Author Topic: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!  (Read 98161 times)

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 77698
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #570 on: August 15, 2012, 10:05:30 pm »
Also, just to reiterate, if we are trying to look at things from an evidential perspective, the Webster 1913 etymology of the variance "pussy" as a derogatory term derived from "pursy" occurred only in that single edition and was removed from subsequent editions, and has no other support. It seems like a funny thing to latch onto so hard, and reminds me of when in the early 1990's it was common for grrrl power chicks to latch onto the widely-repeated piece of (erroneous) folklore that "Cunt" was actually derived from Sumerian "Kundi" and means "Goddess".

FYI, erroneous and invented etymologies are typically removed from dictionaries when further research finds no support for them. A typical red flag for an erroneous or invented etymology is when there are no other sources or references, and the entry is removed from subsequent editions rather than being adopted into subsequent editions and other dictionaries.

As I mentioned, it was incredibly common for dictionary editors of that time to "pad" their content with inventive etymologies in order to create a selling point for their dictionary.

This probably explains the "cunt is derived from the same root as cunning or ken" thing that I saw some years ago, and can't find now. Thanks.  :)

Yes, and I've always wondered about the logic behind that kind of "reclaiming", because the logic seems to be "See, it doesn't really mean "vagina", so it's not really anything bad" rather than ACTUAL reclaiming, which would be "It means "vagina" and vaginas are good".
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Anna Mae Bollocks

  • La Mano Famosa del Infierno
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 10724
  • Interweb Horrormonkey of Love
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #571 on: August 15, 2012, 10:06:23 pm »
Just like "white" becomes pejorative when someone says "white tears", Stellz? I explain my word choice below, btw.

"Hey there, I see that you're currently victim to the horrors of Auschwitz. I can imagine how that must feel for you. While not a resident myself,  I am going to tell you all about Auschwitz as the local authority on Auschwitz. What's that? No, I think you're wrong about that detail. Why does that upset you? How come your side of the Auschwitz yay or nay argument is the best and I have to listen to you? If you want your situation to get better, you need to be more respectful towards people who aren't in Auschwitz when they explain Auschwitz to you.What do you mean I can't be an official Auschwitz ally if I go about misrepresenting Auschwitz and insist that the interpretation from within is somehow invalid?" to expand on the already fairly dangerous comparison.

Roger, I'm not reading that into it at all. Maybe I'm more familiar with the positions being represented here and there's a miscommunication I'm reading past. Comparing quotes of statements to those of replies and interpretations is a bit beyond the capabilities of my phone, but the thread reads like "men can absolutely be helpful and involved but cannot be primary sources on the experiences of women", "hey, fuck you for excluding me."
This!

Right, then, if that's how I'm coming off, then I am neither suitable for this conversation or the general struggle it describes.  Signor Paisor can keep explaining my position for me, I guess, since he feels he is capable of stating what I really think.
Roger, please chill out. No one is attacking you. While I an frustrated with you (you keep putting words in my mouth and I'd like it if you'd stop, please), I have not observed you doing the crying. I never saw you bitch about how feminism makes you feel sad or whatever.

I am a "CIS male".  This is utterly irrelevant as to whether or not I am an elgatarian.  And I don't see any "feminist space".  I see people who want to be recognized as people and/or who recognize other people as people.  There is no "space" here to enter.  There is no territory upon which to infringe.  You are, or you aren't.  Nothing else matters.

That's fine. But Roger, there are feminist spaces. Whether there should be or not is a different argument, but they exist. There are feminist collectives and feminist blogs and feminist communities and feminist events, and they are spearheaded as such. They're a thing. And when men come along and want to turn the whole things into a discussion about "what about meeeeee", that's when we get frustrated.
This. You being cis is irrelevant until you, or any other dude, make it relevant. I added "cis" to the "man tears" because transmen don't exactly have the same privileges you do (and again, privilege is nothing to be ashamed of, just something to be aware of) or experience things the same way. I was trying to be more specific.

Garbo, a person is a human being first, having a human experience. Male, female, straight, gay, trans, bi, cis  :x, etc. are waaaaay secondary to that.

Everybody goes through shit. Some people go through shit that's not identical to your shit, but it involved being mindfucked, pushed around, or whatever, and sometimes a it's lot more intense. There's enough there that they can relate. I wouldn't dismiss them with "cis tears" OR "white tears".
« Last Edit: August 15, 2012, 10:08:35 pm by TEXAS FAIRIES FOR ALL YOU SPAGS »
Scantily-Clad Inspector of Gigantic and Unnecessary Cashews, Texas Division

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 77698
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #572 on: August 15, 2012, 10:09:52 pm »
Yes but can men join as equals, intellectually and otherwise? Or are men expected to join as foot soldiers and solidarity trophies, expected to place their own beliefs and experiences and ideas on a lower level than women's? If that's the kind of joining I would have to do, then no thanks. I understand that the experience of being a woman can only be had by women (though there's some wiggle-room there), but a heartfelt understanding and empathy with women can be had by anyone, and anyone can have valid observations and ideas about how to improve things. It turns a lot of men off even trying, and turns a few of them against feminism, to just say, "lol you're a man what do you know."

How can they? They just do. Part of that joining involves listening to women's experience and feelings in their lower-status situation in this society, as well as women listening to men's experience and feelings in their higher-status situation. Most importantly, it means both men and women being aware of that status disparity as they listen to, and tell, their stories.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Anna Mae Bollocks

  • La Mano Famosa del Infierno
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 10724
  • Interweb Horrormonkey of Love
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #573 on: August 15, 2012, 10:12:43 pm »
The following is a rationalization that my brain came up with. I know it's not right in spite of there being a little truth to it, but I thought I'd offer it up as an example of a way that patriarchal ideas can manifest. I'm also depositing it here for the sake of dissection.

Women tend to be physically smaller and have less upper body strength than men, so why is it such a no-no to link femininity to weakness? On one hand I hear women saying that men don't understand how inequality in strength and size fuels feelings of vulnerability around men, yet women seem to not want womanhood or femininity otherwise linked with weakness.

Unfortunately, it's entirely appropriate for women to be concerned about being physically overpowered as it's basic fact that most men are stronger than most women. For the average man, such a concern is less warranted as he's likely to have a more even match when push comes to shove. So when guys disparage one another using words conceptually linked to women it seems less about putting women down and more an inference that what is an appropriate concern for a woman is often not an appropriate concern for man.

OK, I'm going to do one of those comparisons that people hate so much. Before I do, I want to make clear that I am doing this purely because I find it incredibly effective in highlighting the issue in terms that most of us are already familiar with, and not because I in any way think you endorse these views.

Quote
Blacks tend to be lower income and have less material wealth than whites, so why is it such a no-no to link blackness to poverty? On one hand I hear blacks saying that whites don't understand how inequality in income and assets fuels feelings of oppression and disparity around whites, yet blacks seem to not want African origins or dark skin otherwise linked with poverty.

Unfortunately, it's entirely appropriate for blacks to be concerned about being economically discriminated against as it's basic fact that most whites are paid more than most blacks. For the average white person, such a concern is less warranted as they're likely to have a more even match when applying for work. So when whites disparage one another using words conceptually linked to blacks it seems less about putting blacks down and more an inference that what is an appropriate concern for a black person is often not an appropriate concern for a white person.

Question (not gauntlet): Aren't there more poor Blacks because of a rigged social/economic system? If everybody had the same advantages here, the numbers would be different, obviously. Men don't have more upper-body strength because of better nutrition or because gyms keep women out, so I'm not sure about this analogy.

I don't have a problem with being seen as inherently physically weaker, it doesn't mean "inferior" anyway. We have other things we tend to do better, we're just as good, but not identical. I like being able to ask guys to to heavy lifting because they know it's easier for them. It would be another story if I'd grown up watching boys get better food and play outdoors while I was locked in a room mending socks or something.

Yes, but the specific issue being addressed here is not whether blacks are statistically more likely to be poor, but what using a word that denotes blackness as an insult tells us about our society.

Just as the specific issue with calling men "pussies" or "little girls" is not whether women are weaker overall than men are, but what using femininity as an insult tells us about our society.

Ah, thanks.  :)
Scantily-Clad Inspector of Gigantic and Unnecessary Cashews, Texas Division

Juana

  • Hideous and Otherworldly Attack Duckling of DESPAIR
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 5589
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #574 on: August 15, 2012, 10:17:36 pm »
Yes but can men join as equals, intellectually and otherwise? Or are men expected to join as foot soldiers and solidarity trophies, expected to place their own beliefs and experiences and ideas on a lower level than women's? If that's the kind of joining I would have to do, then no thanks. I understand that the experience of being a woman can only be had by women (though there's some wiggle-room there), but a heartfelt understanding and empathy with women can be had by anyone, and anyone can have valid observations and ideas about how to improve things. It turns a lot of men off even trying, and turns a few of them against feminism, to just say, "lol you're a man what do you know."

How can they? They just do. Part of that joining involves listening to women's experience and feelings in their lower-status situation in this society, as well as women listening to men's experience and feelings in their higher-status situation. Most importantly, it means both men and women being aware of that status disparity as they listen to, and tell, their stories.
This.

Vex, a man's experience IS as valid as a woman's. But you do have to realize, if you want to work with women and females on issues specifically related to them, that you are going to have to put your experiences in the back seat when dealing explicitly with those issues. And be aware of your higher status the rest of the time.


Stellz, Human experience, yes. I agree. But those experiences are very heavily colored by those filters.

Being oppressed is traumatic and obviously terrible. But it also can have the effect of turning people sour and seeking revenge. This is fact, and nobody is above it. See: ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY. Being oppressed does not lend itself to giving a balanced view of the situation even if that oppression ends. Whole nations of humans have formed for the specific purpose of seeking revenge for oppression - and they do it, and they're no better than their oppressors were, but they don't see it, because their ability to be fair has been violated and destroyed by the original oppression.

I'm not saying feminism is necessarily going to go down this path, but it's possible (and you can't really say it's impossible without being self-righteous and just plain wrong). So it seems to me that feminism needs detached, outside opinions and observations in order to keep that possibility in check.

Saying things like "men don't/can't understand" or "a man's view is inherently inferior or inadequate" or that it must "take a back seat" to a woman's opinions is evidence of that counter-oppressive possibility.
Those outside opinions are often flavors of "you're overreacting!"* so you'll have to excuse me if I have trouble with that idea.


*This is not to say that a guy can't have valid input, but that I'm going to analyze what he has to say very, very harshly. And THIS IS NOT A PERSONAL ATTACK ON ANYONE HERE. I don't think any of the guys on PD would tell me, if a guy started to verge on rapeiness, that I was overreacting. I know you wouldn't.

This. You being cis is irrelevant until you, or any other dude, make it relevant.

Until the man-tears start, of course.
Uh, pretty much, although I'm going to point out, since I possibly wasn't clear enough before, that other dudes crying doesn't delegitimize your input. We try not to paint with a broad brush (yes, I know that's not how you're seeing it at present; Imma try to untangle the knots soon - maybe that would be useful?).
"I dispose of obsolete meat machines.  Not because I hate them (I do) and not because they deserve it (they do), but because they are in the way and those older ones don't meet emissions codes.  They emit too much.  You don't like them and I don't like them, so spare me the hysteria."

The Good Reverend Roger

  • Horrible Bastard
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 90457
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #575 on: August 15, 2012, 10:18:44 pm »
I'd have to see.  It looks pretty knotted up.

In fact, it looks like everything that's been explained to me in the last 2 days has been bullshit.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

 "Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 77698
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #576 on: August 15, 2012, 10:18:59 pm »
Yes but can men join as equals, intellectually and otherwise?

Join what?

the feminist cause, the fight for equality. saying "mens ideas must take a back seat" is like telling straight people they have no business fighting for gay rights, or white people they have no business fighting for racial equality, unless they completely bow out of the conversation and do nothing but show up at rallies and echo what they're told to say.

I think that "men's ideas must take a back seat" is wrong. However, I think that when people say "men need to listen to women's feelings and experiences without trying to invalidate them just because they don't match their own feelings and experiences", some people often perceive it as saying that men's ideas must take a back seat.

It's not that men's experiences don't count or aren't valid. It's that it's a problem when men try to use their experiences to tell women what women feel and experience, or what men think women ought to feel and experience.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 77698
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #577 on: August 15, 2012, 10:19:31 pm »
Yes but can men join as equals, intellectually and otherwise?

Join what?

the feminist cause, the fight for equality. saying "mens ideas must take a back seat" is like telling straight people they have no business fighting for gay rights, or white people they have no business fighting for racial equality, unless they completely bow out of the conversation and do nothing but show up at rallies and echo what they're told to say.

Eglatarianism (or feminism) isn't something you join.  It's something you ARE and something you DO.

The approval of one faction or another is irrelevant.  I don't care if someone thinks I can only be an "associate member" because of my gender or whatever, because I never joined their group, because there IS NO GROUP.  There are only your own personal beliefs and actions.

And, this.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


The Good Reverend Roger

  • Horrible Bastard
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 90457
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #578 on: August 15, 2012, 10:20:00 pm »
I think that "men's ideas must take a back seat" is wrong. However, I think that when people say "men need to listen to women's feelings and experiences without trying to invalidate them just because they don't match their own feelings and experiences", some people often perceive it as saying that men's ideas must take a back seat.

It's not that men's experiences don't count or aren't valid. It's that it's a problem when men try to use their experiences to tell women what women feel and experience, or what men think women ought to feel and experience.

I can't disagree with anything in this post.

But I don't read what was said earlier as being the same as this.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

 "Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Anna Mae Bollocks

  • La Mano Famosa del Infierno
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 10724
  • Interweb Horrormonkey of Love
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #579 on: August 15, 2012, 10:20:14 pm »
Ook ook. If you're determined to take offence, fuck you Roger. You miserable fuck. I'm done giving you the benefit of the doubt and can only read your reactions here as attempts at shutting the conversation down with strawmen.

What the gibbering fuck are you talking about?

"OOK OOK" - wasn't that Khara's line?  :lulz:
Scantily-Clad Inspector of Gigantic and Unnecessary Cashews, Texas Division

The Good Reverend Roger

  • Horrible Bastard
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 90457
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #580 on: August 15, 2012, 10:20:59 pm »
Ook ook. If you're determined to take offence, fuck you Roger. You miserable fuck. I'm done giving you the benefit of the doubt and can only read your reactions here as attempts at shutting the conversation down with strawmen.

What the gibbering fuck are you talking about?

"OOK OOK" - wasn't that Khara's line?  :lulz:

No, that was my line.   :lulz:
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

 "Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Ps

  • James Bond-defying Shit-Volcano Trigger Device of the Next Armageddon.
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2925
  • I ain't even mad.
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #581 on: August 15, 2012, 10:22:23 pm »
Ook ook. If you're determined to take offence, fuck you Roger. You miserable fuck. I'm done giving you the benefit of the doubt and can only read your reactions here as attempts at shutting the conversation down with strawmen.

What the gibbering fuck are you talking about?

I'm talking about repeated attempts to address your "they are putting words in my mouth and that post didn't have anything to do with me" with "prove it" and "then it probably wasn't aimed at you" being responded to with "YOU JUST KEEP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH".

Get fucked. "This minority isn't giving me enough of a say" makes you look like a parody of every privileged motherfucker ever. "BAWWW They aren't trusting me even though I am on their side" you poor son of a bitch, that must be really upsetting. You know who else that distrust is uncomfortable for? The women whose experience has led them to develop it for self defence.

Here, for the first time, there is room for complaining about how I'm portraying you.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 77698
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #582 on: August 15, 2012, 10:23:02 pm »
"Hey there, I see that you're currently victim to the horrors of Auschwitz. I can imagine how that must feel for you. While not a resident myself,  I am going to tell you all about Auschwitz as the local authority on Auschwitz. What's that? No, I think you're wrong about that detail. Why does that upset you? How come your side of the Auschwitz yay or nay argument is the best and I have to listen to you? If you want your situation to get better, you need to be more respectful towards people who aren't in Auschwitz when they explain Auschwitz to you.What do you mean I can't be an official Auschwitz ally if I go about misrepresenting Auschwitz and insist that the interpretation from within is somehow invalid?" to expand on the already fairly dangerous comparison.

Roger, I'm not reading that into it at all. Maybe I'm more familiar with the positions being represented here and there's a miscommunication I'm reading past. Comparing quotes of statements to those of replies and interpretations is a bit beyond the capabilities of my phone, but the thread reads like "men can absolutely be helpful and involved but cannot be primary sources on the experiences of women", "hey, fuck you for excluding me."

YES! Thank you, Paes!

Except that what Paes said had jack shit to do with what I was saying.

So the fuck what? He made some good points. It's not about "winning" some personal debate IMO, it's about getting to the truth.
Im guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk, Charles Wick said. It was very complicated.


The Good Reverend Roger

  • Horrible Bastard
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 90457
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #583 on: August 15, 2012, 10:23:44 pm »
Ook ook. If you're determined to take offence, fuck you Roger. You miserable fuck. I'm done giving you the benefit of the doubt and can only read your reactions here as attempts at shutting the conversation down with strawmen.

What the gibbering fuck are you talking about?

I'm talking about repeated attempts to address your "they are putting words in my mouth and that post didn't have anything to do with me" with "prove it" and "then it probably wasn't aimed at you" being responded to with "YOU JUST KEEP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH".

Get fucked. "This minority isn't giving me enough of a say" makes you look like a parody of every privileged motherfucker ever. "BAWWW They aren't trusting me even though I am on their side" you poor son of a bitch, that must be really upsetting. You know who else that distrust is uncomfortable for? The women whose experience has led them to develop it for self defence.

Here, for the first time, there is room for complaining about how I'm portraying you.

Paesor, you simply don't have the chops to tell me that I don't understand the consequences of non-eglatarian behavior.

That's really all there is to it.
" It's just that Depeche Mode were a bunch of optimistic loveburgers."
- TGRR, shaming himself forever, 7/8/2017

 "Billy, when I say that ethics is our number one priority and safety is also our number one priority, you should take that to mean exactly what I said. Also quality. That's our number one priority as well. Don't look at me that way, you're in the corporate world now and this is how it works."
- TGRR, raising the bar at work.

Juana

  • Hideous and Otherworldly Attack Duckling of DESPAIR
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 5589
    • View Profile
Re: Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!
« Reply #584 on: August 15, 2012, 10:25:08 pm »
This has gone from a discussion about how men are also harmed by the patriarchy, to a rather interesting examination of views on language previously taken for granted, to an explanation of the following (from 3 users):

1.  Men can't understand.
2.  Men can't be trusted.
3.  Allies are not desired.  Put on the whole uniform or GTFO.
4.  "Decent men" are needed for support, which assumes that "decent" isn't the default position.
5.  Men somehow want to join the "club of the oppressed".

This conversation is now a self-parody, and cannot - in its present form - have any possible desirable outcome.  It is no longer about eglatarianism, it is now the sort of thing that is used as ammunition by people opposed to feminism.

The upside is, before it turned into a pissing contest, I got one good thing out of it (thanks, Garbo).

It's starting to sound like that rusty old Gloria Steinem/Marlo Thomas rhetoric that ruined the first wave feminism by assuming we all wanted to HATE MENS AND BE FORKLIFT OPERATORS.

A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.
A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after.
We are becoming the men we wanted to marry
A woman reading Playboy feels a little like a Jew reading a Nazi manual.
Women have two choices: Either she's a feminist or a masochist.

Both sides of the argument present a false dichtomy.  There is only one standard:  CAN YOU LIVE THE LIFE YOU WANT TO LIVE, ON YOUR OWN MERITS AS A HUMAN BEING?

If the answer is yes, you're an equal, regardless of what YOU CHOOSE to actually do.  If a woman CHOOSES to be a housewife or to have a career is her choice, and does not indicate one way or the other if she is a "feminist".

Likewise, a Gay person can choose to be whatever they want to be, if it is something inside their individual capabilities.  So can I, so can you.  No other conditions are necessary or even desirable.
There's no argument to be had here from me.
"I dispose of obsolete meat machines.  Not because I hate them (I do) and not because they deserve it (they do), but because they are in the way and those older ones don't meet emissions codes.  They emit too much.  You don't like them and I don't like them, so spare me the hysteria."