463
“there’s not much misogyny on Lemmy” - kinda comments I got on a post expressing concern about Ariana Grande’s health (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/womensstuff@piefed.blahaj.zone
202 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 52 points 3 months ago* (7 children)

Recently had a man complain about the topics I post about. That by reposting stories about violence against women, I’m actually attacking men because while the news stories are true, I shouldn’t be highlighting them at the frequency I do. It makes men overall look like predators.

Women are always the problem for speaking up about problematic men while the men are always worth defending no matter what.

Hell, we have community members actively try to quiet other women in here for asking men to respect the rules.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Oh I love when people chastise me for my content on a platform where anyone can post whatever they want. Thankfully, if they want to see more pro-men content, they can look in literally any comment section outside of this community.

    By the way, are we talking about yesterday? That was a real special conversation. Like misogynist trolls need any more fucking allies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

    I am indeed talking about yesterday. I notice when people are quick to silence women speaking up but never say anything to the men breaking the rules. There have been times I’ve been told the bickering in this comm is not pleasant, but the alternative is allowing men to force their sexist opinions in here with no one speaking out against it to show it’s not ok.

    Silence is complicity imo.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    9/10 posts here are the most pleasant conversations I've seen on this platform.

    I appreciate the backup when they're not.

    People who choose their battles still have my respect, not everyone has the energy for negative interactions. I don't mind silence as much as picking the wrong side.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago*

    Actually yeah, I’m all for people choosing their battles and that line in my comment is rigid. Silence in the face of the offense while trying to silence others is more about complicity than just silence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago*

    People who choose their battles still have my respect, not everyone has the energy for negative interactions.

    I appreciate you. Thanks for taking the time to say that.

    Contrary to the spirit of the Fediverse (as I understand it - no offense intended) I don't assume Good Faith intentions. There’s absolutely a blatant ongoing global campaign to make women things again – the architects and amplifiers are open and vocal about it with each other - and no one’s immune to accelerationism.

    I've got no patience for male-presenting user accounts endlessly amplifying their gender wars in every available online space, child rape jokes about "the Epstein files" like it's brave activism, drip-feed trigger content in everyone's doomscroll... It's all SO heartbreaking and shit's already so dire.

    Media literacy for me in 2026 is equal parts rtfa and blocking. Just for basic mental health (and to slow down the accelerationism - idk if it works). I used to tag user accounts on reddit with RES, but really dgaf enough to bother anymore.

    Truth is, the ONLY reason I open a comment section anywhere when the subject's "horrible things happening to women" is to bulk up my blocklist with all the user accounts who go there to play Kick the Dolly or Debate Club (so I don't accidentally take them at face value when they pop up elsewhere). No quarter.

    -Maybe this is true but I don't see it. - block -That's sad but the victim is problematic so we probably shouldn't care. - block
    -That's sad but the victim should've known better so we probably shouldn't care. - block -Why aren’t we talking about this other thing over there? – block
    -Sure but it's worse when women - block
    -No war but the class war, amirite ladies? - blockblockblock

    From user account spujb 2 years ago - https://files.catbox.moe/c8i4xx.jpeg

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago*

    I would call that "a valid point in theory, but not in practice."

    Racists for example do use selective reporting to demonize minority groups. TERFS for example will run entire sites that do nothing but report on the crimes of trans women. Because in any group of sufficient size, there will be saints and sinners among them. You can demonize a minority group by simply selectively reporting the truth. The Nazis ran papers that did nothing but report on real crimes committed by actual Jewish people....and not the crimes of anyone else. By doing so they subtly convinced people that Jews were innately criminal. So yes, in theory, only reporting on the crimes of one group can be a tool of instigating hate.

    But this fails in practice in this case. You're not going to convince anyone to hate men by only reporting on the violent crimes of men. In fact, even if you reported every crime committed, the vast majority of your stories would feature men, as the vast majority of violent crimes are committed by men. This kind of tactic works to demonize a small misunderstood minority group. It's not going to convince anyone to start hating a group that's half the population.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent