Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)O

ObjectivityIncarnate

@ damnedfurry @lemmy.world

Posts
0
Comments
423
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • The problem is that panel 3 men exist at all

    Panel 3 women do, too. Some people are just shitheads.

    society normalizes it to be like that.

    That's simply not true. There is a reason neither men nor women are ever the ones willfully broadcasting this behavior: society absolutely does not justify this behavior. It's invariably the one on the receiving end calling them out (and the fact that it is seen as "calling them out" in the first place is more evidence that it is not a socially acceptable behavior).

    “Men will be men” and all that is the problem.

    Can you find a single, solitary example of a man being shown to react immaturely to being rejected posted online somewhere, and anything even close to the majority of the response being anything resembling "men will be men"? I contend you're fabricating this.

    I totally get why women would be guarded because of it.

    Do you also "totally get" why someone wouldn't trust black people after having a bad experience with a person who is black? Because this is the exact same line of reasoning white supremacists use.

    Our job as men is to point out toxic behavior when it happens.

    It's not men's job to socially police men. It's everyone's job to socially police everyone. It's ridiculous to insinuate that it's any more a male's responsibility to call out bad behavior, just because the one behaving badly is also male.

  • The reason no one dates incels is not because of their body type, or because they’re nerds, or any other excuse they can think of, it’s because they’re pieces of shit and it reflects on their personality, and no one likes people who have a shitty personality.

    There are plenty of people who are incels that do not fit this definition, and it does no one any good (you making yourself feel morally superior doesn't count) to generalize them all based on Internet stereotypes.

    What if anxiety and/or trauma prevents you from being able to even try to initiate romantic contact with someone, or ever allow yourself to be vulnerable to the degree required to make any sort of actual connection? Does that make you a "piece of shit", too?

    The majority of people who have no sex/relationships, against their will, are not the stereotypical "incel".

  • This falls under the fallacy of composition.

    The error is treating a group as if it were a single, internally consistent person, and then accusing that “person” of hypocrisy.

    • Men say X
    • Men say Y
    • X and Y are hypocritical

    Therefore: men who say either X or Y are hypocrites.

    That conclusion only follows if it’s the same individuals doing both X and Y. When it isn’t, the reasoning breaks.

  • 🎶It's alright🎶

  • I don't know, dry seems bad, but is "moist" even better? This really seems like a no-win situation.

  • So many

    Don't extrapolate your social circle onto the entire population. If someone else's social circle contains no one like this, are they then justified in saying it's overblown and extremely rare? Somehow I doubt you'd think so.

    This is no different from someone rationalizing/justifying a mistrust of black people based on the face that they were mugged once, and the mugger was black.

  • Was there some particular reason he never wanted to do it after lunchtime? /s

  • What’s the logic here? Just a bruised ego?

    Yes, coupled with a lack of maturity—a bruised ego alone does not a ridiculous rejection response make.

    It's the exact same reason women do it, when they do. There are plenty of posts on the 'nice girls' subreddit over the years of a woman doing the exact same 'you're ugly anyway' nonsense as an immediate reaction to rejection.

    This is a human phenomenon, not a male one.

  • None of the men who say the things in panel 1 are the same ones who say the things in panel 3.

    Men are not a monolith. The panel 1 men are on your side re the panel 3 men. Don't push them away with sexist generalizations.

    Also, women do this plenty as well (google "nice girls"), you just don't hear about it as much, even though I suspect the % of women who do it is comparable to the % of men (if not more, which I think may be the case, based on the second bullet point below), simply because women experience a lower absolute number of rejections, as a sex, than men do, by virtue of the following:

    • They do the approaching far less often on average. Only the 'approacher' can be the one who gets rejected, after all
    • On the absolute scale, men are definitely less likely to reject a woman who approaches them, than the other way around
      • This means women in general have less experience with rejection, and that difference of 'exposure'/experience likely leads to being less likely to handle it maturely, on average, as is the case with all sorts of things (I'm reminded of Christopher Titus's quip about how dysfunctional people can handle anything, while 'well-adjusted' people are more likely to freak out over what's trivial to the former demographic)
    • I'm also fairly sure men are also less likely to publicly 'call out' a woman, when she does react poorly to a rejection, than the other way around

    And for a mini-anecdote along those lines: I've personally been called the f-slur for rejecting a woman who propositioned me while having a boyfriend I was aware of.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • The author could have just used a smaller font so they wouldn't have had to abbreviate "FASTERISKGGOT".

  • That would be true even without the first sentence, lol

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • I think you could say part of one’s identity exists outside of the person.

    That doesn't really make sense to me. It would imply that some part of who you are is defined by outside perception, and I definitely don't agree with that, especially considering that there are an indefinite number of outside perspectives, and some number of those perspectives could definitely be mutually exclusive with others, making it impossible for them both to be correct.

    Simple analogy: if a triangle is viewed 'face-on' by one person and directly 'edge-on' by another, the former will perceive it as a triangle, and the latter, as a line. Something can't be a line and a triangle simultaneously, so how can these outside perspectives both be any part of what defines the identity of that object?

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • 🤓 Being trans has to do with gender identity, not sex. The whole foundation of transgenderism as a concept is that sex and gender identity are independent elements of a person. So as a corollary (I think, haven't used that word in a while lol), no non-sapient creature can ever be trans, because you need consciousness to have a gender identity in the first place.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Suddenly remembered Mitch Hedberg saying on stage, after some of his newer material didn't land as well, "My old shit's better than my new shit~"

    Maybe you've just peaked, Ruth, lol.

  • When Firefox started recording key strokes

    Source? That's news to me, and when I tried finding a source myself, all I found were extensions etc. to add that to the browser.

    EDIT: Both the comment I replied to, and a comment replying to me by the same person, have been deleted...were they caught in a lie/mistake and not brave enough to admit it? lol

  • Recently I’ve been seeing signs on them that kids can call Santa

    That's adorable :)