hakase @ hakase @lemm.ee

Posts

6

Comments

317

Joined

2 yr. ago

Ok, then stop making blanket statements that all men's spaces are like that, when that's clearly not the case.

In fact, to answer your original question in a more complete manner: one thing women could do to help men's lives improve is to stop systemically demonizing men in general.

Literally nobody said anything about "comfort women", or that male loneliness even has anything to do with sexuality, for that matter.

One thing women could do to help is to stop demonizing and dismantling male-only spaces that provide men an opportunity for bonding and comradeship while hypocritically demanding more and more women-only spaces.

Not really, since that's just the same ill-defined "Earnings Gap" nonsense constantly peddled as a "wage gap" for decades. As this article from Forbes and the sources inside explain, and has been well-known for a decade at this point, "When comparing two people in the same profession, with the same seniority, working the same number of hours, and so forth, women earn $0.98 for every dollar that a man earns."

Their source for that number has since updated that number to $0.99 for every dollar a man earns for the same work.

So, unless you think that women should be paid significantly more than men for the same work (which wouldn't surprise me, given your other comments in this thread), Rejoice! for the "wage gap" is no more!

I originally wasn't going to respond to this post, but there's so much revisionism, omissions, and outright inaccuracies here that I ultimately couldn't ignore it, and that's just when it comes to the Minoans and Hittites, which I'm most familiar with. As such, I assume your comments about the others are equally one-sided in order to serve the really odd, unnecessary narrative you have going on here.

First off, we know very little about the Minoans, since, y'know, Linear A hasn't been deciphered yet, but from what we do know, they had an incredibly gender-segregated society, far more than we have today. In lists of family members, for example, the men and the women are in completely separate lists, which would be pretty weird for a place that didn't have "arbitrary social constructs" like gender roles, and women seem to have been forbidden from most traditionally male jobs in their society.

Their art emphasized sexual dimorphism, and for you to assume that nakedness of the breasts in clothing trends implies the same thing for them that it would in our society today just adds to the evidence that you have no idea what you're talking about.

They did have indoor plumbing, so at least you're right about that.

For the Hittites it's even worse, since their code of laws enforced separate punishments for crimes against men and women, with crimes against men carrying much more stringent penalties than crimes against women. Also, Hittite men wielded a large amount of legal power over their wives, which is indicated in their marriage ritual, where the man would "take" his wife so he could "possess" her afterward. Yes, it's better than the ancient Greeks a thousand years later, but by how much is debatable.

Further, tawananna (queens) only ruled when their kings were away, or after they had died until the next king was chosen, and not a single queen is listed in Hittite histories as a legitimate successor to the dynasty at any point. Their role in court was mostly religious, and while they did conduct diplomatic relations with other countries, to act like Hittite queens were on par with Hittite kings in any way is completely false.

So we’re operating from what’s effectively misogynistic propaganda treated as a blueprint carried forward and reinforced in the historical record. It’s not “how it’s always been” at all. It’s just how it’s been recorded as having been by one side.

While there are definitely plenty of excellent examples of strong female leaders throughout history, and their achievements should certainly be celebrated, the ridiculous Bronze Age revisionism you've written here sounds much more like propaganda than what's actually attested in the "historical record".

I'm pretty sure that by this point most reasonable people have realized that the wage gap is a myth, so that's probably not your best example.

Exactly. Feminist terminology like "toxic masculinity" and "patriarchy" has been very carefully chosen to be misandrist enough to result in the intended widespread popular demonization of men that we've seen over the past few decades, while also giving feminists enough deniability to gaslight with "that's not what the terms ackchually mean though".

The misandry is a feature, not a bug.

Exactly. More lenient sentencing is definitely part of female privilege.

Oh wait, no, I mean part of the horrible misogynist practice of "putting women on a pedestal", of course. Gotta make sure that we frame all of the privilege that being a woman brings as actually just more evidence of how bad men are!

Brosef, the term "patriarchy" itself is (and has always been) intentionally misleading and inherently misandrist, and has played a huge role in the modern demonization of men as a result. The "academic definition" of the term is irrelevant, as the (fully intended) real world negative consequences of the term for men in the cultural zeitgeist have been systemic and pervasive, as we can see all over this thread.

Because I see the state of public school funding in the US, and I think it's utterly, ludicrously naive to think that our universities will somehow magically avoid the same fate. We live in a world where there's a very real possibility that Trump is elected again, and the people advocating for free college don't seem to be able to put two and two together to realize that this would put Trump's government in complete control of the funding of the universities that he condemns as "liberal brainwashing".

The push for all universities to be free in the US is nothing but utopian wishful thinking that ignores the actual state of US politics, and will have disastrous real-world consequences for the already shaky state of education in the US.

Making community college free seems like a pretty ideal compromise though - everyone gets access to college, and the ability of our universities to take advantage of funding through tuition to ensure that their quality remains among the best in the world is unimpeded.

Nah, I nailed it the first time.

I'm usually against free college, but this is actually a really great idea. It makes education available to everyone, without the additional risk of government mismanagement hamstringing our world-class universities in the process.

This has "mah bucket" sea lion vibes.

pp (very soft) is likely a reference to how the performer has trouble keeping his incredibly small penis erect. This can be common in any part of a song; it mostly depends on how much of a loser the performer is.

The worst part of this comic is that philosophy bro is clearly not even very good at his field, since there's a much better Cartesian parallel to be made here (and I'm not even a philosopher).

"I think, therefore I am" is actually leaving out (imo) the most important part of Descartes's argument. He was trying to find literally anything that he could know without a doubt was true. The problem is, that's really hard, as our existence-troubled shopper has discovered. Descartes could doubt the existence of God, he could doubt the existence of goodness, of truth. All of these things might not actually exist. Descartes could even doubt his own existence.

In fact, literally the only thing Descartes could conclude without a doubt was true was the fact that he was doubting at all. So, since that's the only thing he could be sure of, that's what he built his argument for rationalism upon.

This perfectly mirrors the existential crisis the so-called philosopher comes upon, but instead of starting the shopper right where Descartes started, he instead just provides what must seem like almost a non sequitur in context, since if the man is currently doubting his existence, he can also doubt that he's thinking. What he cannot doubt, is that he is in fact doubting.

"I doubt. Therefore, I think. I think, therefore I am."

Fleming himself was a British agent, and knew SMERSH so well that he put this foreword at the beginning of From Russia With Love:

"Not that it matters, but a great deal of the background to this story is accurate.

SMERSH, a contraction of Smiert Spionam--Death to Spies--exists and remains today the most secret department of the Soviet government.

At the beginning of 1956, when this book was written, the strength of SMERSH at home and abroad was about 40,000 and General Grubozaboyschikov was its chief. My description of his appearance is correct.

Today the headquarters of SMERSH are where, in Chapter 4, I have placed them--at No 13 Sretenka Ulitsa, Moscow. The Conference Room is faithfully described and the Intelligence chiefs who meet round the table are real officials who are frequently summoned to that room for purposes similar to those I have recounted.

I. F."

We need more nuanced, objective takes like this. Thanks for bringing some rationality to this discussion, even though you're getting dogpiled.

To everyone attempting to reply to the above comment in good faith, remember that the only way to productively engage with a hexbear is to not engage at all. Trying to do so is what started this whole kerfuffle in the first place.

Don't feed the trolls.

Edit: Note the bait below, and note how I'm not wasting my time engaging with it.

Copied from my comment down below:

I chose lemm.ee because of how rarely it defederates. Blahaj is still federated, as is hexbear, lemmygrad, and beehaw, as well as stuff like lemmynsfw. For those who want to curate their own instance experience, I'm not currently aware of a better home (though if anyone knows of one, definitely let me know, of course!).

The server was upgraded this past week actually, and I haven't had any problems since.

?? I was suggesting it for the user above, who specifically mentioned wanting instances that weren't quick to defederate.