Men women aren’t a social construct. Society structures around the biological facts of there being men and women or male and female, and what makes them different. Which is something that should be celebrated, not demonized.
I think In society men and women formed a structure based on strengths and weaknesses. This is neither dominated by men or women, not the way you want to see it. Which is why I made an earlier comment to go to places where men DO dominate society on every level and treat women like 2nd rate humans. If you truly believe we here in the west live in that way as well, we got nothing left to talk about.
Does that matter? I said the west, the west in general is fairly well balanced in terms of rights or equality. Maybe it’s different in Italy specifically but considering trans men can sign up for miss universe contests, apparently it’s not so bad.
You probably missed my edit. You didn’t give evidence for your position so I’ve asked you to refute evidence for mine, just to make it nice and simple for you.
How the f would I go about proving that? You come with an article speaking about a serious outdated law nobody lived by to begin with. Changed decades ago to reflect that fact.
So, you think when bad laws go away, the attitudes behind them disappear as if by magic?
The article gives up-to-date statistics as well as the dates of various laws. If you think those statistics are wrong, or don’t demonstrate what the authors say they do, you can explain. Or admit that your opinion is rooted in abject ignorance of the world you live in. Either will do.
That’s cool, except if only certain people with certain body configurations have the uncontrolled freedom to be themselves, that’s still a problem.
Or, as long as people who do not identify with the body they were given are ostricized, there are problems. As long as there are people who are groped because their body is different, lynched because their skin is different, or kept out of certain rooms just because of growths on their bodies they have no control over, there are problems.
Just because you remove a label doesn’t mean there isnt a problem any more.
In that case, is “patriarchy” the right label? Most men (racial minorities, non-cis, etc) face systematic oppression, so it doesn’t seem like gender is the problem. Seems like oppression follows class lines, not gender, race, orientation, etc.
I don’t care if you call it The Wibbly Fuck Problem. Stop worrying about what it’s called and just do something about it. Damn. Everyone always worry about the unimportant shit.
Oppression follows ALL those lines. Oppression and privilege are intersections. That’s why a woman can be black but also be rich and live a better life than a dude who’s poor.
Maybe Kyriarchy works better for you? It describes a multi layered and interactive web of stacked series of oppressive factors that encompasses race, class, gender, sexual orientation, ablism issues etc.
Though under the definitions of patriarchy men are still oppressed. Young men and the poor are held in sway and looked at as disposable pawns and labor by the patriarchs - powerful men in the lead positions, like male heads of the family, but in this instance the ‘family’ is government, military, businesses and corperations, guilds, unions and bosses. The the buy in for those men at the bottom is that even a lowly man gets to feel like they are better at least than women. The act of being a woman is an automatic sort of failure state. Hence why men behaving in a feminine fashion are a threat. It subverts the hierarchy when someone willing chooses to behave as “lesser” of their own volition and seem happier for it.
The the buy in for those men at the bottom is that even a lowly man gets to feel like they are better at least than women.
This hasn’t been my experience, most authorities in my life have been women (teachers, bosses, etc). Even upper leadership in the company I currently work for has slightly more women than men. Obviously not everyone has the same experience, but I don’t think the picture you tried to paint is a universal truth.
Read the whole thing just for you. I think you need to read the whole thing yourself. But I’ll boil it down for you, it’s 1 psychologist opinion that you could word (leaves that even optional) to differentiate between sex and gender. However also points out, most psychologists, don’t see it that way.
I know plenty, nobody agrees with such views and in several hearings in the USA it’s been properly handled and answered. No need for me to do that. This isn’t debate club.
No, there still is. Trans men suffer from all of the same patriarchal oppression that cis men suffer from. The loneliness, the isolation, the expectation that they have no emotion. If you somehow watch trans people TikTok, The men’s biggest complaint is that they now have no friends.
So yes, the patriarchy exists even if gender is a construct. Because one of those constructed genders oppresses the others, and themselves.
“Patriarchy.” You use the word but you dont know what it means. We’re not talking about heads of households, we’re talking about the halls of power; which are controlled by cis men. Gender Equality advocates are not making claims that “men don’t exist,” just that gender its a highly varied spectrum. My guess is you already know this, and willfully ignore nuance so you can push a counter ideological stance. That makes you a lame-o. Sorry.
Back in the 1990’s I was a member of the USCG Auxiliary, which, while made up entirely of civilian volunteers, we worked/trained with active duty USCG and wore very similar uniforms & insignia. The primary differences in our uniforms was we use silver wherever the USCG uses gold, and our insignia, epaulets, etc. have a big “A” in them. So if you know what to look for it’s fairly obvious, but to the casual observer there’s not much difference.
As civilian volunteers we don’t salute one another and don’t expect salutes from active duty USCG, but if someone did salute we would return it out of respect.
I was appointed a position on the USCGAUX National staff for a couple years and had a position that roughly equated to a commander (3 stripes). I occasionally traveled to various USCG training centers as a result, along with other Auxiliarists, and we’d wear our uniforms while on those trips.
We used to chuckle at the various reactions we’d see as we walked around these facilities. Virtually every senior USCG officer could spot us a mile away and offered nothing more than a polite nod or greeting as we passed. Younger members that had been in the USCG for a while would obviously start paying close attention as they got close, looking for a clear sign, then obviously relax when they realized they didn’t have to salute. Cadets and newer USCG personnel would only see the three stripes and immediately salute.
This is fantastic, while having them obviously in drag is delicious, it would be even more stark if some of them present as traditional male too and really bring the point home.
This type of sexism is doubly stupid. At least in my experience, women in male-dominated fields tend to be exceptionally good at what they do because the ones that aren't passionate about the work don't find it to be worth staying because of the sexism. If I were going to be biased, I'd be biased in favor of having a woman work on my car!
This is why we used a female plumber for years. She was extraordinary. Whereas you’re flipping a coin with every dude plumber, knowing half of them are morons and suck at the work.
Both are bad choices. When reddit says open /r/pics or else, you just delete /r/pics.
Reddit has NEVER been profitable. It's the classic:
Takes a bunch of venture capital funding
Builds a huge user base
Get bought
Parent company tries to figure out a way to make money off of you.
When they can't, they try to spin you off and IPO you.
You have your "oh shit" moment and realize you actually have to be profitable now.
This is the crap that caused the dot-com bubble in the late 90s.
Their current business model is unsustainable.
They're doing the API war out of sheer survival.
The sad part is, we all went along for the ride, using the service and filling it with useful information, never wondering if it was still going to be there a decade or two later.
Reddit wants to IPO. Having gone through the IPO process twice now with a company, I can tell you, the only thing that matters is money in the bank. The more money you have in the bank, the more you can charge for your IPO. When I worked at CompUSA back in the 90s, we didn't pay any of our creditors for something like 6 months before the IPO to swell the bank accounts. I remember the week before the IPO, we had almost nothing in the store, because we owed everyone money. 30 days after IPO, trucks came rolling in again with product.
This unfortunately is the truth, at the end of the day they will just find new moderators who wont be acting for the users or at least the majority. I'm a mod and although I want this to work and it may still have some impact realistically mods are powerless. Only users talking with their feet can really make a long term difference and there isn't a like for like replacement yet..
Really we don't want to force users off, we want users to want to leave because of how reddit treats it's free labour and content or for reddit to actually work with the subs it's demonizing
That would be true if they made i fees reasonable or at least gave more time. This change caused mobile apps to shut down. The revenue from that is $0.
This change sucks. But, from what I read, Reddit have NEVER been profitable. If they were smart, they would modified the API so it included ads. I don’t think Reddit is long for this world. Even if these protests were effective, reddit is eventually going away. They’re too big to make a profit now.
When you say “NEVER been profitable” is there a reliable source for that or is it spez?
Hosting a link agregator is cheap, it is purely just text. Yes they now host images and videos, and I think they shouldn’t do that if the cost is a problem, also they could always discontinue it.
Going back to the API. If they really need cash they could work with developers. They could reduce the fees and give 3 months heads up like they have been asked.
The whole spectacle didn’t sound “we need money to survive”, it sounded like “we could make more money from users by forcing them to switch to our crappy app, by shutting down 3rd party apps”
Nevertheless, like many IPOs, Reddit remains unprofitable. The question for investors is whether Reddit can achieve minimum viable economies of scale and achieve profitability. So far, there are no indications that this will happen.
There are few other sources that say reddit is unprofitale.
What I’m saying is that their core service doesn’t cost much to run. They could have small team to run everything and would make a lot of money, but their goal is to make it a billion dollar business, when it is not.
BTW: I also find the article funny, on one bad it says they are seeking $15 billion valuation, then it says it doesn’t generate money. So that creates a question, how come a company that doesn’t generate a profit costs $15 billion?
Wow, I totally forgot about CompUSA. I used to love going there as a kid, back when Apple had that underdog appeal. Now I'm a FOSS maxi (just don't look at my iPhone...).
Both are bad choices. When reddit says open /r/pics or else, you just delete /r/pics.
Hard disagree with your first sentence. As @Starmina explained, Reddit would just force re-open it.
And as explained in my comment, this is causing Reddit users to switch over to Lemmy due to the protesting subs getting stale: https://lemmy.world/comment/289241>
I was a tech journalist in the early 00’s and I remember writing about that story or one like that.
A similar thing happened with Microsoft, who either delivered or was served the full documentation of some office format printed out. It’s a pretty popular form of malicious compliance, also paying people in bags of coins.
maliciouscompliance
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.