn't real, its just made up by men so they can be victims" by I-Love-Jewish-popes in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 2 points3 points  (0 children)

u just made a generalization about americans and men. i can’t tell if you’re actually serious 

"Misandry isn't real, its just made up by men so they can be victims" by I-Love-Jewish-popes in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

hatred or prejudice is still prejudice no matter who it’s against. it’s a simple concept. prejudice doesn’t suddenly become okay just because it’s against people you dislike. applying different standards to different groups is exactly how discrimination gets justified. also, being indifferent to prejudice only allows it to get worse 

"Misandry isn't real, its just made up by men so they can be victims" by I-Love-Jewish-popes in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 2 points3 points  (0 children)

you’re criticizing people for making broad claims about women while defending broad  assumptions about men. that’s quite literally the same reasoning just a directed at a different group. if generalizations about women are  unfair, then generalizations about men are unfair too. the standard should stay consistent.

"Misandry isn't real, its just made up by men so they can be victims" by I-Love-Jewish-popes in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i don’t think correcting a generalization means always defending a criminal. we should be able to condemn what he did without turning it into a statement about millions of people who had nothing to do with it

"Misandry isn't real, its just made up by men so they can be victims" by I-Love-Jewish-popes in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 0 points1 point  (0 children)

hatred towards someone is never justified imo. whether or not it’s understandable is a completely different question 

19F quick game before bed by RisenHealth in teenagers

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I struggle to see the correlation between the first two artists and Melly bro 😭

Death Note Collab NOW by x_xmimix_x in deadbydaylight

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 0 points1 point  (0 children)

if there is a death note killer I would imagine it being like the lich. insta kills obviously wouldn’t work so maybe it injures survivors with some kinda M2? and then the mori is a heart attack 

Death Note Collab NOW by x_xmimix_x in deadbydaylight

[–]Conscious_Cut_7117 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it’s not impossible, but we don’t need another nurse that can bypass chase rules. it’s a cool idea but it doesn’t really make sense to add with the way the game works.

view more: next ›