Obviously I can understand why mysoginists are hated upon, As their belief is all women are trash or men are superior etc. But why are incels also generally hated upon? They are lacking in a way that makes them unable to gey in a relationship, but that shouldn’t necessarily mean they are mysoginists, right?

What am I missing here? I haven’t ever had a relationship with a woman, but I don’t hate all women either. I just consider myself unlucky. Does that make me an incel?

  • beardown@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    Fear based on immutable traits is always wrong. Not a difficult concept. Kind of the basis of the equal protection clause and liberalism in general

    • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      It may be conceptually wrong, but so is rape. So is assault. Those things being wrong don’t make them impossible.

      Therefore, it isn’t wrong to be afraid of those things. In a perfect world, no one would have to be afraid of anyone. But also bad things wouldn’t happen.

      You can’t argue this point away just because you’re adhering to a specific political ideology about how the world should be. Reality is what it is. 1 in 3 women experience sexual assault of some kind in their life time. People who rape or assault will almost always pick a target they can overpower.

      It might be wrong to be wary of men because they’re men, but it’s also reality that women have to do that.

      I’ve said it a few times already: Don’t take my word for it. Look into womens’ perspectives online or ask one you know if they’ve ever avoided a man that sketched them out.

      If you don’t seek their opinions, what right do you have deciding what’s right or wrong for someone else?

    • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Additionally, I really don’t feel like rehashing every single point I just made with the other guy because you also think it’s a matter of whether you agree or not. I linked resources. I spelled it out several times, honestly more thoroughly than I should have.

      I urge you to look into it yourself. Seek what women actually say and feel and fight the urge to just tell them they are wrong because you feel personally attacked. It’s not personal.

      I’m out.

      • beardown@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        Anyone who stereotypes anyone based on immutable traits is wrong. If there are individual women who do this to men then they are wrong. Same as any white person who would do this to an Asian person.

        All humans are individuals and should be treated as such. Being prejudiced against an entire race/sex/sexual orientation is wrong under all circumstances

          • beardown@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            You’re literally defending bigotry. And you seem to be doing so because you think women are infallible.

            Which is sexist. Women aren’t any more or less moral than men. They’re all just people. Immutable traits do not bestow moral clarity or hidden knowledge. To think otherwise is extremely bigoted

            • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              👍

              (Framing what I said as defending bigotry does not change reality. It’s preposterous to assert that women should not take precautions against the worst case scenario because someone’s feelings might get hurt)

              (I’m out for real this time. Seriously consider taking on a woman’s perspective)

              • beardown@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                You’re making the same fallacious argument that racists make about why whites need to avoid blacks. Or why Christians need to avoid dealings with Jews. You’re a bigot whether you realize it or not.

                • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Actually, no. I’m going to take 5 minutes and address this one through example.

                  Women aren’t afraid of men because they have a penis, which is the thing that makes them a man. They are afraid of men because men are biologically armed.

                  Let me spell it out for you, although I’m certain this endeavor ultimately isn’t going to get any response from you except the quintessential “nuh uh”:

                  1. You are being approached by a nondescript person with a rifle pointed at you. That doesn’t concern you at all? You don’t know he’s going to pull the trigger, and he probably won’t anyway because that would land him in prison.

                  But by your logic if you take any measure to avoid him you are a bigot against people with guns

                  1. Now you’re looking to cross the street. You look both ways and notice cars are coming. You deduce that they would most likely see and avoid you if you just walk out in the middle of the road, but there’s still the chance you might get hit.

                  But by your logic you are being a bigot against people who drive if you decide not to cross the road

                  1. Now you are a woman walking to your car from the gym. There is a man parked next to you waiting by his car for seemingly no reason. You noticed him staring at you when you were on the treadmill. You tell yourself he probably won’t do anything because there’s cameras, but trying to get to your car door makes you nervous.

                  By your logic you would be a bigot if you decided not to go back to your car

                  This situation actually happened to my mother-in-law. That man tried to grab her and came on to her.

                  If you say “Well Seasoned_Greetings, it’s OBVIOUSLY not the same situation in the first two examples because those situations are ACTUALLY DANGEROUS”, then you are running head first into the point and still missing it.

                  Men are armed. They cannot disarm. Women aren’t afraid in the same way of men in wheel chairs, or men they can clearly get away from, or even outnumber.

                  If you really, truly can’t understand why women take precautions, there’s nothing more I can say to you. It’s not bigotry to be aware that you can be overpowered and fear for your own safety. Full stop.

                  Accusing this mindset of bigotry only really highlights to people who get it that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

                  Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go to bed.

                  • beardown@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    I don’t think you understand what a trait vs an immutable trait is. Being a driver or a gun owner is not an immutable trait. So those aren’t applicable to what I’m talking about. I’m talking about bigotry based on immutable traits, such as sex or race. Which is unlawful under certain circumstances and is always highly illiberal

                    A woman could also have done that to your MiL, especially if she had a knife or gun. Which should be presumed as we are in the United States. Any stranger behaving in such a manner should raise red flags, including if that stranger is a woman. My point is not that stranger danger isn’t a reasonable concept under certain circumstances, it’s that you’re a bigot if you only apply that concept to certain sexes or races. White women, for example, should raise just as many red flags and protective measures as black men do if we are talking about strangers acting strangely. In fact, you’re a mark and a bigot if you think a would be assailant is actually a friend just because they’re a white lady

                    Suspicious behavior should always raise your suspicions. Race and sex don’t play any part in that analysis

            • june@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              To put it out there, bigotry is defined as:

              obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group

              The reason this isn’t bigotry is outlined pretty clearly here: https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics

              In case you don’t want to open the link:

              1 in 5 women experience rape, and 33% of them were raped between 11-13

              81% of women experience sexual harassment

              There’s nothing obstinate or unreasonable about women treading lightly around men. Nearly all women experience unwanted and/or aggressive sexual advances from men. Being cautious of men is the right and reasonable thing to do.

                • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  You can’t help but draw a false equivalency to make your points, I’m glad it isn’t just with me.

                  Here’s the thing, neither lgbt people nor Muslims are defined by their physical superiority to the other. That’s why it’s a false equivalency.

                  Furthermore, the argument isn’t “all women should be distrustful of all men all the time because of the rapists”, it’s “women have a reason to, at their discretion and in times of vulnerability, be cautious of men”

                  It’s not comparable.

                  • beardown@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    You’re laying a basis for the “reasonable” use of sex segregation in society and for a bifurcated social grouping of men and women. Which is sexism.

                    Also your arguments about biological strength differences were used as a justification for racial segregation in the United States and in Apartheid South Africa as a basis for keeping the “inherently brutish and rapacious African” away from the more “civilized” whites, mainly white delicate women. You’re doing the same thing here. You’re a bigot, and the rationalizations you’re using are of the same type that bigots always employ

                    Maybe you should read a history book. Or just stop othering people and enabling prejudice. It’s inherently immoral, illiberal, and counter to Western enlightenment thought.

                • june@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  The vast majority of Muslims in the west, like Christians, are ideologically against folks that are LGBTQ, but they aren’t out there assaulting 81% of LGBTQ people. This, like the other commenter is saying, is a false equivalence and not relevant.

                  • beardown@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    You think that your hypothetical men who are so evil are somehow not Muslim or black? Why?