محترمہ پربھا ✅I don’t understand the purpose of men, why should women suffer so much to give birth to mostly trash who then have audacity to preach to us
If you reply with not all men in replies, am going to 🥊 , stay away from me
No matter bird app or here, men who don’t have spine to talk against sexism will come all out and preach to women about how not all men are bad. Men please keep your comments to yourself. Thanks 🙏🏼
esoteric_guy@Deepsealioness all men are sexist at some level, in some role. Maybe as father, brother, son, lover or friend. We can't imagine the level patriarchy has penetrated our minds. It appears in so many thoughts which seem harmless at first.
Perhaps the next generation born in the internet explosion age will change that.
btw don't punch me
Perhaps the next generation born in the internet explosion age will change that.
btw don't punch me
🎓 Doc Freemo 
🇳🇱I tend to agree on this point with one added detail. All women are sexist at some level too. The ubiquity of sexism extends to all races and is not exclusive to men in any way.
Sometimes they do, sometimes they dont. Its very situational who is in power.
But regardless sexism is sexism power or not.
I disagree, in the cases where the woan holds the power then it is the man who looses from the sexism. In cases where the man has power then the woman looses. Who is on the loosing end of the sexism is, of course, situational.
Of course power matters, I never claimed it didnt. Only that sexism is sexism evenwithout the power, it just so happens in those cases the sexism will do less damage.
@freemo
No sir, most of the times, men do. That's the point. We have to realize that women being in power and being sexist is the exception not the norm. At least in developing countries it is the case.
@Deepsealioness
No sir, most of the times, men do. That's the point. We have to realize that women being in power and being sexist is the exception not the norm. At least in developing countries it is the case.
@Deepsealioness
Well I never disputed that fact. I do agree that overall men are more likely to be oppressive (sexist + power) than women are. Absolutely, particularly in third world countries.
My point is this. Sexism and prejudice is, sadly, human nature. Women are just as much capable of it as men, and exhibit that prejudice just as often. We should recognize that men are more oppressive than women NOT because they are any more sexist (which is why the distinction is important) but only because they have more power.
I think its important we understand and maintain the distinction between sexual oppression and sexism.
capthaddock@freemo @ninad @Deepsealioness agree. Definition of sexism is also not the same as it was a generation ago.
@freemo
I see it this way - most of those in power have malices in them including women. So yes some woman in power can indeed be sexist.
But not all women! Simply because all of them still haven't even got the opportunity to be something or even think for themselves, let alone be sexist and exercise power by discriminating.
Wellthere are two issues there.. sexism, and power. A woman who is sexist with no power is still sexist, they just wont do much harm. So if we are talking about what groups are or arent sexist then power isnt related to that. Now if we want to talk about which groups are **oppressive** then that would of course require an element of power. So its a bit of a semantic aspect that needs to be clarified before we define who is what.
In terms of sexism I'd say everyone is probably sexist to some degree, some more than others, but it is pretty universal. Int erms of power I'd say it depends largely ont he country but men willmore often have some degree of power more than women. So men are more likely to be oppressive than women overall, but no more likely to be sexist.
@freemo
I agree on power.
As far as sexism is concerned, in men, sexism is mostly (not always) thinking that they are 'better' than or superior to women.
I can't say the same about women. So that's why sexism in men is politically incorrect imho.
@Deepsealioness what do you think?
I thinkt he way sexism manifests is very cultural. In the USA most sexism I see from women revolves around them thinking men are inherently "scum" and that women are better. Even some forms of sexism from men takes that form, praising women as superior.
That said there is some of the sexism you describe as well in good numbers. Plenty of men who might think they are superior to women or that womena rent suited for a certain task. In general the sexism in america doesnt appear very different from either sex except for a few differences.
In europe (I now moved to and live in the netherlands) I'd say its a bit different. I rarely see any sexism of any kind here. I cant recall ever having seen an incidence of sexism here, so I dunno. Maybe an expectation for women to dress a certain way and for men to dress a certain way, but thats about it.
One form of sexism i saw in europe once was from tourists so I'm not going to go into that as it doesnt exemplify the dutch.
@freemo True. It is different in different cultures. But mostly has been against women because men have been in powerful position. Now as we move towards a more equal society, the women are expressing more of themselves and as you said that expression could also have some sexism in it.
@Deepsealioness
@Deepsealioness
Not sure i follow. In what way would our arguments have changed through the recognition of male privilege?
I think by privilege she means what we have already discussed - that men have traditionally been in power and oppressed women. That privilege.
@Deepsealioness right?
Yea but we both already agreed to that point. So why does she think we are "missing" the point then if we covered it anfd agreed to it? I presume its more than just that? Or maybe she missed the earlier part of the convo?
@freemo
Yes. She might have not read the full convo. I have replied with a link to one of my toots.
Although can't risk to irk her much 
I still fear the punch will land on me 
@Deepsealioness
She is a very sweet person. As long as you talk to her respectfully I usually find she will also treat you with respect, even if you differ in opinion :)
@freemo
Of course she is. I have interacted and argued with her before. She is one of the reasons many flocked here from BirdSite.
I am just making the discussion a bit on lighter notes...
@Deepsealioness
Of course she is. I have interacted and argued with her before. She is one of the reasons many flocked here from BirdSite.
I am just making the discussion a bit on lighter notes...
@Deepsealioness
Jo/Jyothi@freemo @ninad @Deepsealioness
That she is. Most definitely, without doubt. Sweet and respectful, when given the same.
That she is. Most definitely, without doubt. Sweet and respectful, when given the same.
I'm not sure its that cut and dry. Consider the following:
A white woman in a majority white country, lets say the USA, vs a black gay male in the USA.
Obviously we cant say that the woman is non-privileged and the man is privileged. Because its just not that simple
Take me for example, I'm male, so in that regard I do have the majority advantage (would be privileged), but I am also overweight, which makes me a target of prejudice in that regard and an non-privileged. I am also native american which makes me significantly non-privileged and oppressed int he USA. Similarly I have a disability (spinal injury) which further makes me non-privileged. I moved to the netherlands but most of that still applies here.
So am I more privileged than a skinny, pure european, with no disabilities who happens to be a woman.. Well im not sure that logic really works at all.
I think this applies to most everyone. While everyone has certain properties that denote privilege and others that do not. People are not overall defacto privileged or not by sex alone.
That's one reason i dont generally like using the term "privileged" for any individual. I think its fine to say "men are more privileged than women" that certainly has truth to it. But to assume all men are therefore privileged is where the logic immediately fails.
Well in a sense that is what I was trying to say. If we talk in general terms, not about specific people I think its totally valid to say "males are more privilaged than women"
But my point is the second we talk about individuals and make statements that "all males are privilaged people and all females are non-privilaged people" then it becomes false.
Its a fine generalization, but it becomes dangerous the second we start assuming the generalization applies to specific people, just as generalizations tend to do.
@freemo @ninad disagree there. All men are privileged because we live in a patriarchal world
Also here is a pretty long dialogue between me and guy discussing Male privilege
https://twitter.com/deepsealioness/status/1148476146989748224?s=21
Again not sure a black gay man is a privileged person in a patriarchal world, but you could say "him being a man adds to his privilege while his other qualities detracts from his privilege", that I could agree with. But to just say he, as a person, overall, is privileged just for being male, im not sure that is accurate or even a good way to view it.
Agreed, a black gay man would have privilages in the USA a white straight woman would not have, many of those privilages extending from his sex.
But to carry it to its full completion, the woman in this scenario also has privileges the man doesnt have, those stemming from her whiteness and straightness in this case, so she is also privileged.
Which is the point im getting at. We can talking about characteristics that carry with it privilege, but we cant make generalizations about everyone who has those characteristics being a privileged individual overall.
We cant say "All men are privilaged people" but we can say "being a man carried with it privileges"
@Deepsealioness
So when we say privileged or oppressed, we must say so in relative terms. We can compare genders with genders, casts with casts, races with races. That way it's clear that women, blacks and dalits are the oppressed.
Comparing a white woman with a Black man as @freemo did is complex. This comparison isn't binary. We can't say - either privileged or not.
This comparison will have the privileged box checked 4 the white woman on some issues and 4 black man on some issues.
The point here though is just that, people **are** complex.. yes we can talk about race overall and the privilages it may denote. But when we talk about individuals we have to understand that virtually everyone has privilages and has oppression.
Everyone is oppressed for some aspect of who they are, and almost everyone is privilaged for some aspect of who they are.
@freemo
Not everyone. For example, say being a white straight male in US is (or was) the best position.
In India, that position is being a Brahmin male.
Similarly worst conditions too exist. Being a dalit/tribal woman in India.
Untill the notion of hierarchy isn't completely eliminated from a generation, we must keep fighting. Positive note is that it has started happening in India as well. And with technology, will only gain pace & move exponentially!!
@Deepsealioness
Well some people may be oppressed in ways that are so minor as to not be particularly significant, but even a white straight male may have otehr ways they are oppressed.. If they are significantly overweight for example, that will absolutely cause them to be part of an oppressed group, same for if they happen to be disabled, or autistic, or if they have a history of drug abuse.
There are countless qualities a person may have that falls ont he side of oppression rather than the side of privilege.
I would assert that virtually everyone has at least some qualities that they are oppressed for, even if they may not be as significant as other qualities.
One thing is clear to me, no one is univerally a member of the "privilaged" nor universally a member of "the oppressed", everyone is some mix of each in countless ways.
Agreed thats why when we started i wasnt particularly happy with the word sexism as i felt we were talking about oppression not sexism, but at this point i agree we are talking specifically about systematic oppression (when talking in the generalized state), which of course is very serious, but it is also somewhat different from just sexism.
But again, semantics so lets not beat a dead horse considering that we pretty much agree and really just use slightly different words to get there :)
techbolt@freemo
David Cameron, Jacob Rees Mogg, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove = universal members of "privileged class" 🤣😂
They brought upon a nation the bane called Brexit for their internal party squabbles...
Privilege is and does exist and is dependent on the context and cannot be generalized. Oppression is what weaker members of society face but weaker in what context has to be clearly defined for any action plan to be formulated.
@ninad @Deepsealioness
David Cameron, Jacob Rees Mogg, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove = universal members of "privileged class" 🤣😂
They brought upon a nation the bane called Brexit for their internal party squabbles...
Privilege is and does exist and is dependent on the context and cannot be generalized. Oppression is what weaker members of society face but weaker in what context has to be clearly defined for any action plan to be formulated.
@ninad @Deepsealioness
Well i thinkw e are mincing words here. When we talk about privilage in terms of sexism we are talking about "inherent advantages you have due to something you were born with".. we arent really talking about the more colloquial use of the term privilage which tends to mean "someone who has a lot of resources at his disposal".
Women, as we covered, tend to be oppressed in much of the world, they are not generally considered "priilaged". But of course a billionair woman born into riches we might, as a colloquial term say "she is privilaged" even if her sex itself may add to her oppression rather than privilage. So we have to be careful not to mix these terms.
Boris for example is clearly privilaged in the colloqual sense. He is a person who has power, and as such is privilaged. I'd also say that. Similarly we could say Teresa May was privilaged for the same reason, even if her sex may have contributed to some degree of oppression, overall she was privilaged in status and class.
So by extension to take what I said earlier, Boris I am sure has at least some aspects in which he is oppressed. I really dont know him well enough to speculate what those may be. In fact its likely he probably hides them from the public if he has any such qualities (perhaps he has a heart defect for example he doesnt tell people about).
So I'd say even Boris, while overall mostly privileged, likely has some aspects of his makeup, albeit perhaps minor, that also would cause him to have some aspect of oppression on him as well.
@freemo
Boris is oppressed in the area of intellect and common sense as are most of the Tories...🤣😂
@Deepsealioness @ninad
Boris is oppressed in the area of intellect and common sense as are most of the Tories...🤣😂
@Deepsealioness @ninad
Deepak
Slave of the most merciful@Deepsealioness what's wrong..? Are you alright sister.?
@Slave_of_allah just men being trash to me, nothing new
@Deepsealioness I guess that doesn't mean all men are trash. Maybe whoever you met were all trash. But there's still good men there.. what really happened. Can you just briefly explain me ..? If I know I will help you. If I don't I will try to find an answe for you.