• 0 Posts
  • 167 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 18th, 2023

help-circle


  • The second thing is actually pretty easy to answer. The same people from the first part of your answer have also been using their outsized power and influence to erode the power and influence of unions over time. Many actions taken by European unions would be considered illegal in America and met with violent state oppression. While Europe has maintained many of their labor rights from the turn of the 20th century, America’s labor rights have been rolled back to almost before the new deal. Most unions barely have the right to strike, and even when they can that power is exceptionally limited. Basically any effective labor action in the US would require people to accept that they are breaking the law, and will likely die, sustain life altering injury, or go to jail for it. Since most Americans that would benefit from strong unions are living in oppressive poverty to begin with they either see the risks of illegal labor action as too large, or have been propagandized against it.


  • People rarely distinguish between the sentiment of a demographic versus the sentiment of the individuals that make up that demographic. Hence, stereotypes.

    “Americans” are not a monolith. There’s almost 400 million people in this country. Idk how each individual is doing, but most of the people I know are too busy trying to keep their heads financially above water to care. The actual American people have very little say over what happens in this country, and most are just as trapped in the horror as the rest of the world.

    Does a country without public transit, universal healthcare, or any social safety nets sound like a country where the average person is in control to you?




  • I guess I was a little to aggressive in my original comment. I meant to explain why minority only groups get less flack than majority only groups, not to suggest that men only groups shouldn’t exist.

    Women only groups exist alongside the people who disapprove of them. I don’t see why men only groups can’t. As many have pointed out, however, men only groups DO exist. Someone linked to dull_mens_club as a Lemmy specific example, but more broadly, fraternities exist. Battered mens groups exist. I think some groups like nights of Columbus and the masons are or were men only. Men only schools and colleges exist, as do women only. Most veterans organizations are primarily men just by nature of who makes up the majority of most militaries.


  • You’re putting words in my mouth and confusing the difference between a demographic and an individual. AS A DEMOGRAPHIC, women are oppressed. AS A DEMOGRAPHIC, men are not. We’re talking about statistics here, not individual experience.

    The fact that some men are oppressed does not imply men are equally or more oppressed than women.

    The fact that women AS A DEMOGRAPHIC are oppressed and men AS A DEMOGRAPHIC are not does not imply all men are oppressors. It DOES imply that men opress women, but like… fucking duh? If men aren’t pressing women, then who is? It doesn’t mean all men are oppressors, but are you seriously going to sit her and act like the majority of domestic abusers, sexual harassers, and discriminators AREN’T men???

    You’re interpreting a defense of women exclusive spaces as an attack on individual men. You should unpack that.



  • The mens club you’re talking about DOES exist though. Since men are not a marginalized minority, that club is just called society.

    Your logic mirrors asking, ‘Why not create a whites-only club?’ Technically, you could, but people would rightly view it negatively because white people, as a group, are not marginalized. Exclusive spaces for minorities exist to provide relief from the discrimination or bias they routinely encounter. For groups that do not face those barriers, everyday society already functions as their ‘exclusive space,’ which makes it difficult for non-minorities to understand why others might need a separate environment.









  • I was gonna yell, but this has to be satire.

    Nevertheless, I must tap the sign, just in case anybody really believes that fascists’ minds can be changed by debate:

    “Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”

    Quote is from Jean-Paul Sartre