What Do Men Think It Means To Be A Man?

[Jarhyn]

I agree that Toni Has, repeatedly, claimed one but not the other, that men must reject mysogynists (they must) while bitterly objecting to the idea of Islamic people rejecting theocrats. This IS a double standard.

No, it isn’t. First, that’s a strawman. It’s rejecting “terrorists” not “theocrats.” Second, stating that men must reject misogynists (or whatever she actually said), is an opinion. Third, “men” and “Muslims” and “terrorists” and “misogynists” are not equivalent categories, so there is no standard that is being doubled. Forth, it is tu quoque and therefore void no matter what, so now everyone itt can drop the derail.

First, it isn't a straw man to ask someone to take consistent views. I'm tired as shit of fucking idiots believing that an opinion can't be fucking WRONG, (though if you look carefully, I'm saying that men can and should police their undesirables WRT misogyny) or that opinions are somehow immune to the need for consistency, or that opinions about ethics can somehow stand immune to criticism. One of the D's, Derec or Dismal, I can't remember which, is of the opinion that trafficking in sex slavery is OK... but the rest of us know how fucking sick that is. Opinions on ethics are very much vulnerable to criticism and should be based in fact, and real demonstrable relationships in nature.

Further, I very clearly stated the class which we are talking about needing rejection, and you have provided NO evidence that either of these two things fall outside of the valid class.

Finally, there is nothing "you, too" about it. Some people in this thread have said on multiple occasions that (population) should reject (problematic element). Toni is one who has said this form of (men) and (misogynists). Others have said it about (Islam) and (Islamic extremists). Either (populations) should reject (problematic element) is a correct statement, or it is not. My goal here is not to attack the view that men must police inappropriate behavior among men. As I have said repeatedly, I think this is Ann ethical obligation. My POINT is to hopefully bring people around a shared rule and to get them to apply it consistently.

So, do you accept the rule?

 

[Toni]

I agree that Toni Has, repeatedly, claimed one but not the other, that men must reject mysogynists (they must) while bitterly objecting to the idea of Islamic people rejecting theocrats. This IS a double standard.

No, it isn’t. First, that’s a strawman. It’s rejecting “terrorists” not “theocrats.” Second, stating that men must reject misogynists (or whatever she actually said), is an opinion. Third, “men” and “Muslims” and “terrorists” and “misogynists” are not equivalent categories, so there is no standard that is being doubled. Forth, it is tu quoque and therefore void no matter what, so now everyone itt can drop the derail.

First, it isn't a straw man to ask someone to take consistent views. I'm tired as shit of fucking idiots believing that an opinion can't be fucking WRONG, (though if you look carefully, I'm saying that men can and should police their undesirables WRT misogyny) or that opinions are somehow immune to the need for consistency, or that opinions about ethics can somehow stand immune to criticism. One of the D's, Derec or Dismal, I can't remember which, is of the opinion that trafficking in sex slavery is OK... but the rest of us know how fucking sick that is. Opinions on ethics are very much vulnerable to criticism and should be based in fact, and real demonstrable relationships in nature.

Further, I very clearly stated the class which we are talking about needing rejection, and you have provided NO evidence that either of these two things fall outside of the valid class.

Finally, there is nothing "you, too" about it. Some people in this thread have said on multiple occasions that (population) should reject (problematic element). Toni is one who has said this form of (men) and (misogynists). Others have said it about (Islam) and (Islamic extremists). Either (populations) should reject (problematic element) is a correct statement, or it is not. My goal here is not to attack the view that men must police inappropriate behavior among men. As I have said repeatedly, I think this is Ann ethical obligation. My POINT is to hopefully bring people around a shared rule and to get them to apply it consistently.

So, do you accept the rule?

So provide a link where I have 'refused to demand that Muslims reject terrorism.'

You keep claiming that I do.

Apparently you are unable or unwilling to see that Islam is not rightfully part of this particular thread.

And you and other men are apparently convinced that you can demand that I agree with whatever you want me to agree with and that this is fair and just and righteous.

 

[ruby sparks]

FFS sake toni, asking for clarification of someone's views is not a demand.

And in case you're wondering, I would guess that you would agree with both statements. I'm not making any accusations.

I would not be getting frustrated, except that I have asked you the same question at least 3 times.

And part of my frustration is that if you would just confirm (one word would do) we could hopefully move on from this item, which imo is not central to the OP. But since it's been brought up, it would be good to clarify it.

 

[Toni]

FFS sake toni, asking for clarification of your views is not a demand.

And in case you're wondering, I would guess that you would agree with both statements. I'm not chasing you down and I'm not making any accusations.

I would not be getting frustrated, except that I have asked you the same question at least 3 times.

And part of my frustration is that if you would just confirm (one word would do) we could hopefully move on from this item, which imo is not central to the OP. But since it's been brought up, it would be good to clarify it.

FFS

1. Explain to me how it is that what I do or do not believe with regards to Muslims and terrorism is related to the topic of this thread.

2. Explain to me why it has been brought up aside from being a non sequitor/red herring

3. Demonstrate to me any instance of me suggesting that Muslims should not denounce terrorism.

4. And why the fuck are you all over my case over something I haven't done as a 'matter of consistency' when no one gives a flying fuck about Loren's non-responses to my equally off point demands that he express a political opinion.

Muslims and terrorism is frankly not the fucking topic of this thread. Feel free to start another thread and I will or will not decide to post in it depending on my mood and time free to post and frankly, the quality of responses.

 

[ruby sparks]

FFS sake toni, asking for clarification of your views is not a demand.

And in case you're wondering, I would guess that you would agree with both statements. I'm not chasing you down and I'm not making any accusations.

I would not be getting frustrated, except that I have asked you the same question at least 3 times.

And part of my frustration is that if you would just confirm (one word would do) we could hopefully move on from this item, which imo is not central to the OP. But since it's been brought up, it would be good to clarify it.

FFS

1. Explain to me how it is that what I do or do not believe with regards to Muslims and terrorism is related to the topic of this thread.

2. Explain to me why it has been brought up aside from being a non sequitor/red herring

3. Demonstrate to me any instance of me suggesting that Muslims should not denounce terrorism.

4. And why the fuck are you all over my case over something I haven't done as a 'matter of consistency' when no one gives a flying fuck about Loren's non-responses to my equally off point demands that he express a political opinion.

Muslims and terrorism is frankly not the fucking topic of this thread. Feel free to start another thread and I will or will not decide to post in it depending on my mood and time free to post and frankly, the quality of responses.

Whatever. No, Islam is not the issue here. That's a fair point. But yet again, typing 'yes' would have taken about 1% of the time it took you to type that.

No prob. You don't want to answer. You don't have to. It would have easily and quickly cleared things up, that's all. I won't be asking again.

ETA: Imo, it could be argued to be relevant to the thread, even if it is a tu quoque and not a 1 on 1 comparison. The way it could be relevant to the thread is if someone thinks that what it takes to be a man (or a 'good' man or whatever) is that a man should denounce rape, then it would appear somewhat inconsistent if the same person did not apply a similar standard in other spheres, such as the one originally presented by Jahryn (although at one point he changed it from terrorists to theocrats which is one of the things which confused me).

'Do you think people should denounce those who litter?' is another possible version of the same question.

 

[Jarhyn]

FFS sake toni, asking for clarification of your views is not a demand.

And in case you're wondering, I would guess that you would agree with both statements. I'm not chasing you down and I'm not making any accusations.

I would not be getting frustrated, except that I have asked you the same question at least 3 times.

And part of my frustration is that if you would just confirm (one word would do) we could hopefully move on from this item, which imo is not central to the OP. But since it's been brought up, it would be good to clarify it.

FFS

1. Explain to me how it is that what I do or do not believe with regards to Muslims and terrorism is related to the topic of this thread.

2. Explain to me why it has been brought up aside from being a non sequitor/red herring

3. Demonstrate to me any instance of me suggesting that Muslims should not denounce terrorism.

4. And why the fuck are you all over my case over something I haven't done as a 'matter of consistency' when no one gives a flying fuck about Loren's non-responses to my equally off point demands that he express a political opinion.

Muslims and terrorism is frankly not the fucking topic of this thread. Feel free to start another thread and I will or will not decide to post in it depending on my mood and time free to post and frankly, the quality of responses.

First, this post is a perfect example. All you have to say is "both groups do have such a responsibility, yes". The fact that you can't just relent and accept that someone else has a valid argument makes me respect you exactly as much as I respect the Human Trafficker, the Trumpette, or the Rape Fanboy, the Islamic Wordsalad Chef, or any of the other awful tropes that have turned up here like bad pennies over the years.

That you don't is fairly strong evidence that you don't believe in that responsibility. The point here isn't to make this about Islam, and if you weren't sitting with your head so far up one of your other orifices you would see that. The point here is, in fact, to draw some of the other posters here through to the induction that men have a responsibility to reject misogynists, not to drag low-information feminists over to asking for Islam to aid us in a culture war over extremism... even though, yeah, that's another such effect.

 

[Toni]

FFS sake toni, asking for clarification of your views is not a demand.

And in case you're wondering, I would guess that you would agree with both statements. I'm not chasing you down and I'm not making any accusations.

I would not be getting frustrated, except that I have asked you the same question at least 3 times.

And part of my frustration is that if you would just confirm (one word would do) we could hopefully move on from this item, which imo is not central to the OP. But since it's been brought up, it would be good to clarify it.

FFS

1. Explain to me how it is that what I do or do not believe with regards to Muslims and terrorism is related to the topic of this thread.

2. Explain to me why it has been brought up aside from being a non sequitor/red herring

3. Demonstrate to me any instance of me suggesting that Muslims should not denounce terrorism.

4. And why the fuck are you all over my case over something I haven't done as a 'matter of consistency' when no one gives a flying fuck about Loren's non-responses to my equally off point demands that he express a political opinion.

Muslims and terrorism is frankly not the fucking topic of this thread. Feel free to start another thread and I will or will not decide to post in it depending on my mood and time free to post and frankly, the quality of responses.

First, this post is a perfect example. All you have to say is "both groups do have such a responsibility, yes". The fact that you can't just relent and accept that someone else has a valid argument makes me respect you exactly as much as I respect the Human Trafficker, the Trumpette, or the Rape Fanboy, the Islamic Wordsalad Chef, or any of the other awful tropes that have turned up here like bad pennies over the years.

That you don't is fairly strong evidence that you don't believe in that responsibility. The point here isn't to make this about Islam, and if you weren't sitting with your head so far up one of your other orifices you would see that. The point here is, in fact, to draw some of the other posters here through to the induction that men have a responsibility to reject misogynists, not to drag low-information feminists over to asking for Islam to aid us in a culture war over extremism.

I have pretty consistently been anti violence, and have stated my pacifist POV (and hereby acknowledging that for some, arguing is against pacifism but for me, it is not) many times.

In fact, in this thread, I have said that men should reject violence multiple times. Terrorism is generally violent. Virtually all terrorism is committed by males. Virtually all terrorism by Muslims is committed by males.

I do not understand how it is that men continue to cling to the stance that they are logical and women are emotional when you all lose your shit over me ignoring non sequiturs and trying to tell me that I am not being consistent. And claiming I have some radical leftist posting history yet being quite ignorant of my actual posting history. I'm actually quite consistent. I'm actually also trying to keep this thread on topic.

 

[Toni]

FFS sake toni, asking for clarification of your views is not a demand.

And in case you're wondering, I would guess that you would agree with both statements. I'm not chasing you down and I'm not making any accusations.

I would not be getting frustrated, except that I have asked you the same question at least 3 times.

And part of my frustration is that if you would just confirm (one word would do) we could hopefully move on from this item, which imo is not central to the OP. But since it's been brought up, it would be good to clarify it.

FFS

1. Explain to me how it is that what I do or do not believe with regards to Muslims and terrorism is related to the topic of this thread.

2. Explain to me why it has been brought up aside from being a non sequitor/red herring

3. Demonstrate to me any instance of me suggesting that Muslims should not denounce terrorism.

4. And why the fuck are you all over my case over something I haven't done as a 'matter of consistency' when no one gives a flying fuck about Loren's non-responses to my equally off point demands that he express a political opinion.

Muslims and terrorism is frankly not the fucking topic of this thread. Feel free to start another thread and I will or will not decide to post in it depending on my mood and time free to post and frankly, the quality of responses.

Whatever. No, Islam is not the issue here. That's a fair point. But yet again, typing 'yes' would have taken about 1% of the time it took you to type that.

No prob. You don't want to answer. You don't have to. It would have easily and quickly cleared things up, that's all. I won't be asking again.

ETA: Imo, it could be argued to be relevant to the thread, even if it is a tu quoque and not a 1 on 1 comparison. The way it could be relevant to the thread is if someone thinks that what it takes to be a man (or a 'good' man or whatever) is that a man should denounce rape, then it would appear somewhat inconsistent if the same person did not apply a similar standard in other spheres, such as the one originally presented by Jahryn (although at one point he changed it from terrorists to theocrats which is one of the things which confused me).

'Do you think people should denounce those who litter?' is another possible version of the same question.

It's much less about effort than it is about refusing to engage in non sequiturs.

 

[ruby sparks]

Oh never mind.

 

[Jarhyn]

First, this post is a perfect example. All you have to say is "both groups do have such a responsibility, yes". The fact that you can't just relent and accept that someone else has a valid argument makes me respect you exactly as much as I respect the Human Trafficker, the Trumpette, or the Rape Fanboy, the Islamic Wordsalad Chef, or any of the other awful tropes that have turned up here like bad pennies over the years.

That you don't is fairly strong evidence that you don't believe in that responsibility. The point here isn't to make this about Islam, and if you weren't sitting with your head so far up one of your other orifices you would see that. The point here is, in fact, to draw some of the other posters here through to the induction that men have a responsibility to reject misogynists, not to drag low-information feminists over to asking for Islam to aid us in a culture war over extremism.

I have pretty consistently been anti violence, and have stated my pacifist POV (and hereby acknowledging that for some, arguing is against pacifism but for me, it is not) many times.

In fact, in this thread, I have said that men should reject violence multiple times. Terrorism is generally violent. Virtually all terrorism is committed by males. Virtually all terrorism by Muslims is committed by males.

I do not understand how it is that men continue to cling to the stance that they are logical and women are emotional when you all lose your shit over me ignoring non sequiturs and trying to tell me that I am not being consistent. And claiming I have some radical leftist posting history yet being quite ignorant of my actual posting history. I'm actually quite consistent. I'm actually also trying to keep this thread on topic.

And again, all you have to do is say it without hedging, that members of a population have a duty to reject those among them who are engage in unacceptable conduct, not in regards to specific populations, but in general.

As to your bloviating about what you think men think, I have known many very intelligent women. By in large they are per capita in my friend pool more common than intelligent and logical men. I just don't think YOU are intelligent or logical here.

Also, good job blaming it all on masculinity. 100%.

 

[laughing dog]

From this thread, one could draw the reasonable conclusion that some men think browbeating an answer to a derailing straw question is part of being a man.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

First, it isn't a straw man to ask someone to take consistent views.

The straw man was you referring to “theocrats” instead of “terrorists.”

or that opinions are somehow immune to the need for consistency

Toni has been entirely consistent in regard to her opinion that men should encourage other men to stop being misogynists/rape apologists.

What YOU (and others, like Loren) are doing is engaging in tu quoque (or “whataboutism”). Do you know what that is?

Further, I very clearly stated the class which we are talking about needing rejection, and you have provided NO evidence that either of these two things fall outside of the valid class.

Wtf are you talking about? Evidence? You are engaging in a fallacy. Stop it.

Finally, there is nothing "you, too" about it.

Bullshit. Toni (and others) are saying that men should police their shit. Then you and others whatabouted with “How come you don’t say Muslims should police their shit?” That’s straight up whataboutism.

I am under absolutely NO obligation to say, “Every single person should police everything they do with no one particular group focused on.”

Some people in this thread have said on multiple occasions that (population) should reject (problematic element). Toni is one who has said this form of (men) and (misogynists). Others have said it about (Islam) and (Islamic extremists). Either (populations) should reject (problematic element) is a correct statement, or it is not.

AND TOTALLY FUCKING IRRELEVANT TO THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD. The topic of this thread is “what makes a man” not “what makes a Muslim.”

Jesus fucking christ.

 

[Toni]

First, this post is a perfect example. All you have to say is "both groups do have such a responsibility, yes". The fact that you can't just relent and accept that someone else has a valid argument makes me respect you exactly as much as I respect the Human Trafficker, the Trumpette, or the Rape Fanboy, the Islamic Wordsalad Chef, or any of the other awful tropes that have turned up here like bad pennies over the years.

That you don't is fairly strong evidence that you don't believe in that responsibility. The point here isn't to make this about Islam, and if you weren't sitting with your head so far up one of your other orifices you would see that. The point here is, in fact, to draw some of the other posters here through to the induction that men have a responsibility to reject misogynists, not to drag low-information feminists over to asking for Islam to aid us in a culture war over extremism.

I have pretty consistently been anti violence, and have stated my pacifist POV (and hereby acknowledging that for some, arguing is against pacifism but for me, it is not) many times.

In fact, in this thread, I have said that men should reject violence multiple times. Terrorism is generally violent. Virtually all terrorism is committed by males. Virtually all terrorism by Muslims is committed by males.

I do not understand how it is that men continue to cling to the stance that they are logical and women are emotional when you all lose your shit over me ignoring non sequiturs and trying to tell me that I am not being consistent. And claiming I have some radical leftist posting history yet being quite ignorant of my actual posting history. I'm actually quite consistent. I'm actually also trying to keep this thread on topic.

And again, all you have to do is say it without hedging, that members of a population have a duty to reject those among them who are engage in unacceptable conduct, not in regards to specific populations, but in general.

As to your bloviating about what you think men think, I have known many very intelligent women. By in large they are per capita in my friend pool more common than intelligent and logical men. I just don't think YOU are intelligent or logical here.

Also, good job blaming it all on masculinity. 100%.

Good job on not understanding what I write?

I mean, seriously, dude.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

One of the D's, Derec or Dismal, I can't remember which, is of the opinion that trafficking in sex slavery is OK...

Whoa. Wow. Really? One of them actually holds that view? If so, don't you think it is important which one does before you sweep them both together and slander the other? "One of either Jarhyn or Hitler gassed the Jews. I can't remember which it is."

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

'Do you think people should denounce those who litter?' is another possible version of the same question.

Or "Do you think dog owners have a special responsibility to denounce people who don't clean up their dog's poop".

I bet you all that Toni would have readily answered that question without putting up such a display.

 

[Jarhyn]

And again, all you have to do is say it without hedging, that members of a population have a duty to reject those among them who are engage in unacceptable conduct, not in regards to specific populations, but in general.

As to your bloviating about what you think men think, I have known many very intelligent women. By in large they are per capita in my friend pool more common than intelligent and logical men. I just don't think YOU are intelligent or logical here.

Also, good job blaming it all on masculinity. 100%.

Good job on not understanding what I write?

I mean, seriously, dude.

"I am against violence, I am a pacifist" has no leverage against or for "groups have an obligation to reject bad behavior". They do not speak to each other AT ALL.

"Men should reject violence", "terroism is violent", and "terrorists are violent men" do not act as a confirmation of the general case "groups have an obligation to police bad behavior". You have singled out exactly ONE group with an explicitly stated obligation to self-police bad behavior: men. You have not made any affirmation here that the obligation is general.

"Men think they are logical, and women are not logical, stop criticizing me" is not an answer to the general case in any fashion. Instead it's an utterly sexist and frankly insulting position based on a gender stereotype. I called you a low information feminist, not a leftist. I'm a leftist. I'm a feminist.

I made a statement to help others see how their views that "muslims have an obligation..." induct to "men have an obligation...".

Edit: hell, When it comes down to it, I'm not sure I see myself strictly as a 'man'. It's just easier to say that I am than to explain the reality of who and what I am, with respect to gender.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

From this thread, one could draw the reasonable conclusion that some men think browbeating an answer to a derailing straw question is part of being a man.

No, sorry. You can't hide Toni behind her skirt on this one.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I made a statement to help others see how their views that "muslims have an obligation..." induct to "men have an obligation...".

I see it too, and I'm on the flipside of the answer. I don't think either have a special obligation to "police their own" or to speak out against those who share their characteristics who do bad things. I think we all have equal responsibility for that whether we share characteristics or not. I don't hold a random peaceful muslim more responsible than myself for denouncing Islamic terrorism. I can see why they would want to, to distinguish themselves and save themselves from the ire directed at the Islamic Terrorists. I can also see why well behaved men would especially want to denounce men who misbehave and distinguish themselves. #notallmuslims #notallmen. It is the toxicity of identity politics.

 

[Jarhyn]

I made a statement to help others see how their views that "muslims have an obligation..." induct to "men have an obligation...".

I see it too, and I'm on the flipside of the answer. I don't think either have a special obligation to "police their own" or to speak out against those who share their characteristics who do bad things. I think we all have equal responsibility for that whether we share characteristics or not. I don't hold a random peaceful muslim more responsible than myself for denouncing Islamic terrorism. I can see why they would want to, to distinguish themselves and save themselves from the ire directed at the Islamic Terrorists. I can also see why well behaved men would especially want to denounce men who misbehave and distinguish themselves. #notallmuslims #notallmen. It is the toxicity of identity politics.

Or you can accept the reality of insular culture. There are some things men don't or won't hear from women, and that men are reluctant to accept and thus say to themselves, so ethical men have a responsibility to say it loud enough to make up those gaps. The same is true for Islam, women, furries, or any other culture you could point to.

 

[Toni]

From this thread, one could draw the reasonable conclusion that some men think browbeating an answer to a derailing straw question is part of being a man.

No, sorry. You can't hide Toni behind her skirt on this one.

Heh. It ain’t me who is hiding and dodging and offering up red herrings and non sequiturs and lame excuses.

But that’s ok. I never for a moment thought you’d ever have the guts to stand up for or stand for anybody or anything but yourself.