Not *all* men

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, it is the part where society as a whole shuns the awkward. Society doesn't take much notice of the awkward.

Ya ... that's kind of the essence of the shunning. It's a social rejection. While not as blatant as other ways groups are shunned, that doesn't make it any less painful for the people on the receiving end of it who are ignored, overlooked and dismissed. They want to fit in and become part of the groups around them but ... just can't quite make it work. The people they try to associate with either don't pay attention to them or just derisively snicker at their ham-fisted attempts to try and do what everyone else is doing so easily and they just end up alone not really getting why they can't manage to be as much a part of things as the rest of the people they see. It hurts and the pain they feel from it is a real thing.

The dismissive bullshit about how it somehow doesn't matter because you can point to other groups of people who have it worse off is just ... bullshit.

 

[ksen]

If it's a derail it's not a derail by me. I do not think it's a derail anyway as it fits the topic of lumping people together based on a single broad attribute.

Well, "lumping people together based on a single broad attribute" is not the topic of the OP. But I will agree that it's the topic of those not wanting to talk about the topic of the OP.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, it is the part where society as a whole shuns the awkward. Society doesn't take much notice of the awkward.

Ya ... that's kind of the essence of the shunning. It's a social rejection. While not as blatant as other ways groups are shunned, that doesn't make it any less painful for the people on the receiving end of it who are ignored, overlooked and dismissed. They want to fit in and become part of the groups around them but ... just can't quite make it work. The people they try to associate with either don't pay attention to them or just derisively snicker at their ham-fisted attempts to try and do what everyone else is doing so easily and they just end up alone not really getting why they can't manage to be as much a part of things as the rest of the people they see. It hurts and the pain they feel from it is a real thing.

The dismissive bullshit about how it somehow doesn't matter because you can point to other groups of people who have it worse off is just ... bullshit.

Have it worse? We are talking on the scales of magnitudes.

Perhaps it is better worded to say the awkward are shunned, women are castigated and vilified.

If it's a derail it's not a derail by me. I do not think it's a derail anyway as it fits the topic of lumping people together based on a single broad attribute.

Well, "lumping people together based on a single broad attribute" is not the topic of the OP. But I will agree that it's the topic of those not wanting to talk about the topic of the OP.

I'm partly to blame (fully?). I mistook the movement as a response to the shooting as I heard about it on NPR with relation to the shooting. Had no idea it has been going for a bit.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Have it worse? We are talking on the scales of magnitudes.

Perhaps it is better worded to say the awkward are shunned, women are castigated and vilified.

Ya, but children are dying of starvation. Why should anyone waste any time doing anything but dismissing complaints about some women being castigated and vilified when there are children dying of starvation?

It would be appropriate that anytime someone complains about treatment of women to respond to that post by pointing out the dying children whom the poster droning on about all the crap about the women is just trying to draw focus away from.

 

[The Paul]

But to start making statements like "A man is someone who pays a woman less because she's a woman" or whatever...

I'm afraid I missed whatever this came from?

That claim is made, as someone else pointed out (thread is moving fast) in the article linked in the OP... the author of that article seems to be one of those people who thinks that if they predict someone will react defensively, then attack that person or group until they react defensively, they have done something terribly clever.

Anyway, your response here...

Something that strikers me about this #NoAllMen response is similar to how I feel about liberal Christians telling me, "not all Christians are like that."

And I would say to them, if you are posting your #NoAllMen thing onto the "YesAllWomen threads/tweets whatever, then you are missing the point. Go post your "#NoAllMen ideas to the mysogeny boards, the youtubes that slutshame, the blogs that rant about women not being available, the op-eds that objectify, the fan pages that demean, shame and dehumanize.

It's like the liberal Christian telling me, "we're not all like that!" I am not the one you need to convince, darlin'. You go get your own house in order. Your fellow Christian does not listen to me. So are you going to be part of the problem, or part of the solution? They need to hear FROM YOU, loud and clear, that someone they think is in their own tribe is asking them to desist.


If I have a problem with the objectification of women and I'm calling out the people who do it, and if you have the same problem, then CALL THEM OUT ALONGSIDE ME, don't try to shut down my work with distraction. The best advocacy for "Not All Men" is to actually show the bad guys that it's not all men, make them know they are the wingnuts. Don't bolster their act by publicly saying, "yeah, I think women are wrong, too, just not quite as bad as you do, dude."

...seems to be saying men don't have the moral position to respond to an accusation made against all men generally, because they aren't doing enough to shout down men who are guilty of whatever the accusation might be.

But:
1) There are men making an effort to shout down misogynists
2) Prejudices are harmful to the people who hold them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Have it worse? We are talking on the scales of magnitudes.

Perhaps it is better worded to say the awkward are shunned, women are castigated and vilified.

Ya, but children are dying of starvation. Why should anyone waste any time doing anything but dismissing complaints about some women being castigated and vilified when there are children dying of starvation?

We are talking about social interactions and stigmas, not about failed economic policies.

A guy kills six people and we are to talk about how women were obligated to have sex with him so he wouldn't feel like an outsider?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

A guy kills six people and we are to talk about how women were obligated to have sex with him so he wouldn't feel like an outsider?

No, it has to do with understanding the basis of his motivations, which is completely different from giving validity to those motivations.

 

[ksen]

Well, "lumping people together based on a single broad attribute" is not the topic of the OP. But I will agree that it's the topic of those not wanting to talk about the topic of the OP.

I'm partly to blame (fully?). I mistook the movement as a response to the shooting as I heard about it on NPR with relation to the shooting. Had no idea it has been going for a bit.

It's not your fault buddy. It started way before you got tricked into it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A guy kills six people and we are to talk about how women were obligated to have sex with him so he wouldn't feel like an outsider?

No, it has to do with understanding the basis of his motivations, which is completely different from giving validity to those motivations.

The basis of his motivation was a baseless sense of entitlement. He tossed away self control to throw a baby tantrum with guns and a motor vehicle.

 

[ksen]

I think the really important question is: will girls want to fuck him now?

I mean if he hadn't killed himself first.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

A guy kills six people and we are to talk about how women were obligated to have sex with him so he wouldn't feel like an outsider?

No, it has to do with understanding the basis of his motivations, which is completely different from giving validity to those motivations.

The basis of his motivation was a baseless sense of entitlement. He tossed away self control to throw a baby tantrum with guns and a motor vehicle.

Ya, in a basic "he did it because evil" sense of understanding the basis of his motivations. His baseless sense of entitlement did have a focus which was important to him and motivated him to act, however, and it wasn't just vague and generic.

- - - Updated - - -

I think the really important question is: will girls want to fuck him now?

I mean if he hadn't killed himself first.

Yes, if he was an infamous mass murderer in prison, there are girls who would want to fuck him.

Our society comes with multiple brands of crazy.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

A guy kills six people and we are to talk about how women were obligated to have sex with him so he wouldn't feel like an outsider?

No, it has to do with understanding the basis of his motivations, which is completely different from giving validity to those motivations.

The basis of his motivation was a baseless sense of entitlement. He tossed away self control to throw a baby tantrum with guns and a motor vehicle.

Ya, in a basic "he did it because evil" sense of understanding the basis of his motivations.

I didn't use the word evil. There is no such thing as "evil", other than the Executives over at the headquarters for the Animal Planet channel. He wanted to punish women for not liking him.

His baseless sense of entitlement did have a focus which was important to him and motivated him to act, however, and it wasn't just vague and generic.

What is vague about it? He wanted girls to like him. They didn't. So he killed some. Seems like square peg / square hole to me. Seems like the only avenue to have avoided this was women sleeping with him.

 

[dismal]

As a service to the forum, I will integrate the killing discussion and the stupid internet meme:

Person 1: A man is someone who kills 6 people because women won't go out with him
Person 2: *not all men* do that
Person 1: ZMFOG!1!!1!!1 CNAT"T YOU SEE YOU"R PART OF THE PROBLEM #NotAllMen

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

He wanted girls to like him. They didn't. So he killed some. Seems like square peg / square hole to me. Seems like the only avenue to have avoided this was women sleeping with him.

But not all women.

But seriously, he couldn't hire a hooker?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

He wanted girls to like him. They didn't. So he killed some. Seems like square peg / square hole to me. Seems like the only avenue to have avoided this was women sleeping with him.

But not all women.

But seriously, he couldn't hire a hooker?

With what? He'd spent all his money on guns.

 

[ksen]

1) Buy Guns
2) Knock off a liquor store
3) Buy time with a hooker . . . if you can find one to take you

 

[Derec]

He wanted girls to like him. They didn't. So he killed some.

It is very telling that when someone kills four men and two women all everybody seems to care about is the women he killed.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

1) Buy Guns
2) Knock off a liquor store
3) Buy time with a hooker . . . if you can find one to take you

So, you're suggesting that the solution to dealing with people's mental problems is to encourage them to get into a life of crime? Nice dude. Real nice.

As to your point #3, that's the good thing about hookers. If you have the money, they'll take you. Odds are that they're recently had sex with someone who revolts them more than you do, so getting banged by you isn't going to be the worst part of their day. That's a bit of positive reinforcement to remember the next time you find yourself with no option for sex except to pay someone for it.

 

[Bronzeage]

He wanted girls to like him. They didn't. So he killed some.

It is very telling that when someone kills four men and two women all everybody seems to care about is the women he killed.

What does it tell?

 

[The Paul]

He wanted girls to like him. They didn't. So he killed some.

It is very telling that when someone kills four men and two women all everybody seems to care about is the women he killed.

I wouldn't normally agree, but his stated reason for the murder was that none of those cool/sexy football dudes wanted to fuck him. I really feel like that should draw some attention.