When I was younger I was very pro-free-speech, then around age 20 or so I became woke. Then I got cancelled and it snapped me out of it. It turned my whole world upside down.
When I was younger I was very pro-free-speech, then around age 20 or so I became woke. Then I got cancelled and it snapped me out of it.
There’s no guarantee of free-speech in the US except from our government. (even that has restrictions) You aren’t guaranteed free speech on internet platforms, nor are you shielded from the effects of what you have said. Was there a certain statement that got you cancelled or was it a number of things?
@nothingplanet Basically I agree with the radical feminist viewpoint that women face unique challenges on the basis of their sex, not gender identity.
@realcaseyrollins @nothingplanet Being a guy in a dress has basically negligible consequences. Women face issues because they're physically weaker than us and because they have wombs (the ability to make babies, which is something we consider a commodity).
Women spend hours putting on makeup and wearing sexualized clothing like high heels because they are positioned as lowly people in society. Makeup is oppressive. Imagine if men wore makeup. Imagine that everyone around you does it, and if you don't you're a freak. You have to literally paint your face, and it takes up to 2 hours every morning. It's no wonder women get paid less, they have to do a great job on top of a rigorous morning routine to make sure they look beautiful.
Would you like to wear makeup every day? I'm guessing not. So why would a man choose to wear makeup every day? This is really just an example, but there are 100 different ways people identify as trans, I don't even know where to begin deconstructing them all.
@mewmew @realcaseyrollins @nothingplanet "Only an average" still means 98% of them. Men and women are sexually dimorphic. Just go outside and look... if you think there are millions of in-between people you may be spending too much time on the Fediverse. To be clear I'm not talking about their hairstyles or clothes, but about their physical bodies. They are smaller and thinner. Huge women who can beat up men are extremely rare.
@mewmew @realcaseyrollins @nothingplanet I think you may be underestimating yourself. Arm wrestle with some women you know, just give it a try. It's possible you're right, but it would be rare. There is a significant difference between the sexes, even at the edges.
@mewmew @realcaseyrollins @nothingplanet Well, now we're in the territory of whether a cat with 3 legs is still a cat.
@mewmew @realcaseyrollins @nothingplanet First of all, what specifically are you arguing against?
I think grouping women together there doesn't make sense.
@mewmew @realcaseyrollins Okay. Why do more women get murdered by their husbands in heterosexual relationships than husbands murdered by their wives?
> The majority (73%) of family violence victims were female. Females were 84% of spouse abuse victims and 86%of victims of abuse at the hands of a boyfriend or girlfriend.
> While about three-fourths of the victims of family violence were female, about three-fourths of the persons who committed family violence were male.
> Eight in ten murderers who killed a family member were male. Males were 83% of spouse murderers and 75% of murderers who killed a boyfriend or girlfriend.
You mean men are not safe to be let out among the general population? Harsh.
But you argue they have mental health issues that cause them to be violent.
Given the rate of male violence, we must conclude that a high proportion of men have mental health issues that render them unsafe.
I do, yes.
You said men are violent because of mental health issues.
A high proportion of men are violent.
Your argument is that the men who commit violence, against other men, against women, against their partners & children are mentally ill.
So mentally ill that they can’t control their violent urges. That is the criterion for confining a person against their will - i.e. that they are a threat to themselves of others.
‘Most’ isn’t the point (for a person who is sneery about others’ grasp of statistics, you don’t appear to have a firm hold on the topic yourself 🤷♀️).
Your argument is that men are violent due to mental illness.
Many men who are violent have not shown signs of this ‘mental illness’ before being violent (although many men demonstrate a pattern of violence).
You argue that there are men whose (asymptomatic & undiagnosed) mental illness causes them to be violent to others; something they can’t control due to mental illness.
It doesn’t matter whether it’s ‘most’: by your logic, (asymptomatic & undiagnosed) mentally ill men are unpredictably violent.
People who, as a consequence of their mental illness, are considered to be a risk to themselves or others, can be confined in a mental health facility against their own will - regardless of whether they’ve actually been violent to someone else.
Are you arguing for a change in such powers generally, or just for men?
@Camille I think you’re misrepresenting their point here, be that intentionally or unintentionally. What mewmew stated is that domestic violence is caused by mental issues more often than by sheer muscle force.
While this does mean that a lot of people who are engaging in domestic violence have had mental health issues (regardless of whether that is true or wrong), it does not imply that most people with mental health issues are also violent. Those two groups may have intersections, yes, but they’re most definitely not one and the same.
I believe that is a composition fallacy.
I didn’t suggest that mentally ill people are violent.
The argument @mewmew made was that men are violent as a consequence of mental illness - & undiagnosed, & apparently asymptomatic prior to the violence, mental illness at that.
The argument was not that men with mental illness are violent. The argument made was that men who are violent have a mental illness *because* they are violent. This is an extremely dubious claim, presented without any supporting evidence.
I believe you’ve misunderstood the argument.
You made that claim. You did not make an argument.
You claimed that domestic violence was most likely caused by mental illness, even though these men have not displayed symptoms of mental illness, nor been diagnosed with a mental illness. You speculated.
This is not supported by evidence (and surely every domestic abuser would use this as a defence?).
It also implies an association between mental illness and violence to others, which is also unsupported by evidence.
That’s not my speculation, nor, I believe, is it @alex’s.
I think men take out their aggression, frustration, fear, whatever etc etc on women because they can.
They’re unlikely to experience violence in return, there’s a fairly high societal tolerance for it (see the stats), women are often trapped in situations it’s difficult to escape and are often not believed, conviction rates are low.
They do it because they’re bullies and can get away with it.
@Camille @alex @mewmew @realcaseyrollins @mezzodrinker
"They’re unlikely to experience violence in return, there’s a fairly high societal tolerance for it (see the stats)"
In a domestic violence situation the male can usually overpower a female partner, but western society most certainly doesn't "tolerate it". We criminalize it and we provide housing resources, run public awareness campaigns, and so on.
If there's any type of societal tolerance for violence, it's when a women attacks a man
In your view.
But you’ve already demonstrated that your view merits no consideration. What with behaving like an asshole n all.
@Camille @alex @mewmew @realcaseyrollins @mezzodrinker
"The merits of your argument don't matter because of your character"
Now who's throwing out the ad hominems here again?
I didn’t say anything about your character.
I criticised your behaviour.
The manner in which you chose to introduce yourself to me told me all I needed to know about your capacity to conduct yourself like an adult.
Go tantrum elsewhere. You’re boring.
@Camille @alex @mewmew @realcaseyrollins @mezzodrinker
I pointed out the variety of ways in which you were acting like a boomer, which, to add to the list, is that you've been disrespectful to other people in the thread, and are now upset that you're being called out about it.
When a person behaves like an asshole - and you did: “acting like a boomer” is ageist and lazy - I treat them like an asshole.
You’ll just have to learn to deal with that. Not behaving like an asshole would be a good start.
@Camille @alex @mewmew @realcaseyrollins @mezzodrinker
Apparently to you, "not behaving like an asshole" means "not criticizing my behavior".
You think "boomer" is ageist and lazy? How do you make that claim and then turn around and tell us to "get out of the basement sometime", and do so completely unironically? You are exactly the type of person for whom "boomer" is an apt description.
