Making a post about women doesn’t - and shouldn’t - mean you’re excluding men. I feel like excluding should only be defined as an active attempt to prevent people from associating with the post
Does this apply to making posts about men? Because if so (meaning, the rule applies universally without making exclusions for certain demographics), then I’m inclined to agree.
Experience shows however that posts (or any media) about men usually get attacked for ostensibly excluding women, even without explicitly doing so.
I would rather instill a mindset in all people that would allow for situations where, for example, a man can find relevancy in a post about women, rather then try to get all people to only share content that specifically addresses who all is intended to be able to relate to it.
This is almost hilarious. I mean, on the surface I agree. But again, if we flip the situation then we can see how comical it is. Can women find relevancy in a post about men without commenting by saying it isn’t gendered, or even that it applies to women more than it does to men? The same thing applies to race. Can POCs find relevancy in a post about white people (even just implicitly), without claiming it’s excluding other races?
The fact is if a white guy wants to create any form of media, be it writing a novel or making an indie film or whathaveyou, he has to be very careful to explicitly include other genders and races, because anything less will get nailed as being exclusionary.
But when a post is explicitly exclusive to one gender, as long as if that gender happens to be women, then suddenly “Oh it’s fine, men can just find relevancy in it even if it doesn’t (explicitly or implicitly) include them. It doesn’t have to be gendered even though it’s clearly and deliberately gendered.”
Like, the mental hoops people will jump through to justify double standards as long as men are the ones being disadvantaged by them. That is not egalitarianism.
Bud, what? Women constantly have to find relevancy in posts about men. It’s been the default for nearly every culture since the beginning of human history. The only double standard is the universal double standard that people like you couldn’t see this whole time, and is only just slightly starting to close.
Any post you see without a woman complaining that it’s fallen on them to once again find relevancy in a post that isn’t about them is an example of them utilizing their own lived experience, rather than being outlined as the intended audience by the poster. So, yes, they’re following the mentality I described for most posts.
You’re usually the one doing the crucifying, so I’m not surprised you haven’t witnessed it as a spectator.
Media is usually centered on the male perspective.
That is an overly-broad generalization and not even remotely accurate. Maybe fifty years ago that would apply in most cases, but still not all.
And unless you’ve literally never read media analysis in any academic journal, we both know that male-centered media is considered a faux pas at best these days.
We quite literally live in a patriarchal society.
Patriarchy harms men and women. You can’t just lump all men in as “the patriarchy,” that doesn’t even align with the perspectives in actual feminist literature.
Patriarchy is specifically the structures of dominance and oppression which, while traditionally ascribed as a male role, women can also participate in. There is such thing as women participating in patriarchy and if you don’t believe that then you’ve never read actual feminist philosophy.
By the way, reinforcing patriarchal standards of toxic masculinity (such as "men can’t/shouldn’t talk about their problems or their feelings) is participating in patriarchy. Way to go.
Egalitarianism is about equality. If you think uplifting women means putting men down, then you’re not a feminist.
These are the kinds of subtle undertones that one learns to read as a man in society simply by the experiences and microaggressions that one’s received since boyhood. They’re not always overtly stated.
You can’t just lump all men in as “the patriarchy,” that doesn’t even align with the perspectives in actual feminist literature.
Where did I lump all men in as “the patriarchy”? It’s not fair to lob an accusation and then say it’s in subtle undertones. Subtle undertones where? In what comment?
By the way, reinforcing patriarchal standards of toxic masculinity (such as "men can’t/shouldn’t talk about their problems or their feelings) is participating in patriarchy. Way to go.
Another specific accusation. Where did I say men can’t or shouldn’t talk about their problems or feelings? Which comments contain the microaggressions suggesting this?
It’s not fair to lob an accusation and then say it’s in subtle undertones.
That’s a very interesting statement considering I used the same argument that women often use to talk about their experiences. Odd how it suddenly doesn’t apply when a man makes the same argument…
You’re right, you’re not all women. So just because you haven’t used the argument doesn’t mean no woman has ever.
But guess what? Being a man and simply not making misogynistic arguments about women isn’t enough to protect one against criticisms aimed at “men” as an abstract whole.
Responding to those criticisms with “I’m not like that” or “I don’t do that / haven’t said that” gets hit with the “nOt AlL mEn!!1!” ridicule…
Does this apply to making posts about men? Because if so (meaning, the rule applies universally without making exclusions for certain demographics), then I’m inclined to agree.
Experience shows however that posts (or any media) about men usually get attacked for ostensibly excluding women, even without explicitly doing so.
This is almost hilarious. I mean, on the surface I agree. But again, if we flip the situation then we can see how comical it is. Can women find relevancy in a post about men without commenting by saying it isn’t gendered, or even that it applies to women more than it does to men? The same thing applies to race. Can POCs find relevancy in a post about white people (even just implicitly), without claiming it’s excluding other races?
The fact is if a white guy wants to create any form of media, be it writing a novel or making an indie film or whathaveyou, he has to be very careful to explicitly include other genders and races, because anything less will get nailed as being exclusionary.
But when a post is explicitly exclusive to one gender, as long as if that gender happens to be women, then suddenly “Oh it’s fine, men can just find relevancy in it even if it doesn’t (explicitly or implicitly) include them. It doesn’t have to be gendered even though it’s clearly and deliberately gendered.”
Like, the mental hoops people will jump through to justify double standards as long as men are the ones being disadvantaged by them. That is not egalitarianism.
Bud, what? Women constantly have to find relevancy in posts about men. It’s been the default for nearly every culture since the beginning of human history. The only double standard is the universal double standard that people like you couldn’t see this whole time, and is only just slightly starting to close.
Any post you see without a woman complaining that it’s fallen on them to once again find relevancy in a post that isn’t about them is an example of them utilizing their own lived experience, rather than being outlined as the intended audience by the poster. So, yes, they’re following the mentality I described for most posts.
There’s quite a few posts here centered on men’s perspectives and I don’t see them being crucified in the comments.
Like what are you even talking about? Media is usually centered on the male perspective. We quite literally live in a patriarchal society.
You’re usually the one doing the crucifying, so I’m not surprised you haven’t witnessed it as a spectator.
That is an overly-broad generalization and not even remotely accurate. Maybe fifty years ago that would apply in most cases, but still not all.
And unless you’ve literally never read media analysis in any academic journal, we both know that male-centered media is considered a faux pas at best these days.
Patriarchy harms men and women. You can’t just lump all men in as “the patriarchy,” that doesn’t even align with the perspectives in actual feminist literature.
Patriarchy is specifically the structures of dominance and oppression which, while traditionally ascribed as a male role, women can also participate in. There is such thing as women participating in patriarchy and if you don’t believe that then you’ve never read actual feminist philosophy.
By the way, reinforcing patriarchal standards of toxic masculinity (such as "men can’t/shouldn’t talk about their problems or their feelings) is participating in patriarchy. Way to go.
Egalitarianism is about equality. If you think uplifting women means putting men down, then you’re not a feminist.
Where did I lump all men in as the patriarchy?
Where have I said men can’t or shouldn’t talk about their feelings?
These are the kinds of subtle undertones that one learns to read as a man in society simply by the experiences and microaggressions that one’s received since boyhood. They’re not always overtly stated.
Where did I lump all men in as “the patriarchy”? It’s not fair to lob an accusation and then say it’s in subtle undertones. Subtle undertones where? In what comment?
Another specific accusation. Where did I say men can’t or shouldn’t talk about their problems or feelings? Which comments contain the microaggressions suggesting this?
That’s a very interesting statement considering I used the same argument that women often use to talk about their experiences. Odd how it suddenly doesn’t apply when a man makes the same argument…
I haven’t used that argument and I’m not all women.
You’re right, you’re not all women. So just because you haven’t used the argument doesn’t mean no woman has ever.
But guess what? Being a man and simply not making misogynistic arguments about women isn’t enough to protect one against criticisms aimed at “men” as an abstract whole.
Responding to those criticisms with “I’m not like that” or “I don’t do that / haven’t said that” gets hit with the “nOt AlL mEn!!1!” ridicule…