LABELS - The Thread!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I refuse to view him as a full human being until/unless he views me, and all women, as full human beings with the right to define our own experiences and wants.

It's a give and take thing I have going on.

Anybody who insists that I am taking away their basic humanity by refusing to let them deprive me of mine is a non-person in my eyes.

Anyone who looks at an issue of another person's oppression and responds with "But what about ME?" is a non-person in my eyes, until and unless they are able to critically examine their response, recognize the selfishness of it, and revise their perspective.

Note that I am NOT talking about the issue of how patriarchy and institutionalized sexism affects men. Men HAVE their own experiences, which are valid. What is not valid is trying to supercede/co-opt women's experiences and needs in the feminist dialogue.

I don't disagree one bit with the overwriting opinions. The subhuman part is the part I disagree with. Flawed, yes, but insulting, demeaning, and other forms of mental assault I don't believe will solve the problem. (Note I am not perfect and have done so especially if it's a hot topic with me that I am very enthusiastic about.) That makes people stonewall and turn off, in which the information you are trying to give to him gets lost which again means he will not have learned anything at all. You can say it's his problem, but as a relay of information and to educate and hope your idea gets out there and sticks, his problem becomes everyone's, including yourself.

I hope that came out right, I don't mean it to be offensive or an attack in any way.

I'm not sure I said subhuman. It's not really a word I use much. I recall saying non-person. "Not a full human being" ie. not bipedal.

When someone is demeaning and insulting toward me, I don't feel bad about doing it back to them.

As far as it shutting down his willingness to learn, he was already willing to learn. I don't dismiss people until I'm pretty sure they're hopeless.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

"But he's really a nice guy and doesn't mean any harm, you shouldn't have been so hard on him"

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I refuse to view him as a full human being until/unless he views me, and all women, as full human beings with the right to define our own experiences and wants.

It's a give and take thing I have going on.

Anybody who insists that I am taking away their basic humanity by refusing to let them deprive me of mine is a non-person in my eyes.

Anyone who looks at an issue of another person's oppression and responds with "But what about ME?" is a non-person in my eyes, until and unless they are able to critically examine their response, recognize the selfishness of it, and revise their perspective.

Unless they're saying it from the inside of a gas chamber.

But other than that, I can see where you're coming from.

Yeah, if someone is in immediate need of help, it's totally justified for them to go "but what about me?"

[trippinprincezz13]

Anyone who looks at an issue of another person's oppression and responds with "But what about ME?" is a non-person in my eyes, until and unless they are able to critically examine their response, recognize the selfishness of it, and revise their perspective.

Note that I am NOT talking about the issue of how patriarchy and institutionalized sexism affects men. Men HAVE their own experiences, which are valid. What is not valid is trying to supercede/co-opt women's experiences and needs in the feminist dialogue.

Ok, this I can understand. Rather than addressing the issues women are facing, attempting to turn the conversation to what men have to go through, undermines the topic/point of the discussion turning the focus from women back to men. Both sides of the issue are important, but continuing to try to spin the conversation to "Yea but I....." invalidates the problems that women actually do face by trying to say everything is the same for everyone or my problems are equal to your. I can see trying to empathize with "I see your experience, and this is what happened to me", but it's not always appropriate, especially when they are completely different experiences. Am I getting close? Because then I do see where the issue is and agree.

I have a lot of respect for you, Nigel, I think you're a very smart, strong and likable person, so I'm really not being deliberately argumentative here. I was a bit miffed at being accused to apologizing for sexist behavior when my point was mostly "can't we all just get along" (not quite, but I stated my position above and TDM summarized it pretty well too). I know this is a sensitive issue so things can get heated, and I still feel like to an extent it's turned into an us v. them/with us or against us type argument (not saying you, just the general vibe I get from either "side"), when I feel that overall most people here agree on the core issues

ETA: "My parents were killed in a horrible car accident yesterday"
        "I know how you feel, my tomato plant ending up dying no matter how much I watered it"

Maybe a bit of an extreme example, but I think that is part of where the issue is?

[Ben Shapiro]

This is by far one of the best threads I've read.

[Sung Low]

Only half way through, but

agreed.