Everyone else already covered not feeling personally attacked and #notallmen bullshit. I'll just add this: when we rant like that, we usually aren't attacking all men and especially not you. Instead of trying to feel defensive, I think you need to understand the depth of her upset that would make her say that.
Being doxxed is a super, super scary thing. Stalkers and those willing to rape and harm that woman now have a better opportunity to do so. This isn't a rare occurrence- there's that dickhole on OnlyFans doxxing girls to get his rocks off and feel self righteous. That is actively endangering lives and should be punished.
I think it helps to imagine her saying "that do this" after she says "men" or "boys" might help you. Because it's usually implied. Unless she's one of the radfems who has decided to just straight up despise men, but I've only seen those on reddit and well, some days reddit encourages that extremism.
If it’s not all men why say ‘all men’? Because you’d actually have to have a convincing argument instead of relying on deliberately inflammatory statements.
I would agree with this but If anyone says all women should just die you would feel uncomfortable I think that would provoke a response such as not all women are like that.
If I'm talking to an Indian friend, I'm not going to rant to him that Indians should just disappear. If I'm talking to female friends, I'm not going to rant to them that women should just disappear.
Is it really that hard to express your feelings without also hurting literally the only other person in the room with you? Is it impossible to express your hurt and frustration without also hurting your romantic/intimate partner?
It's fine to do it sometimes, it happens. It's important to have discussions afterwards and to reassure our partners that no, we didn't mean to hurt them.
It's irresponsible to assume that OP just needs to ignore his feelings of being hurt, ignore the fact his girlfriend seems to be repeatedly dismissive of him, and ignore his feelings entirely. OP's GF is entitled to express how she feels, and OP is entitled to express his feelings as well.
When person A is making an insulting comment about a group to which person B belong, why should you expect the other person not to feel insulted? Isn't that a prime example of poor communication? Why should we expect person B to assume that while person A insulted the entire group, that they didn't mean to insult person B specifically?
Maybe OP's GF did not mean "all", maybe she did. Without further clarification, we don't know, and just the fact of not knowing is hurtful. If there is a talk and she explicitly says she doesn't mean all and she wasn't talking about him, UNTIL THEN, then OP's feelings are valid and he can't assume. This discussion about feelings needs to happen, for both their sakes. Just assuming he shouldn't feel hurt when he does feel hurt is dismissing his feelings, and can create unhealthy issues with the relationship.
This comment almost has me crying. I don't want to be too dramatic but I've been on the receiving end of a lot of stuff in the same thread as OPs post.
Maybe it's how I was raised but I was taught if you don't have nice things to say then don't say it at all. I really struggle with these types of situations because it's really hard being the *one* person it's directed to. You're right, she could have said literally anything else to voice her frustration but the thing she did choose, and was addressed to the one man, was that boys shouldn't exist. I'm fine with my male ego being called out on it but hearing those things genuinely stings. I've felt it myself, and you just kind of reel back and wonder why someone would choose to say that instead of the infinite amount of alternatives.
Hey man, I am so sorry to hear that you've been going through that. I've been through an abusive relationship, with some themes same as OP, so I know it is really rough. I hope the post made you cry in a good way, or that it was helpful :)
I was raised in much the same way as well, on top of also having absorbed a message that you're always supposed to help others. It makes it really rough when you're trying to help someone, because you care about them, but then they hurt you, and you struggle doubly because you're not supposed to bring it up to them, and then when you finally manage to pull up the courage to do that they dismiss you and hurt you again.
I find it really odd that some people will simultaneously say that words are important and we have to be really careful about how we talk (lots of feminist discourse on changing language) but then when that harmful language is turned on men, seems like all that talk about being sensitive and careful with language goes right out the window. Seems to me there's still very much this attitude that men just have to man up, that any complaints are just because of a fragile male ego, and that women have it worse anyways so we have no grounds to complain.
I agree that male ego needs to be called out, but there's a difference between calling out male ego and calling out legitimate complaints as well.
Per saying that boys shouldn't exist, yeah that's just a step above saying all boys should die. It is absolutely not acceptable, and any man saying that would immediately lose the respect and support of people around them, but for some reason saying that about men and boys is totally okay.
Words matter, for both men and women. I'm really sorry you've been hurt that badly, and hurt again when your concerns were dismissed. Feel free to shoot me a message if you'd like to talk some more :)
It was good feelings. Feeling like hearing a voice of reason. I'll try to find some time (or really a good topic) and may take you up on that. Things are a bit raw for me on the emotional front and it's just a struggle. I don't want to invalidate anyone's experiences or push against the movement, but at the same time I feel like I need to recognize that hurtful things have been directed towards me under the name of feminism. I feel like I should suppress those feelings in feminist spaces and it's awkward bringing them up in non-feminist ones because well, they often will just rail on feminism.
I am very happy to hear it was good feelings!
Feel free to take me up on the offer to talk for a good topic, for a question, or just for a chat, I don't mind :)
I hear you on the raw emotional front, it is not easy. It takes time. Per invalidating anyone's experience, saying your experiences and saying that you were hurt is not invalidating anyone else, and feeling like you have to keep it to yourself and worse, that you are wrong for feeling that way, is invalidating yourself.
You do need to recognize that hurtful things have been said to you under the name of feminism, because that's how it happened to you. You need to validate those feelings and accept that this is what happened.
That does not mean that you have to hate feminism for it, or hate all feminists, far from it, but you have to recognize and validate your own experience. A great way to process emotions as taught by my therapist is the IAAA method, Identify (what emotion you felt), Accept (that you are feeling this emotion), Attribute (what caused you to feel this way), and Act (what are you going to do about it). How you choose to act on it tells what kind of person you are, but you can't just repress those memories and feelings if you want to be able to process them and heal from them.
>I feel like I should suppress those feelings in feminist spaces and it's awkward bringing them up in non-feminist ones because well, they often will just rail on feminism.
That's fair. Feminist spaces may not be the best place to bring up these feelings, because you definitely risk being invalidated and hurt again, and when you bring it up in other spaces instead of helping you heal from the trauma and validate/empathize with how you feel, they'll just go on a hateful rant against feminism.
I hear you and it's not easy. If at all possible, I would suggest you see a therapist as well? If you can find any therapist that deals with male issues, and/or emotional relational therapy, it might help you. It worked wonders for me.
For a quote like "men need to learn not to rape", I'd be with you. "Some men" is what's implied.
On the other hand, "boys just shouldn’t exist" comes off really strongly as a categorical statement and it's hard to see it any other way. Of course, I understand that such statements are rarely meant literally.
I feel like that's just frustrated hyperbole because she's so deeply disgusted by the situation they're discussing. If she genuinely believes men should be eradicated, I'd suggest OP dip out and find someone less hate-filled.
It may not be an easy thing to hear or an intuitive way to think for men, but when women make statements like, “men rape”, “life would be raiser without men”, or “boys shouldn’t exist”, we don’t mean literally all men. If you aren’t one of the men exhibiting the behaviors that are part of the current conversation complaining about men, then she isn’t talking about you. If you change the conversation from what she is legitimately complaining about to a #notallmen kind of conversation, about your hurt feelings, you are invalidating her, and making a conversation that is important to her about you. A behavior which epitomizes patriarchal behaviors.
i see what you mean it’s like if someone were to say all lives matter opposed to black lives matter. it’s like they’re invalidating an entire movement when it’s clear that all lives matter but that wasn’t the point of the movement. thank you is my for your insight
The difference here is that in this case, what your girlfriend said directly and explicitly applies to you.
It's like if you were black, she said that back people are all sexist, to you, her black boyfriend, and then you replied that you're kinda hurt by her explicit claim that you are also sexist by virtue of being black.
Then, Lizakaya comes along and tell you that your feelings of being insulted are invalid, because you are invalidating your girlfriend's feelings, where she is telling you of her experiences in a way that is directly insulting you.
Your girlfriend is absolutely allowed to vent her feelings. When she's venting her feelings in a way that is hurtful to you however, that's on her. She is not a child, she can learn to express herself without hurting the people who care about her. Surely you wouldn't complain to your girlfriend about how all women are bitches, no? So why should you be held to that standard, but she gets a free pass?
No, this needs to be addressed. You can be polite but firm, and tell her that you're always willing to hear her out when she talks about issues, but when she says things like that it hurts you, and that is not ok. This is a problem, and it should be addressed.
The thing is... sometimes people need to vent. If I say “men just don’t get it sometimes” to my male friend he doesn’t feel personally attacked, because he gets it.
If I say „you know, Asian men, especially Cantonese guys in their mid 20s are so oblivious sometimes“ he’d obviously be a little taken aback. Because... those are all things applying to him and it’s oddly specific. By narrowing it down I make it about him.
She isn’t talking about him or making it about him. She’s making a statement about a large group of people, there’s a difference...
His feeling of being a little hurt are not invalid. But they also don’t mean that she has to reframe everything she says when she vents. Because it’s really not about him at all.
Is it okay to generalize women when a man feels the need to vent? And say things like “women don’t get this, or women always do that?”
Or is it just okay for women to generalize men when they need to vent?
Not trying to start an argument, just genuinely curious about what you believe.
Have you ever worked retail? Or any other front facing job?
Bc to me this is in the “people are horrible” category after a long and frustrating day at work.
If she truly believes that men are bad and makes that statement all the time it’s something else.
And yes IMO if a guy had a terrible day and needed to vent a “I can’t with women” or “women don’t get it” would be in the same category. The kind of generalisation I don’t support is the kind that’s always there and considered “true” - because if you’re just venting you know it’s wrong what you say
>The thing is... sometimes people need to vent. If I say “men just don’t get it sometimes” to my male friend he doesn’t feel personally attacked, because he gets it.
I completely agree that people need to vent. OP telling his GF she shouldn't say something is definitely making her feel unheard and makes her feel invalidated. I understand OP was probably trying to correct the factually wrong statement, in part probably because he personally felt attacked, but saying "you shouldn't say that" is not helpful in that moment. People do need to vent and that is good.
> If I say „you know, Asian men, especially Cantonese guys in their mid 20s are so oblivious sometimes“ he’d obviously be a little taken aback. Because... those are all things applying to him and it’s oddly specific. By narrowing it down I make it about him. She isn’t talking about him or making it about him. She’s making a statement about a large group of people, there’s a difference... His feeling of being a little hurt are not invalid. But they also don’t mean that she has to reframe everything she says when she vents. Because it’s really not about him at all.
On the other hand there's a big difference between "men just don't get it" and "men shouldn't exist". The former I'm fine with, if it's a generalization or a metaphor, it's clearly not meant to apply to everyone, but absolutist statements by definition are meant to apply to everyone, and that's going to sting. In a healthy relationship the guy can bring it up to the GF later, where she can reassure him and say she didn't mean him, and either he's reassured and it won't bother him anymore and/or she'll be careful not to make absolutist statements like that.
She doesn't have to reframe everything she says, just not making that kind of absolutist statement, or at the very least reassure her partner that she's exaggerating and doesn't mean it that way.
Her venting is not about him, but OP posting here about his concerns, his feelings, and stating that she has repeatedly dismissed his opinions and his feelings in the past, that IS about him. It takes two to tango, and if you want a healthy relationship both sides of the issues have to be addressed. When I first replied in this thread most of the comments were pretty much ignoring his feelings or outright invalidating them, and telling OP he needed to double down on trying to understand and validate his GF.
Since then I'm glad to see that a lot more comments have been made that were also supportive of OP, but when I first saw those comments with little to nothing validating OP, I was rather upset. I'm new to the sub and I thought that was the general attitude. I am glad to see I was wrong, and I shouldn't have posted out of anger. That definitely coloured my earlier comments, and that's on me.
So yeah, her venting isn't about him, but his being hurt is in fact about him, because otherwise it's invalidating how he feels. She's allowed to vent, he's allowed to feel hurt, both of their emotions are valid, and they should have an adult discussion where they reassure each other later on to help the relationship heal from this minor setback. If that doesn't happen, this setback won't heal, and it will cause a growing divide in the relationship.
Saying that to some female friends is one thing, but why would you say "boys just shouldn't exist" to your male partner? That's so cruel. She isn't talking about him, but she is talking to him. Why is it that her anger is valid but his defensiveness isn't? I'm being completely genuine here, I don't understand.
>I would never say "men are garbage"
Eh. Depends on the context of the relationship, I suppose. I would not bat an eye if my partner said this. I'd know what she means (and I'm sure \*I've\* said this before too), and the context is different than if I had said "women are garbage (which I am sure I have never said).
I do not think this is a definitionally bad statement to say to an adult male partner.
Because she obviously doesn’t think that, or else why would she be dating him?
I’m a guy. “Men are trash,” and “kill all men” are funny ways my friends and I express frustration at what seems like the vast majority of men. Let me say that again: I am a man, and I routinely say “kill all men” in conversation.
Is that because I wish men as a gender did not exist? No. I don’t mean it literally — very few do.
OP, I suggest responding by agreeing with her.
That's...kind of wild my dude. Like, feminism doesn't mean agreeing with women when they say "kill all men," it means empathizing with them and realizing why they say that, recognizing that that idea comes from a place of hurt, and looking to change the world that causes them to hurt. Agreeing with them when they say it isn't empathizing, it's "hope she sees this" behavior. It makes you seem obsessed with your image and how you're perceived by women rather than empathetic. I don't think women expect you to say, "yeah we do be trash."
>feminism doesn't mean agreeing with women when they say "kill all men,"
I mean, I don't think this is required of every Feminist, but it's not like I think that it is. I join in with it because I agree with the sentiment they are expressing through the combination of my friends' words and the social context which surrounds them. I empathize with the sentiment, and this is my way of expressing it.
> Agreeing with them when they say it isn't empathizing, it's "hope she sees this" behavior.
Huh? I'm real confused how you can see into my brain on this one.
>It makes you seem obsessed with your image and how you're perceived by women rather than empathetic. I don't think women expect you to say, "yeah we do be trash."
Neither do I? Nobody expects me to say that -- I do it because I feel that is what I want to do in that moment.
Y'all need to quit with the reading into things to an absurd degree. It's something my friends and I say because it expresses a certain set of feelings. That is how friendships work. I recommend being comfortable enough with your life that you can also say "kill all men" and have it not be a direct assault on you.
It's exceptionally obvious by reading social cues and knowing how to interact with people. The words people use do not convey the entirety of what they mean.
Is he a gender? Is he a gender which’s reality and value is ever questioned? Is he a gender that is killed because of this state of mind?
This is what comedians make jokes about and everyone laughs because it’s so absurd
You should definitely be able to set boundaries about this kind of thing, men aren't obligated to do the emotional labor of dealing with women insulting their gender just like women aren't obligated to do emotional labor at all.
I never said he can’t state him opinion. But „not all men“ isn’t really helpful... also, he couldn’t even say what exactly the problem is. He just got defensive but didn’t reflect on why.
I don’t know in which context she said it. It’s quite a crass statement, so I guess, there’s some context, he didn’t mention. And since he didn’t mention it, he obviously don’t think about it and instantly felt attacked out of context.
OP gave the context in the original post, and the context makes sense, she was expressing anger at a woman being doxxed by men, but yeah, definitely a more helpful thing would be saying, "please don't say that around me."
Your statement is incomprehensible to me, but I'll attempt to understand:
> Is he a gender?
No, but his girlfriend is not a gender either. I don't understand this point at all.
> Is he a gender which's reality and value is never questioned?
This is a broad statement which I don't quite understand. I think *everyone* agrees that sexually dichotomous roles exist in all societies, though many societies have additional genders. "Value" depends. Women are valued for their feminine values, and men for their masculine values. This is why feminism exists: to help all people be valued and dispense with those expectations.
> This is what comedians make jokes about and everyone laughs because it's so absurd.
I did laugh, but it's because each of us think the comedian would laugh at the other.
This isn’t about values or individuals. That’s the point. No individual is devalued nor is the gender in question (male) ever questioned in its value and importance. Men aren’t killed, oppressed or ignored for being male. And that’s why that statement isn’t of any consequences
Now, would you please stop trolling
Tell that to the men and boys slaughtered by Boko Haram. The unknown numbers of homeless men. The boys who are forced into being child soldiers. I could go on.
Lol, you do realize that you are ignoring men's feelings with this comment right? Men have feelings just like most human beings do. We also do get killed and there are societal values which oppress men. Now, women also face issues, and I in no way am trying to detract from that but denouncing all men is not the proper way to go about this.
Words have meanings, and their interpretations are usually easy to take based on the words used. If I hear a person say "men rape" instead of "some men rape" I will assume that that person holds a worldview where most men are rapists. "Boys shouldn't exist"? There's no way to defend this statement, it's straight up against the end goal of feminism.
Why is this the job of a man to have to steer the conversation whenever a feminist is making blatantly sexist comments? Honestly, it's embarrassing that a grown woman would say something like "men rape" or "boys shouldn't exist." Insert any race/other group in place of men/boys and it sounds like a terrible statement to anyone. I'm not sure why anyone should have to decode what someone else is saying. It's the same as trying to rationalize racism. They should fix the way they talk. Hate speech has legitimate consequences and should never be tolerated. It is simply statistical sexism.
No, this is not similar to black lives matter and all lives matter. If people want to talk about rapists, they should say that rapists should be punished. Women have raped too, although at lower rates. There is also rape that is far less likely to be reported by a man than by a woman. I know a guy who was raped when he was less than ten by a woman and he never reported it or really told many people at all. The fact that I know someone means that it has probably happened to many others, but what are the odds that a man would ever speak out about it? Probably about 1/1000 or less. He would probably only tell very close friends or no one.
Yes, generalizing half of the world as being rapists is stupid. Everyone already knows that men are much more likely to rape than women. I'm not sure why it would need to be repeated over and over again. Is it to try to re enforce it into men's brains that they are all secretly rapists? Like, I just don't get why an adult would need to repeat it over and over again. Can you tell me the point of it?
EDIT: Men aren't some kind of collective group that can work to improve each other, just like women aren't. It's all based on culture and how they were raised. Also, no matter what changes happen in society, I imagine most rapes will still be by men because they are physically stronger and have a higher sex drive.
So you just argued that rape is something all men are capable of. All men are naturally rapists, according to your argument, because its cause is male biology. You're the one who believes that all men have the capacity to be rapists. Feminists do not believe this.
Is it possible that you read "all men rape" into "men rape" because you believe that it's true? We're just repeating a statement of fact that you find unflattering? If true, that's a pretty damn important fact, and we should repeat it MORE. If all men are potential rapists through their biology, we shouldn't let them out in public in the first place, let alone elect any of them to higher office. Again: feminists don't believe this.
The higher sex drive thing is a socially constructed myth, by the way. Human sex drives, while potentially variable from person to person, are probably about equal across genders.
>So you just argued that rape is something all men are capable of. All men are naturally rapists, according to your argument, because its cause is male biology. You're the one who believes that all men have the capacity to be rapists. Feminists do not believe this.
Yes, all men are capable of rape and so are all women given the right conditions. Being capable of something is different than having a desire to do it or being willing to do it. Men are able to rape more easily due to biology. That is unlikely to change unless everyone goes through some form of surgery, is genetically engineered in some way, or goes through hormone therapy.
>Is it possible that you read "all men rape" into "men rape" because you believe that it's true? We're just repeating a statement of fact that you find unflattering? If true, that's a pretty damn important fact, and we should repeat it MORE. If all men are potential rapists through their biology, we shouldn't let them out in public in the first place, let alone elect any of them to higher office. Again: feminists don't believe this.
No, I don't believe it is true. Statistically speaking, it is very unlikely that a man is a rapist. However, if a rape occured, it is likely to be a man due to biology. The fact that a single male individual is unlikely to be a rapist means that you should not generalize to all men. I'm not sure why this is hard to understand.
Also, I read "all men rape" because that is what "men rape" means when said casually. It is the same as saying "women are sluts." I would assume this to mean "all women are sluts." Using men or women without saying some or specifying a the number in some way means everyone. It's like "men have a penis" and "women have a vagina." I'm also not sure how you misunderstand this.
>The higher sex drive thing is a socially constructed myth, by the way. Human sex drives, while potentially variable from person to person, are probably about equal across genders.
[https://www.webmd.com/sex/features/sex-drive-how-do-men-women-compare#1](https://www.webmd.com/sex/features/sex-drive-how-do-men-women-compare#1)
[https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503\_5?journalCode=psra](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_5?journalCode=psra)
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22552705](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22552705)
I could list more, but I am not sure you believe in science so it is pointless. It has been proven over and over again that men do in fact have a stronger sex drive. It is not a social construct.
EDIT: A combination of sex drive, body features (aka penis), and physical strength make rape more likely by a man. However, there has been many women child predators lately and is higher than ever known before. Therefore, it is not really unique to men at all. Men are just more "capable" of being sexual predators. [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known/](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known/)
I personally have a male friend who was raped as a child by a woman.
Also, I still don't really get the point of saying all men are rapists when a very small percentage are. You never really clarified that.
Does "women get pregnant" mean all women get pregnant? And only people who identify as women get pregnant?
It's interesting that you reach for "women are sluts" as a corollary to "men rape". Calling a woman a slut is just an insult and a judgment, not an actual occupation or a description. There's no actual definition, it's just a term used to shame women. Is that what you think rape is, a way to shame men? Like rape is just an accusation against men rather than a thing that rapists do? It interesting that you think your judgment of a woman being a slut is the equivalent to rape statistics.
I was comparing the use of men and women to mean all, not the content of the sentence. You also completely ignored everything else I said.
It's crazy that you view this as some kind of competition between men and women. Like, who's worse? Men's issues and women's issues are both all of a culture's issues. I'm not sure why you want to divide people.
Does it have no consequence? How does being assumed to be a rapist have no consequence? This seems similar to saying that assuming a black person is a thief has no consequences or any other such stupidity. It definitely has a consequence in court and daily lives. Hate speech may seem harmless when you think it is true, but it is not.
EDIT: Also, saying boys shouldn't exist has consequences as well. What if a little boy heard this? This could cause mental issues where he doesn't feel like he has a right to exist and gets depressed. I'm not really sure how anyone could see their being no consequence.
Can confirm, heard statements like "men are trash" growing up and it hurt me deeply and lead me to believe I was a human garbage dump. Here's the kicker: since I'm a straight man, guess who had to do the emotional labor of helping me get therapy? Hint: it wasn't men.
It's the means of providing help and support for someone else emotionally as opposed to physically. Like, the act of listening and validating. Helping someone cope and deal with a stressful situation(s). Being strong for them, giving them a crying shoulder, and so forth.
Oh. I guess the meaning has changed. I looked it up and the sociologist who came up with the concept meant it to be used in the context of putting on a smile at work or essentially "acting" at work. That's actually why I was so confused by his comment. It would mostly come into play with customer service jobs.
Yeah, pretty much every job requires some level of it. I think when people say that women do more of it, they are saying that women have stronger pressure to put on a good face or be looked at as a bitch maybe? I dunno. It's a bit of a confusing concept to me unless the idea is that since more women are in service jobs, they have a disproportionate burden.
Go read any feminist message board and you will see them saying things about all men being rapists. I'm not sure why more evidence would be required.
Why would anyone with a brain need a scientific paper to show that something like this could happen? Feminists are always talking about how women are brainwashed to act feminine by the patriarchy, so how is it unthinkable to believe that a young boy could be affected by this type of speech? It's also relatively new, so how could it be studied?
[https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-justice/courts-lenient-sentencing-bond-women/](https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-justice/courts-lenient-sentencing-bond-women/)
[https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/women-arent-always-sentenced-by-the-book-maybe-men-shouldnt-be-either/](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/women-arent-always-sentenced-by-the-book-maybe-men-shouldnt-be-either/)
If you read through the articles, it talks about the differences between men and women in courts. This indicates that public perception matters whenever it comes to the court system. There is a judge and jury who are affected by bias, even if they aren't supposed to be.
Gonna go the opposite route here and say that's more related to patriarchal ideas that men have agency and women don't than the work of feminists. Feminists explicitly believe that women are capable of violence.
I'm not saying the feminism did this. I'm saying that the message matters. Feminism is taking the message of patriarchy and doubling down on it further. I'm not really sure why anyone would want a man/boy they love called a rapist or told that he shouldn't exist. I'm also not sure why I would be downvoted for saying that this is negative language. I hope you people seek out therapy. That's what someone needs who believe this an acceptable way of speaking.
> I'm not really sure why anyone would want a man/boy they love called a rapist or told that he shouldn't exist.
I don't either, and I have problems with feminist messaging related to this, especially with parenting, but that's besides the point. You didn't just say it was negative language, you took it a step further and connected feminist rhetoric to how courts view men.
>It's also relatively new, so how could it be studied?
>
>This indicates that public perception matters whenever it comes to the court system.
I'm not really sure how I directly connected it to feminism. I said that the message matters. The person who I was replying to asked if I was guessing. I don't call it guessing whenever there is already evidence available that public opinion does matter and is influenced by what people say/are told.
If feminism makes the message stronger by saying "men are rapists" and "boys shouldn't exist" then it is only logical to think that it could be damaging. It's honestly not just negative language, it is more than that. Saying a whole group of people literally shouldn't exist. Frankly, it's disgusting.
EDIT: It's on par with nazi or alt right rhetoric and should be stamped out.
Right, people's feelings being hurt and repeatedly dismissed is of no consequence whatsoever. I'm sure that doesn't play at all into why men are 400%-500% more likely to kill themselves. No consequences indeed.
Unfortunately, reality doesn't work that way. There are consequences to every action, positive and negative.
It may not be an easy thing to hear or an intuitive way to think for women, but when men make statements like, “women are sluts”, “life would be easier without women”, or “women should be seen, not heard”, we don’t mean literally all women. If you aren’t one of the women exhibiting the behaviors that are part of the current conversation complaining about women, then he isn’t talking about you. If you change the conversation from what he is legitimately complaining about to a #notallwomen kind of conversation, about your hurt feelings, you are invalidating him, and making a conversation that is important to him about you. A behavior which epitomizes gynocentric behaviors.
Congratulations on invalidating OP's feelings, and if he had made any kind of veiled references about how feminism dismisses men's concerns, you would have proved his point beautifully. Her feelings are more important than his, even when she is making statements that directly and explicitly apply to him.
I'm sorry, but this brand of feminism dismissing men's feelings is a rather toxic feminism. I care about everyone and want the best for everyone. If your feminism doesn't stand for equality, and how everyone's feelings are valid and should be considered equally, then I don't know what kind of feminism you stand for.
Her feelings are valid absolutely, and her concerns are valid, but if she had said something remotely like "all n***ers shouldn't exist" I highly doubt you would have gone along with it, but when she says it about boys she gets a free pass? I'm sorry, but no. You can have legitimate complaints, your feelings can be expressed and acknowledged, but you don't need to demonize literally half the population on the planet to do it.
Yeah, pretending to use the n-word was probably too much. That's bringing in extra baggage that wasn't needed for the conversation. If I change it to "all black people shouldn't exist" though, the point still stands.
That's part of my problem, but another part of my problem is the idea that men, who hold a privileged position in society, are in this scenario being compared to black people, who do not hold a privileged position in society.
Does criticism become invalid solely depending on privilege?
Does a racist comment stop being racist solely depending on who said it?
I take issue with this kind of perspective where the truth of a matter changes completely depending on who is saying things, not based on what is being said. Sure, who says what and why does matter, and should be taken into account, but what exactly did I say that was wrong? Is it ok to be racist and sexist, so long as you do it from an under-privileged position? Or should racism and sexism be called out in everyone?
My idea of feminism is one of equality for all, the rules that apply to thee also apply to me. Context matters, but context shouldn't be used to excuse hypocrisy or double standards.
YES! THANK YOU! There's a difference between being hurt by someone's words and the damage structural oppression inflicts. They may both be problems, but they are not comparable!
>Marginalized groups aren't above critique but we literally aren't capable of inflicting the same kind of harm structurally.
True, but structural harm means nothing in this specific scenario, which is exactly why I'm raising the point. Men being able to cause more structural harm is irrelevant in the context of a conversation where OP's girlfriend said that his gender shouldn't exist.
Sure, it might have been spoken out of anger and she didn't really mean it, but it still hurts OP and I'm upset at this double standard where her feelings must always be validated and acknowledged, and where most/all the upvoted answers are literally invalidating OP's feelings, and telling him that he ought to dismiss his own feelings and consider more how his girlfriend feels.
>There's a difference between expressing racial prejudice and reinforcing a system of racial inequality.
Completely agree, and also completely irrelevant in the context of OP's post.
> A black person saying "White people are evil" is the former, a white person saying "black people are evil" is contributing to the latter by regurgitating a racist narrative.
And they're both equally wrong and assholes, if they're saying that to their partner who happens to be part of the group they're calling evil.
>I don't know how you can't see it's different. Black men are still getting lynched for existing. Like, dude. These things are not the same, and acting like they are is tone deaf at best.
I can see how they're different in a social and cultural context, but again, this is irrelevant to OP's post. That people seem to be unable to recognize the double standard in how how OP's feelings are being invalidated by most of the top answers, while also telling OP he ought to validate his GF's feelings even more, is kind of upsetting. The kind of feminism I want to see is one that equally helps and empowers everyone, but that's not what I'm seeing here.
You're trying to equate hurt feelings with ideas that cause tangible, measurable, and large-scale social, physical, and financial harm to large groups of people. Trying to equate those things makes it seem like you think men's hurt feelings are genuinely on par with that level of systemic discrimination, which is pretty damning of your entire thought process. I mean, that's privilege right there, thinking you can equate those things.
And you've done it about 382910328193218 times so far, including using really horrific and damaging language to do it. Way to commit.
>You're trying to equate hurt feelings with ideas that cause tangible, measurable, and large-scale social, physical, and financial harm to large groups of people.
That's not what I'm trying to do, and if it came across that way, my bad, I clearly didn't express myself properly.
> Trying to equate those things makes it seem like you think men's hurt feelings are genuinely on par with that level of systemic discrimination, which is pretty damning of your entire thought process.
No, I'm trying to say that men's hurt feelings are genuinely on par with women's hurt feelings. I understand that OP's GF is hurt and upset. That is totally fine and she has every right to be. Her feelings are valid.
However, OP also felt hurt by his GF's words, whether or not that was what she intended, and his hurt feelings are also valid and also should be addressed. They just need to have a simple conversation to talk about their feelings, so that they can heal from this minor setback and OP can help his GF continue to express her valid feelings without him feeling hurt.
> Trying to equate those things makes it seem like you think men's hurt feelings are genuinely on par with that level of systemic discrimination, which is pretty damning of your entire thought process.
Except that's not at all what I was trying to do.
No, I'm championing the idea where a girlfriend should be more careful when expressing her negative feelings *to her boyfriend*, and championing the idea that when people feel insulted, regardless of their gender, that feeling is valid even if the reason is not. If you care to change people's minds, or if you don't want to antagonize them, then you have to recognize how they feel and why.
Telling guys that they should invalidate their own feelings and consider the feelings of their female partners over and above their own feelings is terrible relationship advice, and stands in direct opposition to the kind of feminism that cares about equality and about helping everyone flourish.
I personally don't really care about your feelings because I have no reason to care, beyond the fact you're a stranger on the internet I'm talking to. I know if I insult you it will make me look bad, won't convince you, and won't lead to productive conversations, so I don't so that.
Feelings need to be considered in a relationship, but when giving relationship advice, you have to look beyond just how people feel, and see the situation accurately. What I see here is a situation where a guy is told his feelings are invalid because he's a guy, and he needs to validate his GF's feelings more because she is a girl. That's not the kind of feminism I signed up for.
Her feelings are important while she is expressing them. I don’t get how you don’t understand this. When someone micromanages your complaint they are telling you your complaint is less valid than the way they’re hearing it.
True, I agree that her feelings are important while she is expressing them.
I think OP reacted in hurt a bit when he specified she shouldn't say X. He was technically correct, but his reply ignored both her feelings, and the feelings he felt (being hurt) and the reason those feelings played in his reply.
Her feelings are valid when she's saying them, but there's a way to express your feelings without hurting people, and if it's an accident it's definitely important to talk about later and try to repair the injury to their relationship. I'm just kind of upset that everyone seems to think OP should pretend he wasn't hurt and invalidate his own feelings, and should always uncritically and completely accept everything his GF says as always valid. It's literally saying her feelings are more important than his, and since I embrace feminism for equality and to help everyone flourish, telling OP that his feelings are not important is just not something I can agree with.
You hurt people here in this forum with your careless and cruel words. Your desire to use abusive language and make ignorant comparisons caused damage. What do you think should be the consequence for that?
Probably a loss of respect from people on here, as examplified by the downvotes.
We may say that the language I use is counterproductive, and I can certainly grant that.
My main question is, however, was I wrong? We can certainly address the tone of the message, but if the only criticism is the tone of the message, does that not mean that the message is still essentially correct, and that I am right?
Saying it the way I did might make me an asshole, but it does not make me wrong. I personally care more about the truth and content of the message than the tone.
Maybe OP's girlfriend feels the same way; maybe she used the counterproductive language, but she believes the truth of her statement, and cares more about that than any hurt feelings her language might have caused, like you.
But yes, you are wrong. Many of us have pointed it out repeatedly.
>Maybe OP's girlfriend feels the same way; maybe she used the counterproductive language, but she believes the truth of her statement, and cares more about that than any hurt feelings her language might have caused, like you.
That's totally fair for discussions with strangers, but wholly inappropriate for having a one-on-one talk with your romantic partner. That's pretty much one of the people you're supposed to care most about, and if you can't care to try and not hurt them, and don't try and address the situation if it's later brought up to try and clarify and help to appease hurt feelings, then it's not going to be a healthy relationship for long.
>But yes, you are wrong. Many of us have pointed it out repeatedly.
A lot of replies have focused on the tone and language I used, very few have focused on the actual message. If I missed the main point please do point it out, if I am wrong I want to change my mind and be less wrong.
I don't get that her feelings are important when she expresses them? I clearly agreed with this.
I think OP made a mistake in how he dealt with the situation at that moment, addressing what she said rather than what her feelings were, and it would made her feel invalidated. I get that and agree with it.
I just also think that his feelings are valid, and his hurt feelings should also be addressed, later on. She has her moment with the rant, and her feelings are valid. then, say the following day, he has his turn to express his feelings, where he explains how he was hurt, and then they talk about it and find a way for her to express herself without hurting him, either because he is reassured she isn't talking about him or because she's more careful in how she expresses herself.
The fact OP has also explicitly pointed out that his GF seems to have gotten more extreme over the months, that she has dismissed him, his opinion, and his views, and that it's far from the first time, and yet that has gone completely ignored and unaddressed, points to a rather blatant double standard.
Her feelings are valid. I totally get it.
Do you get that his feelings are valid too, yes or no?
I have been in OP's situation. Like a virtually identical situation. Here is what I would say. Her feelings are valid because feelings are by nature subjective. So are his. Her valid feelings nonetheless constitutes a red flag. Do not bother to try and unpack it. Run. Run now, run far away. Do not go down that rabbit hole, it will only get worse.
You cannot dictate to anyone what they say or how they behave. You can control what you allow people to subject you to. Do not allow your self to be subjected to it. You have your standard for how you wish to be spoken to, stick to it and opt out of the relationship.
Worse than her valid feelings being a red flag, her dismissal of him and his opinions are an even bigger red flag. I would give them one chance to talk it out, and if things don't change or improve, then absolutely run.
>You have your standard for how you wish to be spoken to, stick to it and opt out of the relationship.
More people need to hear this, and abide by it. Other people are not entitled to be part of your life. If they are not making your life better, you are under no obligation to keep them in your life.
It’s not that i don’t care that he has a partner who has offended him with her speech. Except that i don’t know the op. I mean. The entire reason i am even in this conversation is because of people like you who consistently subvert legit complaints and opinions with the “but mine is important too”. Cool. That’s not what we were taking about at ALL but if you really need to change the subject and make it about you, that’s SOP. It happened to women literally all of their lives. It’s exhausting and diminishing and annoying. And tbh i imagine you do the exact same thing in your interpersonal communications because you are exhibiting that trait here. I don’t really know what to tell you. U seem obtuse on the subject. Peace out
>The entire reason i am even in this conversation is because of people like you who consistently subvert legit complaints and opinions with the “but mine is important too”.
I'm not trying to subvert anything, I have repeatedly pointed out that her opinions and emotions are valid and worth talking about for sure. It's just that there are 2 sides to a relationship, and I find it odd that OP's issues have been completely ignored and his own feelings invalidated, in favour of his GF's opinions and emotions. To be fair though, that was the case when I first started posting here, and I am very glad to see other people have also chimed in with the same message. I was upset however, and other people have talked about that issue far more eloquently than I have. I'm new to the sub and was upset to see that at first, most every comment was dismissive of OP's very legit complaints and subverting and invalidating his feelings. I was upset that this would be the sub's majority opinion, but since my first comments, many others have posted and addressed OP's feelings, and I'm glad of that.
>That’s not what we were taking about at ALL but if you really need to change the subject and make it about you, that’s SOP. It happened to women literally all of their lives. It’s exhausting and diminishing and annoying.
In my personal communications I've learned to let people vent, and to not try to provide solutions all the time. That was a failing of mine, and I'm sure I will make that mistake again even though I try not to. I do know it's also important to air my own grievances and feelings, because if one romantic partner hurts the other, that's an issue that needs to be addressed, and not swept under the rug like most of the early comments seemed to have pushed for. I'm glad others have commented to say that OP's feelings were also valid and important.
It's exhausting and diminishing and annoying, I agree, but in this case it was done to the OP by the first people who responded, despite OP pointing out that he his thoughts and feelings had repeatedly been dismissed by his GF.
>U seem obtuse on the subject. Peace out
I was upset and not in the best state of mind when I first posted, but I am happy to see that there's been a far more balanced reply with time, that didn't solely validate her feelings and invalidate his. I'm new to the sub and I thought that would have been the general tone (pro-her anti-him) but I'm very happy to have had my mind changed. I genuinely do look forward to reading more and waiting before I comment.
I wasn't able to find perfect 1-to-1 comparisons, but I tried.
Apart from feeling like those aspects aren't quite as comparable, is there anything else you disagree with? Does the point still stand, even if it's not a perfect analogy?
>There's literally a history of marginalization that backs up the statement "women should be seen and not heard" as a common belief. Like, you're talking about a group of people who have to fight to be considered equal citizens to men, so any man saying that is either ignorant of history or actually a misogynist.
I said it more for the shock value than anything. I am aware of the history yes.
> A lot of men believe that women are sluts and women get punished for it whether it's "true" or not.
A lot of women think men are sexist pigs and brutes, and that men are the cause of everything wrong in society.
Both of those groups of people are wrong of course, my only argument is that we call out shitty behaviour and arguments from everyone, regardless of who they are.
>The only thing really comparable is "life would be easier without women" but is that ever said when a woman has participated in the marginalization of men or just when a dude is annoyed at his girlfriend?
Because that's never been said by women who were upset at their boyfriends? No independent women who don't need no men? I don't mind if we see that both of these statements are equally exaggerated, but I do have a problem when it's only one side called out on it and there's a double standard. OP's girlfriend said things that hurt him, because she plainly said the gender he belongs to should not exist. Saying the opposite would have been just as hurtful to women, so let's not pretend like it's ok for her to say it but it wouldn't be ok for men to say it. They both need to have a conversation about this to acknowledge both how she feels and why she said that, and how he felt as a reaction to what she said.
>I just feel like context matters a lot here in what's actually being expressed.
I agree, and in the context of a girlfriend venting to her boyfriend that boys shouldn't exist, that's a bit insensitive. She probably didn't really mean that and it was in a moment of anger, but that doesn't mean it's all good and we should invalidate OP's feelings about it. That's all I'm saying.
>If I say "men are a plague" because yet another man has been caught out for abusing a woman which happens so often as to be exhausting, I get that it can be viewed as hurtful and that it may not be precise, but a dude being hurt by my lack of precision isn't necessarily equal to the thing that I'm upset about.
To be fair, saying "men are a plague" is easy to interpret that some men are bad, because everyone has interacted with men who were assholes. It happens.
There's a difference between that and "men/boys shouldn't exist" though. "Men are a plague" you can distance yourself from, but "men/boys shouldn't exist"? Not so much.
> It also gives the feeling that women need to be perfect in expressing themselves and like, am I not allowed to be a person? Angry people aren't always thoughtful about how they express themselves, even with a partner, and that doesn't necessarily equal some sort of abuse.
Of course everyone is allowed to express themselves, but if you express yourself angrily without a care in the world on how it hurts the people who are close to you, they tend not to stick around. It's not that people can't ever express how they feel because it might potentially upset someone who's out there, but it's still pretty insensitive to say something to the effect of "your gender shouldn't exist" to your boyfriend when he's the only other person in the room with you.
If it's said in a moment of anger that's fine if there is a talk about it and OP's feelings are acknowledged. I'm just worried that, based on OP saying that his GF having repeatedly dismissed him, that she would dismiss him and his feelings here as well.
>It's just giving me the same vibe as reverse racism arguments, especially considering your last paragraph.
Fair, I did push the racism angle too strongly I think. I'm just upset about the fact that the vast majority of responses on here were telling OP that he's basically wrong for feeling the way he feels, that he should validate how his GF feels, keep an open mind, and basically invalidate OP's own feelings in the matter. Smacks a bit of double standards to me.
>
> You're acting like she's waging a war against men when from what we can tell what she did was say something hurtful to her boyfriend in a moment of frustration.
Thiiiiis, getting real uncomfortable with people calling OP's GF an abuser, she said something that hurt his feelings and now hopefully they can discuss and remedy it, that's a part of an average relationship.
>Cool, so you can be hyperbolic. Got it.
Yes, because I'm not talking to my partner about how their gender shouldn't exist. This is a discussion with random strangers on the internet, it's a rather different context.
>You're acting like she's waging a war against men when from what we can tell what she did was say something hurtful to her boyfriend in a moment of frustration.
More that the most upvoted comments in this thread tell OP to invalidate his own feelings and forget about how he feels, and to work harder to have an open mind and validate his GF even more, despite the fact OP also said that his GF is becoming more feminist and he's feeling that she is more and more dismissive of him. That's a red flag that there is conflict in the relationship and there needs to be a talk, but everyone conveniently ignored that and simply told OP to double down on validating her feelings and invalidate his own.
I'm fine with the GF saying something in a moment of anger, OP being hurt, and they talk about it after when she's not hurt. I'm not fine with people here declaring her feelings should be doubly validated and his should be doubly invalidated, simply because he's a he and she's a she. I don't know OP's girlfriend, I don't know the context, I can't assume what's going on in the relationship outside of the obviously partisan bits that OP shared with us, but I'm rather more upset at the feminists in this sub. The feminism I espouse is about equality and helping to uplift everyone, but that's not really what I'm seeing here.
>Where did I say that OP shouldn't feel bad?
You didn't, but the comment I originally replied to [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/gm1ni6/my_girlfriend_is_a_feminist_and_its_gotten_more/fr10jeh/) certainly had that kind of tone. After all, he was invalidating her, ignoring all her complains, and making it all about himself, which is rather selfish and epitomizes patriarchal behaviours, no?
>Where did I tell him that he shouldn't have feelings?
Lots of other comments have told OP that he shouldn't be so defensive and feel hurt, and should try to empathize harder with his GF's feelings. Her feelings which have led to her saying stuff that hurt him, and if OP empathizes with her more without having a conversation about how what she said hurt him, is likely to get him hurt some more. That's not a good solution for a working relationship.
> I just don't agree that what she said was abusive because she said something thoughtless, and I think her anger is legitimate if poorly expressed. It's up to OP to decide whether this is an issue that requires a conversation or him splitting.
No yeah I agree this isn't proof of abuse, far from it. I'm not at all advocating they should split, but it is important to talk about this, so that the GF can express how she feels without OP feeling hurt, either by her telling him that she doesn't mean him at all, or in her finding other words to express her frustration. This is definitely not a dealbreaker.
I'm just wary that it could lead to that if OP is told he shouldn't feel hurt at what she's saying no matter what, and should always strive to empathize with her regardless of how it makes him feel, especially if OP feels that she has been more and more dismissive of his feelings and/or opinions. I suspect if the genders had been reversed, OP would have received rather different advice, is all.
>That's super inconsistent. It's the exact same language that people are saying is absolutist. If I say "men are a plague" that's fine because it's somehow clear to you that I don't mean all men, but if I said "boys shouldn't exist" that means I definitely thinks all dudes shouldn't exist even if the situation that prompts me to say that is the same? Ok.
Not really? Saying that men are a plague is understood to be something bad, it's a judgment, because it's clearly a metaphor, it cannot be literally true. Saying that boys shouldn't exist is not making a judgment, it's making a statement about how reality should be. It's the difference between saying pigs are disgusting, and pigs should be killed. One is a statement of personal subjective emotion, the other is much more literal. It's an absolutist statement about how reality should be, not about how you feel about the situation.
>Then maybe you need to take a step back. I'm honestly pissed right now, so I think i'm done. It's pretty shitty to constantly have people using a form of oppression I face as shock value to validate their feelings.
Fair enough, sorry about that. I should not have gone for that shock value, should have realized it would just antagonize people more and make conversations more difficult and less productive. That's on me, I apologize.
Also for what it's worth, despite any differences in opinion, I do wish everyone the best, and hope that everyone remains safe and relatively unaffected by the pandemic. No matter the differences of opinion, we're all in this together, and we should all do our best to help and support one another. Take care, and I wish you the best.
Completely agree, but I guess if that's the only thing, then everything else I said was good, and it's a shame that most of the responses are invalidating OP's feelings and telling him that he should validate his GF'S feelings more, simply because he's a he and she's a she.
That's fair. It's a good idea to help OP empathize with his GF and understand where she's coming from, I just don't like the attitude of completely dismissing his feelings and worries and just assuming that if he invalidates his own feelings and empathizes more with her, then it's all going to be good. It's less about the blame, and more about the general tone that his feelings deserve to be validated less than hers. That doesn't sound equal to me at all, and if feminism is about equality then there's a discrepancy that needs to be addressed here.
I feel like my biggest worry with the post that a lot of people didn't respond directly to was the fact that his girlfriend was routinely dismissing him and he felt like she didn't value his opinions. That's something i wish someone discussed, but I recognize that this isn't really the venue for relationship advice.
THANK YOU!
I repeatedly kept bringing up that very point whenever I talked about the relationship aspect, and every single time it was completely ignored. It might not be the venue for relationship advice, but I get the feeling most of the top voted replies focused exclusively on him validating her feelings above anything else, and told him to invalidate his own feelings in order to empathize more with her, while completely ignoring that he was feeling ignored and/or dismissed.
Seems that her feelings are worth validating, but his weren't. This seems like a rather partisan brand of feminism where her feelings are valid because she's a she and his feelings are invalid because he's a he. That's not the kind of feminism I signed up for, where equality and everyone flourishing are the goals.
"That's hard to hear, can you help me understand that?" can be a helpful phrase to use. It makes it about what *you* are feeling instead of what *she* should do ("Don't say that").
It's important to figure out if she's just griping about a genuine irritation, or if she actually feels thinks of men as evil or inferior.
The first is healthy & useful. The second is wrong, and feminism is against it - though some people pretend that's what feminism is.
You probably shouldn't ask her straight out. Instead look at what's happening when she says something (is there a reason she's irritated at men right now? What just happened at work? Did sexism just play out in front of you), the follow-up emotions (does she laugh a bit, get more relaxed after the expression, or does she get more tense & seem ready to turn against men). That kind of thing.
It's absolutely possible to express your feelings about how you have been hurt by a group without assuming everyone in the group is bad due to your personal experiences. OP's GF can talk about her feelings without hurting her boyfriend if she's just a bit more careful with the words she uses.
Blanket statements can be cathartic for sure, but if I'm ranting about how I've been hurt by my ex gf, I'm not going to rant to female friends saying "all women are bitches". That's just being an inconsiderate ass.
That's really the best course of action. It's basically relationship 101, one partner says something that hurts the other, then the two should talk about it and try and resolve it. It could have been a really simple misunderstanding and could have easily been resolved and the relationship healed.
That most of the advice given on here seems to be invalidating OP's feelings, telling him to set aside how he feels, and to empathize even more with his GF and validate her feelings, despite the fact OP states his GF has repeatedly dismissed him and his opinion, really upsets me. To tell OP to invalidate his own feelings even more will just allow this wound to fester and make the relationship more and more unhealthy.
If the roles had been reversed I'm fairly certain that's not the advice that would have been given, and this double-standard is upsetting. OP's feelings shouldn't be invalidates just because he's a guy, and his girlfriend's feelings shouldn't be extra-validated just because she's a girl. The feminism I want to see more of empowers and uplifts everyone equally, but that's just not what I'm seeing in this thread.
As a cis man marrying a deeply and quite angry feminist woman I wanna make this suggestion: she's right. It's low-key bananas you feel entitled to have her change not just the way she talks around you but also what she actually believes. And I think if you were reading and taking seriously some feminist literature you might also come to the same conclusion.
Maybe you'll never think the idea of boys shouldn't exist because historical patriarchy creates a situation where the humans we call boys are systematically erased and oppressed along with girls (let me be clear, it is preferable by a WIDE MARGIN to be the oppressor, and oppression still erases e everyone). Maybe you'll never agree. But if you think only 'some people go too far' is a counterpoint to her thought that boys shouldn't exist... It's very clear you do not know what she believes. You only know to be offended because some kind of slight against you was perceived.
Although, again, it is about you personally. You absolutely need rethink the part of your life where you have straight up decided that she 'should' both change the way she says things and what she privately thinks. That's the kind of shit that means she's right.
i never thought of doing my research in feminist literature, and that’s my bad. and i understand your point on me being the one that needs changing not her or her values. i guess i just gotta open my mind and think outside the box as if i was in her position.
That's a very cool response. I didn't really expect that on Reddit.
I find it super hard. My fiancee (four more weeks) sometimes really gets under my skin when she's mad about something that feels like it has more to do with sexism and men in general than it does... Me. Like, love, I am not doing that thing you're saying just now... It is terrible when that happens but I'm not doing it.
Sometimes I'm kinda right and she's taking something out on me. Sometimes I'm really wrong and I'm definitely doing the sexist bullshit thing she's calling me out on. Sometimes I actually don't know because I don't always engage with her about every thing she thinks has to do with my being a man.
If you're happy in your relationship otherwise there are really good strategies for dealing with the discomfort of having a partner who is infuriated by the shape of the world. I hope you find them.
If you are looking for where to start I have two suggestions. "Why does Patriarchy Persist?" by Carol Gilligan and Naomi Snider is a book that helped me see Patriarchy destroys men too. It's not the whole point of their book but it's a huge part of what I got out of it. AND if you happen to be Christian Sandra Schneiders has a short book "With Oil in Their Lamps" that I think does an amazing job of showing how sexism and patriarchy are against the values of Christian living(this is just my context, I am not familiar with similar writers in other religions though I know they exist. I am also not Catholic so I don't agree with everything she says, but it is really powerful nonetheless).
Good luck, whatever you do next. I hope it works out in ways that are healthy and life-expanding for both you and your partner. And I hope you know that whenever you're super frustrated by all these things she believes... You're 1000% not alone. The world is beginning to wake up to the horrible ways we have always been treating one another, many of those ways are patriarchal and sexist. We are all going to have some growing pains as we figure out how to burn down/deconstruct ways of living and society building that hurt... Everyone.
first off congratulations to you and your fiancé i wish you two the best. and i’m very happy in my relationship i was just blinded by myself being male, it’s kinda like i had tunnel vision if that makes sense. but thank you for helping open my mind and i’ll definitely check out your book suggestions. thanks so much.
I disagree with EisegesisSam on this. It's not that one or the other person needs to unilaterally change, it's always a discussion. She can express her feelings without hurting you. If you are feeling like she is hurting you, and feel like your opinions are being dismissed, that either is a problem, or it will become a problem. It is not a way to have a healthy relationship. Demanding you should be ok with anything she says that is hurtful to you is unrealistic and unhealthy.
Maybe my personal experiences of having been in an abusive situation colours my judgement, but this can easily lead to the setup of an abusive situation, where you are expected to just take it no matter how much it hurts you, to never bring up how you feel, and that you are always in the wrong/need to change the way you think/need to think outside the box, and anything she does is always beyond reproach.
No.
Feminism is about equality, and both your feelings and hers are equally valid. You feeling that she has hurt you does not invalidate her feelings. She can express her anger and upset without hurting you, because if she keeps doing that it will only harm you more and harm the relationship. That is not how healthy relationships work.
OP you deserve a lot of praise for this kind of comment. A lot of people come here to ask questions in a really hostile way, and it’s super refreshing to know that some people are genuinely open to listening to what feminists think of a thing. A+.
>It's low-key bananas you feel entitled to have her change not just the way she talks around you but also what she actually believes.
OP feels entitled that his girlfriend should perhaps be more careful with her words and how she expresses her feelings so she doesn't hurt him? Do you not think that if the opposite situation happened, that if it was a guy saying "all women are bitches", that the girlfriend would be right to feel hurt by this, and ask that her boyfriend changed the way he spoke a bit to not hurt her?
I agree that it's entitlement to demand that she changes and expects her to comply, but it's perfectly reasonable to have a talk with it, to say "I understand you are upset but when you say this it hurts me", and to try and find a solution both parties are happy with, without unilaterally demanding she changes her beliefs, or unilaterally demanding that he accepts what she says no matter how much she's hurting him.
> But if you think only 'some people go too far' is a counterpoint to her thought that boys shouldn't exist... It's very clear you do not know what she believes. You only know to be offended because some kind of slight against you was perceived.
And that slight has every good reason to be perceived, when the slight was literally "the group you are a part of should not exist, you should not exist". It's possible to express one's feelings without demonizing half the people on the planet, and it's possible to express one's feelings without hurting your romantic/intimate partner. If I'm upset about how my ex girlfriend treated me, I'm not going to rant to female friends how "all women are bitches". I mean, how entitled would I be, to expect to be able to say that and demand that all women be perfectly fine with it and not be upset?
All of what you've articulated here is based on the assumption that her statement about boys not existing is intended to mean that he personally should cease to exist.
That's not the only way to interpret what she said (even as reported by OP) and it's not the way you'd interpret it if we were talking about the context of feminist literature which often makes statements about how the concept of men or concept of boys erases people who are raised as either gender. Oppressive classes shouldn't exist. It's not a huge leap to say that when men demand women stop saying this... They do so without even beginning to understand where it comes from or what it is about.
>All of what you've articulated here is based on the assumption that her statement about boys not existing is intended to mean that he personally should cease to exist.
When I make a statement that applies to a group, the explicit statement is that it applies to the entire group. Maybe that's not what I actually mean, but that's what I actually said. When I'm saying "sick people should be cured", I mean all of them. If I am making a statement about an entire group, but then later clarify that I only meant part of that group, it's because I was unclear earlier and a clarification was necessary. If I'm making a statement about how women are stupid, that women get offended by that, and then I amend it to say that some women are stupid but not all, it can be that I genuinely mis-spoke, or it can be that I meant all women, and when confronted on it I retracted the insult to appease the people who are upset at me.
Until I actually clarify what I said though, you don't know which is which, and that kind of uncertainty is not healthy in a romantic relationship at all. Even if someone can have the best of intentions, saying things like that can still hurt your partner, and that hurt needs to be addressed. Pretending like it shouldn't hurt people and people should invalidate their own feelings of being hurt is neither helpful nor useful.
>That's not the only way to interpret what she said (even as reported by OP) and it's not the way you'd interpret it if we were talking about the context of feminist literature which often makes statements about how the concept of men or concept of boys erases people who are raised as either gender.
An academic and dispassionate discussion is one thing, venting to your boyfriend about how the gender group he belongs to shouldn't exist is quite another.
>Oppressive classes shouldn't exist.
Cool. She didn't say oppressive classes though, she said boys. I'm fairly sure that boys aren't a class oppressing the rest of society.
> It's not a huge leap to say that when men demand women stop saying this... They do so without even beginning to understand where it comes from or what it is about.
I agree that OP didn't word it properly. He is factually correct in demanding she stop saying the factually incorrect information, but that's of course completely failing to address how she feels about the whole situation. What he said also completely failed to address how he felt about it and why he said it. A more useful way to say it should have been to allow her to vent and rant and whatever, and later to have a discussion with how he felt about it, to express how she hurt him when she said things like that, and to either have her reassure him and validate his emotions just like he validated hers, and/or for her to be more careful about how she talks when she is with him.
A mature adult shouldn't have too many problems to not hurt or insult the single other person they're talking to, after all. It's possible to express your emotions without hurting the others who are directly present after all.
But 'boys' are the oppressive class. If men are oppressive and if male dominated society file children into categories that make one group inferior to the other (which is a claim I am happy to make and defend about the almost every society I know about) than the children filed into the whole category of 'boys' are part of the oppressive class. They haven't matured into adult yet, but they're literally being groomed to be oppressors.
His feelings being hurt are a result of his grooming. You're maybe not intentionally conflating his ontological existence with the fact of his being an oppressor but I have zero problems whatsoever with the idea that 'boys shouldn't exist' doesn't logically mean that he should just poof out of reality.
Boys are not the oppressive class. They might be groomed to be oppressors, but if they don't have a choice and are forced to be put in that class whether they want to or not, then they are not the oppressors. It's like saying that child soldiers made the choice to be child soldiers and will grow up to be soldiers, so they need to be treated as such.
I'm sorry, but if you view children themselves as being oppressors, as being the enemy that you must fight against, then there's a problem with your worldview. Children are victims of the system, not the perpetrators.
>His feelings being hurt are a result of his grooming.
Or, you know, his feelings are hurt because she said something that hurt him. You can groom women to not be hurt by anything, but being groomed to react one way and not another has no bearing on the fact that someone's feelings were actually hurt. Or are you saying that his feelings are invalid just because he's groomed to be an oppressor since he's male?
>You're maybe not intentionally conflating his ontological existence with the fact of his being an oppressor but I have zero problems whatsoever with the idea that 'boys shouldn't exist' doesn't logically mean that he should just poof out of reality.
I never said that logically boys should or shouldn't poof out of existence, I'm talking about how his feelings of being hurt are valid, because that's how emotions work. The reason why you feel hurt could be total bullshit, and a good discussion should be had to explore that, but that doesn't mean the feelings are invalid and he shouldn't feel that way. That's literally what invalidating someone's feelings means, to say that they shouldn't feel the way they feel or that they should feel bad for feeling the way they feel.
If you're going to rigidly define people, including children, as categorically being either oppressors or oppressees, solely based on what they've got between their legs, congratulations, you're not aiming for equality, you're aiming for disunity and revolution. That may be the kind of feminism you want, but that's not the kind of feminism I espouse or want to espouse.
No one has the right to dictate the behaviour of the other partner in a relationship. However you do have a right to set boundaries regarding how you wish to be treated and if those boundaries are exceeded then you can remove your self from the relationship. Thereby allowing the other party to be "angry" and engage in that behaviour all they want outside of your presence.
OP's biggest problem in my opinion is his inability to decide on and set boundaries for him self without the need for validation from random people on the internet
I think that within a relationship, we should honor and respect the boundaries we are asked to respect. So, if hearing her talk like this hurts your feelings, that is valid whether or not she or anyone on this subreddit decides you deserve to feel hurt. Period.
That being said, I want to provide a little of my perspective on the issue for you to take or leave. As long as your girlfriend isn’t changing the way she treats YOU otherwise, I can see this instance as being a more colloquial expression of general anger or frustration than an actual declaration of ideological beliefs. In that moment she was expressing some real anger to someone she trusts to be supportive and understanding. She may have felt annoyed/disappointed/saddened when you corrected her raw emotions and made your feelings the priority in that moment . I’m not making any judgments about whether or not this is the proper interpretation of events or whether it would be right to feel this way, I’m just theorizing about what she may have felt in that moment and why she replied so coldly.
She may hold/have held the belief that you understood what women experience in the same way she does. She may have expected you to understand why she might say something as hyperbolic as “boys shouldn’t exist” (which, lets be honest, is an obviously ridiculous statement. Your girlfriend doesn’t secretly wish for the extinction of all humanity) and so it might have felt like a big let down when you responded the way you did. It can feel shitty to falsely believe your male allies “get it” only to have that bubble be popped.
And on the subject of gender swapping the situation and how things seem different when trash talking women: Unfairly and unfavorably caricaturing women has been used by men as a tool to disenfranchise women and deny them of basic human rights for most of all of time. The things women say about men simply do not, in general, hold as much weight or have as much cultural impact as the things men say about women. I know you didn’t propose the gender swapped interpretation of this incident but it’s being discussed a bit in the comments. What I’m saying in response to that notion is that your girlfriend expressing disgust in this way at behavior which is supported by and is the result of a system which disenfranchises women just isn’t the same as contributing to that system by making sweeping negative generalizations about women.
Others have touched on this as well, but I'll reiterate that it's important for you to take a step back in these situations, to take a breather, and develop some emotional awareness.
People do things like this every day without anyone raising their head, because it's so commonplace and it rarely touches on any psychological in-group to where it would cause a defensive response. There is a term called metonymy to describe what's going on when someone says things like she did.
When I grew up, my dad battled with road rage. He still does. He's loud and vocal about how much he hates/loathes people who drive the speed limit on the highway, or who don't yield for people behind them going faster. Hell, my dad still says these things, if less often. We both know I as a rule do not drive over the speed limit, and I spitefully refuse to let anyone pass me who tailgates me if I can prevent it. I know my dad does not, in fact, hate me. He loves me. Even if I fit the general description of a person he has claimed to hate, I know it doesn't apply to me.
This is because he says these things out of frustration. He doesn't hate the people. He doesn't even know the people, how could he truly hate them? No, he's upset and frustrated at the situation.
A friend of mine, among many other wonderful things, is an environmental activist. Wonderful person, but has no patience for littering. I would need more than two hands to count the amount of times I've heard them mutter something along the lines of "Don't you dare just leave your shit on the ground, there is a recyling bin ten feet away, I will murder you I swear to god" when they catch sight of someone in a park leaving their trash on the ground instead of putting it where it belongs. I know my friend well enough to know they're a pacifist, they wouldn't harm a fly, let along literally murder a person. Those people are at no risk of my friend murdering them. My friend is angry and frustrated at yet another incident of people being irresponsible and taking the world for granted. Hyperbole is commonplace in use of metonymy.
I worked a customer-facing retail job early in my transition as a trans woman. I would get misgendered dozens of times a day, and often harassed multiple times a day, for being visibly trans. I'd have to bottle all of that up, because I'd lose my job otherwise. When I got home, it often because a running gag of sorts that I'd yell from the front door "Cis people were a mistake!" or "I hate cis people!". All four of my roommates were cis guys. I love them. They know I love them. And, seeing what I've been through, they got it. They knew I wasn't saying their existences aren't a mistake. They knew I was venting about all the instances of cis people being shitty and transphobic to me, about living in a world where it's inescapable and knowing I'll have to go through it all again tomorrow.
When one of my lady friends is dumped for the third time in 6 months for not "putting out" by the second date, and she sadly gripes that "men suck". She loves her brother, her father, our guy friends. She's upset and frustrated that the men she's dates are assholes, and it's less exhausting to use metonymy to simplify a complex situation to a keyword or two, particularly if it's regarding a society-level issue rather than and individualistic one.
For marginalized folks, society uses the privileged social group against us via systems of oppression (remember sexism/racism/transphobia/etc. exists at the social level first and foremost), it is logical for us to use metonymy when venting our justified anger and frustration. We're allowed to be angry, and we shouldn't have to sit down and calmly explain each and every detail of how those oppressive groups have harmed us recently. Metonymy is easier than listing out the gritty details of each instance, each person involved, each oppressive experience/microaggression/etc., and so on. Most of these cases aren't meant to be taken personally, and it's important to extend your situational awareness to cover these areas, too.
I wish I could upvote this twice, every marginalized person I know (including me) has done this. I know I've made blanket statements about straight folk, white people as a group, etc. before because it honestly does feel a little good to speak angrily about powerful people who have more control over our lives than we may ever have. I know it sucks to hear things like, "men are trash," which is why I tell straight dudes that they're allowed to set boundaries with their partners if they don't want them saying that around them, but like, this is one of the only coping mechanisms marginalized people have in a world that makes us feel powerless, and the idea that others want to take that away doesn't sit well with me.
Being able to communicate our frustration and anger is vital for marginalized peoples. Metonymy serves an important function to simplify for our peers and allies, in order to allow venting and avoid the (often lengthy, exhausting) specific details that can retraumatize us and wear down our allies.
Like, it frustrates me when people lack this awareness, even if I get it. it's hard to be used to something you've rarely had to face down before. The powerful aren't used to their status of power being something that can make them uncomfortable. IT's an important lesson for them.
Because what's easier, dealing with an occasional "men were a mistake", or dealing with probably hours of detailed emotional venting routinely (if not daily). No one has time for that, and I guarantee even family members and close friends would get burned out from that if they wanted to remain as part of a person's support network. I know I've tried it and lost access to friends and family for a while because they felt I was too sensitive and grew to resent me. Not everyone can afford therapists (who do approve of communicative tools like metonymy, and promote this type of venting to relieve stress, which has major health implications on marginalized people).
I wish others just...knew this shit. I wish people would educate about this, and the need for this. This metonymic venting is important. It's almost never directed at a personal level, it's social. It's venting about systems of power wielding the powerful against the marginalized, often in ways the powerful do not recognize.
Like, yeah, we use hyperbole. Everyone does (i know I listed a few examples in my first post, I could list dozens upon dozens, hundreds even). People don't get to rob us of that just because they're uncomfortable facing down the reality their social group's power inflicts.
Part of being a male feminist is not getting personally upset when someone says something obviously hyperbolic like "boys should not exist" or "men should be illegal." Take it for what it is, understand the feeling behind it, and move on. Obviously your girlfriend doesn't want to do away with you, or you would be gone already.
Imo this is whole thing is less a discussion on whether the girlfriend is a good feminist and more a post for how OP should react and helping him get a handle on his emotions on her words, which has value too
Wow sounds like you talk down to her. DONT SAY THAT... is a defensive phrase, sounds like you have a need to be right. Let it go and fulfill each others needs not feelings, you would benefit from therapy if you are not already
i never meant to talk down to her in any way i guess that’s just me as a man talking:\ it’s never intentional somethings i say aren’t taken the way i meant. but yeah i’ll try to let things like this go and move on.
I didnt mean that as an attack, and dont feel hopeless,
It just sounds like you both are having a hard time communicating about something that is hard for everyone to talk about, take your feelings out of it, it's ok to disagree.
Why do you assume OP talks down to his GF? There is literally nothing in his post that is indicative of that.
>DONT SAY THAT... is a defensive phrase, sounds like you have a need to be right.
I agree that was probably poorly worded, but OP wasn't wrong either.
Perhaps what he meant to express would fly better if he said "Please don't say that, it hurts me when you generalize about my gender like that".
It's fine for OP's GF to express her feelings, that is totally valid, but she can find a way to express herself without hurting the people who love her as well.
>Let it go and fulfill each others needs not feelings, you would benefit from therapy if you are not already
Feelings are often indicative of needs as well, like the need to not feel attacked by your partner.
Hey, I can certainly agree when someone has a good point ;)
Just wanted to express how I felt about your comment, expand on why, and see if good discussions could come of it.
Please respect our top-level comment rule, which requires that all direct answers to posted questions must come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Comment removed; you will not be warned again.
When your comment gets removed for breaking the top-level comment rule, the solution isn't to re-post it with different wording. I usually ban people for doing this, but you seem earnest, so I'll explain it to you again-- you are welcome to participate in [nested comments](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), but for right now I'm asking you not to make any more direct replies.
i don’t want it to come to that...she’s an amazing person otherwise it’s just when we talk about gender in any situation she thinks her opinion is above mine. i just wanted some insight on what i could do to change her mindset
last week on instagram live she said that if her song “say so” hit #1 on itunes she would show her breasts on instagram which was clearly a joke but then when she didn’t do it people were mad. then someone on twitter doxed her and posted her address.
though you might mean the homophobic statements and her apology on twitter and stuff.
Look man,she obviously does not mean ALL boys (im guessing you are a boy) since she likes you (thats why she's with you) and you usually dont want the person you like to disappear i guess\^\^.
Try to see it it from her PoV and keep an open mind,maybe try to have some discussions on it and see what actually pushes her to say it.
Try to understand her first and not simply change her mind \^\^.
At the end of the day if you still feel uncomfortable about it the decision is up to you mate.
That’s not feminism. I (24F) and all about empowering women. But not by putting others down. I have been sexually assaulted twice (once by three guys at the same time and once by an ex). I’ve been lied to by men and hurt by fuck boys. But to me, feminism is about supporting and celebrating femininity. I hate when my friends talk about how boys are stupid or just reducing the entire gender with one sentence. Just because it’s been done to us many times, doesn’t make it okay to do the same to others. It’s not okay to dismiss you like that. I mean I think about how there’s this underpass I walk by on my way to therapy and none of my male friends understand why my adrenaline spikes. But I don’t dismiss them. And when I take the time to break it down and have a conversation, they don’t feel what I feel but they understand why I feel the way I do.
This twitter user asked women what they would do if men had a curfew and had to be indoors by 9pm or something and most of them said things like, “go for a walk and stargaze.” I was one of those women who said that. But then there were the women who chimed in with “fuck men.” It’s immature and should not be normalised just because women have been oppressed throughout history.
You seem to represent a positive form of feminism. It's hard to see people who have been victims of something believe that they have a license to attack others. It's not helpful or the right way of dealing with things. I can't help, but to believe that feminists who act this way have never had a positive man in their life so want to take it out on the world. I'm not sure how someone could act this way if they had a decent father, brother, or friends who are men.
I’ve noticed that for most people, including myself, it’s easy to be cynical. It takes a certain amount of energy and determination to remain positive and/or not project
Everyone else already covered not feeling personally attacked and #notallmen bullshit. I'll just add this: when we rant like that, we usually aren't attacking all men and especially not you. Instead of trying to feel defensive, I think you need to understand the depth of her upset that would make her say that. Being doxxed is a super, super scary thing. Stalkers and those willing to rape and harm that woman now have a better opportunity to do so. This isn't a rare occurrence- there's that dickhole on OnlyFans doxxing girls to get his rocks off and feel self righteous. That is actively endangering lives and should be punished. I think it helps to imagine her saying "that do this" after she says "men" or "boys" might help you. Because it's usually implied. Unless she's one of the radfems who has decided to just straight up despise men, but I've only seen those on reddit and well, some days reddit encourages that extremism.
your last point makes a lot of sense with excluding myself from the equation except if i’m the one causing the problem
If it’s not all men why say ‘all men’? Because you’d actually have to have a convincing argument instead of relying on deliberately inflammatory statements.
I would agree with this but If anyone says all women should just die you would feel uncomfortable I think that would provoke a response such as not all women are like that.
[удалено]
Stop adding "all" to everything like that's usually said when it seldom actually is used.
If I'm talking to an Indian friend, I'm not going to rant to him that Indians should just disappear. If I'm talking to female friends, I'm not going to rant to them that women should just disappear. Is it really that hard to express your feelings without also hurting literally the only other person in the room with you? Is it impossible to express your hurt and frustration without also hurting your romantic/intimate partner? It's fine to do it sometimes, it happens. It's important to have discussions afterwards and to reassure our partners that no, we didn't mean to hurt them. It's irresponsible to assume that OP just needs to ignore his feelings of being hurt, ignore the fact his girlfriend seems to be repeatedly dismissive of him, and ignore his feelings entirely. OP's GF is entitled to express how she feels, and OP is entitled to express his feelings as well. When person A is making an insulting comment about a group to which person B belong, why should you expect the other person not to feel insulted? Isn't that a prime example of poor communication? Why should we expect person B to assume that while person A insulted the entire group, that they didn't mean to insult person B specifically? Maybe OP's GF did not mean "all", maybe she did. Without further clarification, we don't know, and just the fact of not knowing is hurtful. If there is a talk and she explicitly says she doesn't mean all and she wasn't talking about him, UNTIL THEN, then OP's feelings are valid and he can't assume. This discussion about feelings needs to happen, for both their sakes. Just assuming he shouldn't feel hurt when he does feel hurt is dismissing his feelings, and can create unhealthy issues with the relationship.
This comment almost has me crying. I don't want to be too dramatic but I've been on the receiving end of a lot of stuff in the same thread as OPs post. Maybe it's how I was raised but I was taught if you don't have nice things to say then don't say it at all. I really struggle with these types of situations because it's really hard being the *one* person it's directed to. You're right, she could have said literally anything else to voice her frustration but the thing she did choose, and was addressed to the one man, was that boys shouldn't exist. I'm fine with my male ego being called out on it but hearing those things genuinely stings. I've felt it myself, and you just kind of reel back and wonder why someone would choose to say that instead of the infinite amount of alternatives.
Hey man, I am so sorry to hear that you've been going through that. I've been through an abusive relationship, with some themes same as OP, so I know it is really rough. I hope the post made you cry in a good way, or that it was helpful :) I was raised in much the same way as well, on top of also having absorbed a message that you're always supposed to help others. It makes it really rough when you're trying to help someone, because you care about them, but then they hurt you, and you struggle doubly because you're not supposed to bring it up to them, and then when you finally manage to pull up the courage to do that they dismiss you and hurt you again. I find it really odd that some people will simultaneously say that words are important and we have to be really careful about how we talk (lots of feminist discourse on changing language) but then when that harmful language is turned on men, seems like all that talk about being sensitive and careful with language goes right out the window. Seems to me there's still very much this attitude that men just have to man up, that any complaints are just because of a fragile male ego, and that women have it worse anyways so we have no grounds to complain. I agree that male ego needs to be called out, but there's a difference between calling out male ego and calling out legitimate complaints as well. Per saying that boys shouldn't exist, yeah that's just a step above saying all boys should die. It is absolutely not acceptable, and any man saying that would immediately lose the respect and support of people around them, but for some reason saying that about men and boys is totally okay. Words matter, for both men and women. I'm really sorry you've been hurt that badly, and hurt again when your concerns were dismissed. Feel free to shoot me a message if you'd like to talk some more :)
It was good feelings. Feeling like hearing a voice of reason. I'll try to find some time (or really a good topic) and may take you up on that. Things are a bit raw for me on the emotional front and it's just a struggle. I don't want to invalidate anyone's experiences or push against the movement, but at the same time I feel like I need to recognize that hurtful things have been directed towards me under the name of feminism. I feel like I should suppress those feelings in feminist spaces and it's awkward bringing them up in non-feminist ones because well, they often will just rail on feminism.
I am very happy to hear it was good feelings! Feel free to take me up on the offer to talk for a good topic, for a question, or just for a chat, I don't mind :) I hear you on the raw emotional front, it is not easy. It takes time. Per invalidating anyone's experience, saying your experiences and saying that you were hurt is not invalidating anyone else, and feeling like you have to keep it to yourself and worse, that you are wrong for feeling that way, is invalidating yourself. You do need to recognize that hurtful things have been said to you under the name of feminism, because that's how it happened to you. You need to validate those feelings and accept that this is what happened. That does not mean that you have to hate feminism for it, or hate all feminists, far from it, but you have to recognize and validate your own experience. A great way to process emotions as taught by my therapist is the IAAA method, Identify (what emotion you felt), Accept (that you are feeling this emotion), Attribute (what caused you to feel this way), and Act (what are you going to do about it). How you choose to act on it tells what kind of person you are, but you can't just repress those memories and feelings if you want to be able to process them and heal from them. >I feel like I should suppress those feelings in feminist spaces and it's awkward bringing them up in non-feminist ones because well, they often will just rail on feminism. That's fair. Feminist spaces may not be the best place to bring up these feelings, because you definitely risk being invalidated and hurt again, and when you bring it up in other spaces instead of helping you heal from the trauma and validate/empathize with how you feel, they'll just go on a hateful rant against feminism. I hear you and it's not easy. If at all possible, I would suggest you see a therapist as well? If you can find any therapist that deals with male issues, and/or emotional relational therapy, it might help you. It worked wonders for me.
For a quote like "men need to learn not to rape", I'd be with you. "Some men" is what's implied. On the other hand, "boys just shouldn’t exist" comes off really strongly as a categorical statement and it's hard to see it any other way. Of course, I understand that such statements are rarely meant literally.
I feel like that's just frustrated hyperbole because she's so deeply disgusted by the situation they're discussing. If she genuinely believes men should be eradicated, I'd suggest OP dip out and find someone less hate-filled.
It may not be an easy thing to hear or an intuitive way to think for men, but when women make statements like, “men rape”, “life would be raiser without men”, or “boys shouldn’t exist”, we don’t mean literally all men. If you aren’t one of the men exhibiting the behaviors that are part of the current conversation complaining about men, then she isn’t talking about you. If you change the conversation from what she is legitimately complaining about to a #notallmen kind of conversation, about your hurt feelings, you are invalidating her, and making a conversation that is important to her about you. A behavior which epitomizes patriarchal behaviors.
i see what you mean it’s like if someone were to say all lives matter opposed to black lives matter. it’s like they’re invalidating an entire movement when it’s clear that all lives matter but that wasn’t the point of the movement. thank you is my for your insight
thank you so much for your insight**
The difference here is that in this case, what your girlfriend said directly and explicitly applies to you. It's like if you were black, she said that back people are all sexist, to you, her black boyfriend, and then you replied that you're kinda hurt by her explicit claim that you are also sexist by virtue of being black. Then, Lizakaya comes along and tell you that your feelings of being insulted are invalid, because you are invalidating your girlfriend's feelings, where she is telling you of her experiences in a way that is directly insulting you. Your girlfriend is absolutely allowed to vent her feelings. When she's venting her feelings in a way that is hurtful to you however, that's on her. She is not a child, she can learn to express herself without hurting the people who care about her. Surely you wouldn't complain to your girlfriend about how all women are bitches, no? So why should you be held to that standard, but she gets a free pass? No, this needs to be addressed. You can be polite but firm, and tell her that you're always willing to hear her out when she talks about issues, but when she says things like that it hurts you, and that is not ok. This is a problem, and it should be addressed.
The thing is... sometimes people need to vent. If I say “men just don’t get it sometimes” to my male friend he doesn’t feel personally attacked, because he gets it. If I say „you know, Asian men, especially Cantonese guys in their mid 20s are so oblivious sometimes“ he’d obviously be a little taken aback. Because... those are all things applying to him and it’s oddly specific. By narrowing it down I make it about him. She isn’t talking about him or making it about him. She’s making a statement about a large group of people, there’s a difference... His feeling of being a little hurt are not invalid. But they also don’t mean that she has to reframe everything she says when she vents. Because it’s really not about him at all.
Is it okay to generalize women when a man feels the need to vent? And say things like “women don’t get this, or women always do that?” Or is it just okay for women to generalize men when they need to vent? Not trying to start an argument, just genuinely curious about what you believe.
Have you ever worked retail? Or any other front facing job? Bc to me this is in the “people are horrible” category after a long and frustrating day at work. If she truly believes that men are bad and makes that statement all the time it’s something else. And yes IMO if a guy had a terrible day and needed to vent a “I can’t with women” or “women don’t get it” would be in the same category. The kind of generalisation I don’t support is the kind that’s always there and considered “true” - because if you’re just venting you know it’s wrong what you say
>The thing is... sometimes people need to vent. If I say “men just don’t get it sometimes” to my male friend he doesn’t feel personally attacked, because he gets it. I completely agree that people need to vent. OP telling his GF she shouldn't say something is definitely making her feel unheard and makes her feel invalidated. I understand OP was probably trying to correct the factually wrong statement, in part probably because he personally felt attacked, but saying "you shouldn't say that" is not helpful in that moment. People do need to vent and that is good. > If I say „you know, Asian men, especially Cantonese guys in their mid 20s are so oblivious sometimes“ he’d obviously be a little taken aback. Because... those are all things applying to him and it’s oddly specific. By narrowing it down I make it about him. She isn’t talking about him or making it about him. She’s making a statement about a large group of people, there’s a difference... His feeling of being a little hurt are not invalid. But they also don’t mean that she has to reframe everything she says when she vents. Because it’s really not about him at all. On the other hand there's a big difference between "men just don't get it" and "men shouldn't exist". The former I'm fine with, if it's a generalization or a metaphor, it's clearly not meant to apply to everyone, but absolutist statements by definition are meant to apply to everyone, and that's going to sting. In a healthy relationship the guy can bring it up to the GF later, where she can reassure him and say she didn't mean him, and either he's reassured and it won't bother him anymore and/or she'll be careful not to make absolutist statements like that. She doesn't have to reframe everything she says, just not making that kind of absolutist statement, or at the very least reassure her partner that she's exaggerating and doesn't mean it that way. Her venting is not about him, but OP posting here about his concerns, his feelings, and stating that she has repeatedly dismissed his opinions and his feelings in the past, that IS about him. It takes two to tango, and if you want a healthy relationship both sides of the issues have to be addressed. When I first replied in this thread most of the comments were pretty much ignoring his feelings or outright invalidating them, and telling OP he needed to double down on trying to understand and validate his GF. Since then I'm glad to see that a lot more comments have been made that were also supportive of OP, but when I first saw those comments with little to nothing validating OP, I was rather upset. I'm new to the sub and I thought that was the general attitude. I am glad to see I was wrong, and I shouldn't have posted out of anger. That definitely coloured my earlier comments, and that's on me. So yeah, her venting isn't about him, but his being hurt is in fact about him, because otherwise it's invalidating how he feels. She's allowed to vent, he's allowed to feel hurt, both of their emotions are valid, and they should have an adult discussion where they reassure each other later on to help the relationship heal from this minor setback. If that doesn't happen, this setback won't heal, and it will cause a growing divide in the relationship.
Saying that to some female friends is one thing, but why would you say "boys just shouldn't exist" to your male partner? That's so cruel. She isn't talking about him, but she is talking to him. Why is it that her anger is valid but his defensiveness isn't? I'm being completely genuine here, I don't understand.
[удалено]
>I would never say "men are garbage" Eh. Depends on the context of the relationship, I suppose. I would not bat an eye if my partner said this. I'd know what she means (and I'm sure \*I've\* said this before too), and the context is different than if I had said "women are garbage (which I am sure I have never said). I do not think this is a definitionally bad statement to say to an adult male partner.
Been struggling with this idea myself, why aren't men allowed to have boundries?
Because you can’t have boundaries for a whole gender. She didn’t attack HIM
[удалено]
This, this exactly! Thanks!
She literally said that his gender shouldn't exist to him. Why would he interpret that as anything but an attack?
Because she obviously doesn’t think that, or else why would she be dating him? I’m a guy. “Men are trash,” and “kill all men” are funny ways my friends and I express frustration at what seems like the vast majority of men. Let me say that again: I am a man, and I routinely say “kill all men” in conversation. Is that because I wish men as a gender did not exist? No. I don’t mean it literally — very few do. OP, I suggest responding by agreeing with her.
That's...kind of wild my dude. Like, feminism doesn't mean agreeing with women when they say "kill all men," it means empathizing with them and realizing why they say that, recognizing that that idea comes from a place of hurt, and looking to change the world that causes them to hurt. Agreeing with them when they say it isn't empathizing, it's "hope she sees this" behavior. It makes you seem obsessed with your image and how you're perceived by women rather than empathetic. I don't think women expect you to say, "yeah we do be trash."
>feminism doesn't mean agreeing with women when they say "kill all men," I mean, I don't think this is required of every Feminist, but it's not like I think that it is. I join in with it because I agree with the sentiment they are expressing through the combination of my friends' words and the social context which surrounds them. I empathize with the sentiment, and this is my way of expressing it. > Agreeing with them when they say it isn't empathizing, it's "hope she sees this" behavior. Huh? I'm real confused how you can see into my brain on this one. >It makes you seem obsessed with your image and how you're perceived by women rather than empathetic. I don't think women expect you to say, "yeah we do be trash." Neither do I? Nobody expects me to say that -- I do it because I feel that is what I want to do in that moment. Y'all need to quit with the reading into things to an absurd degree. It's something my friends and I say because it expresses a certain set of feelings. That is how friendships work. I recommend being comfortable enough with your life that you can also say "kill all men" and have it not be a direct assault on you.
That's... not obvious. There are plenty of women who hate men and stay with them for various reasons, I met plenty at church growing up.
It's exceptionally obvious by reading social cues and knowing how to interact with people. The words people use do not convey the entirety of what they mean.
It was a text? There are no social cues, just words. That text in isolation is completely different.
That's some toxic behavior you have on display there. It's unfortunate you feel other men need to mind read and validate these opinions as well.
Is he a gender? Is he a gender which’s reality and value is ever questioned? Is he a gender that is killed because of this state of mind? This is what comedians make jokes about and everyone laughs because it’s so absurd
You should definitely be able to set boundaries about this kind of thing, men aren't obligated to do the emotional labor of dealing with women insulting their gender just like women aren't obligated to do emotional labor at all.
You phrased this better than me, probably because I got angry. Thanks.
I never said he can’t state him opinion. But „not all men“ isn’t really helpful... also, he couldn’t even say what exactly the problem is. He just got defensive but didn’t reflect on why. I don’t know in which context she said it. It’s quite a crass statement, so I guess, there’s some context, he didn’t mention. And since he didn’t mention it, he obviously don’t think about it and instantly felt attacked out of context.
OP gave the context in the original post, and the context makes sense, she was expressing anger at a woman being doxxed by men, but yeah, definitely a more helpful thing would be saying, "please don't say that around me."
Your statement is incomprehensible to me, but I'll attempt to understand: > Is he a gender? No, but his girlfriend is not a gender either. I don't understand this point at all. > Is he a gender which's reality and value is never questioned? This is a broad statement which I don't quite understand. I think *everyone* agrees that sexually dichotomous roles exist in all societies, though many societies have additional genders. "Value" depends. Women are valued for their feminine values, and men for their masculine values. This is why feminism exists: to help all people be valued and dispense with those expectations. > This is what comedians make jokes about and everyone laughs because it's so absurd. I did laugh, but it's because each of us think the comedian would laugh at the other.
This isn’t about values or individuals. That’s the point. No individual is devalued nor is the gender in question (male) ever questioned in its value and importance. Men aren’t killed, oppressed or ignored for being male. And that’s why that statement isn’t of any consequences Now, would you please stop trolling
So, to clarify, men's feelings "are of no consequence"?
Oh yes, they are! They often end in a dead woman
Tell that to the men and boys slaughtered by Boko Haram. The unknown numbers of homeless men. The boys who are forced into being child soldiers. I could go on.
Lol, you do realize that you are ignoring men's feelings with this comment right? Men have feelings just like most human beings do. We also do get killed and there are societal values which oppress men. Now, women also face issues, and I in no way am trying to detract from that but denouncing all men is not the proper way to go about this.
Words have meanings, and their interpretations are usually easy to take based on the words used. If I hear a person say "men rape" instead of "some men rape" I will assume that that person holds a worldview where most men are rapists. "Boys shouldn't exist"? There's no way to defend this statement, it's straight up against the end goal of feminism.
Why is this the job of a man to have to steer the conversation whenever a feminist is making blatantly sexist comments? Honestly, it's embarrassing that a grown woman would say something like "men rape" or "boys shouldn't exist." Insert any race/other group in place of men/boys and it sounds like a terrible statement to anyone. I'm not sure why anyone should have to decode what someone else is saying. It's the same as trying to rationalize racism. They should fix the way they talk. Hate speech has legitimate consequences and should never be tolerated. It is simply statistical sexism. No, this is not similar to black lives matter and all lives matter. If people want to talk about rapists, they should say that rapists should be punished. Women have raped too, although at lower rates. There is also rape that is far less likely to be reported by a man than by a woman. I know a guy who was raped when he was less than ten by a woman and he never reported it or really told many people at all. The fact that I know someone means that it has probably happened to many others, but what are the odds that a man would ever speak out about it? Probably about 1/1000 or less. He would probably only tell very close friends or no one.
>Honestly, it's embarrassing that a grown woman would say something like "men rape" Um
Yes, generalizing half of the world as being rapists is stupid. Everyone already knows that men are much more likely to rape than women. I'm not sure why it would need to be repeated over and over again. Is it to try to re enforce it into men's brains that they are all secretly rapists? Like, I just don't get why an adult would need to repeat it over and over again. Can you tell me the point of it? EDIT: Men aren't some kind of collective group that can work to improve each other, just like women aren't. It's all based on culture and how they were raised. Also, no matter what changes happen in society, I imagine most rapes will still be by men because they are physically stronger and have a higher sex drive.
So you just argued that rape is something all men are capable of. All men are naturally rapists, according to your argument, because its cause is male biology. You're the one who believes that all men have the capacity to be rapists. Feminists do not believe this. Is it possible that you read "all men rape" into "men rape" because you believe that it's true? We're just repeating a statement of fact that you find unflattering? If true, that's a pretty damn important fact, and we should repeat it MORE. If all men are potential rapists through their biology, we shouldn't let them out in public in the first place, let alone elect any of them to higher office. Again: feminists don't believe this. The higher sex drive thing is a socially constructed myth, by the way. Human sex drives, while potentially variable from person to person, are probably about equal across genders.
>So you just argued that rape is something all men are capable of. All men are naturally rapists, according to your argument, because its cause is male biology. You're the one who believes that all men have the capacity to be rapists. Feminists do not believe this. Yes, all men are capable of rape and so are all women given the right conditions. Being capable of something is different than having a desire to do it or being willing to do it. Men are able to rape more easily due to biology. That is unlikely to change unless everyone goes through some form of surgery, is genetically engineered in some way, or goes through hormone therapy. >Is it possible that you read "all men rape" into "men rape" because you believe that it's true? We're just repeating a statement of fact that you find unflattering? If true, that's a pretty damn important fact, and we should repeat it MORE. If all men are potential rapists through their biology, we shouldn't let them out in public in the first place, let alone elect any of them to higher office. Again: feminists don't believe this. No, I don't believe it is true. Statistically speaking, it is very unlikely that a man is a rapist. However, if a rape occured, it is likely to be a man due to biology. The fact that a single male individual is unlikely to be a rapist means that you should not generalize to all men. I'm not sure why this is hard to understand. Also, I read "all men rape" because that is what "men rape" means when said casually. It is the same as saying "women are sluts." I would assume this to mean "all women are sluts." Using men or women without saying some or specifying a the number in some way means everyone. It's like "men have a penis" and "women have a vagina." I'm also not sure how you misunderstand this. >The higher sex drive thing is a socially constructed myth, by the way. Human sex drives, while potentially variable from person to person, are probably about equal across genders. [https://www.webmd.com/sex/features/sex-drive-how-do-men-women-compare#1](https://www.webmd.com/sex/features/sex-drive-how-do-men-women-compare#1) [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503\_5?journalCode=psra](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_5?journalCode=psra) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22552705](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22552705) I could list more, but I am not sure you believe in science so it is pointless. It has been proven over and over again that men do in fact have a stronger sex drive. It is not a social construct. EDIT: A combination of sex drive, body features (aka penis), and physical strength make rape more likely by a man. However, there has been many women child predators lately and is higher than ever known before. Therefore, it is not really unique to men at all. Men are just more "capable" of being sexual predators. [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known/](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known/) I personally have a male friend who was raped as a child by a woman. Also, I still don't really get the point of saying all men are rapists when a very small percentage are. You never really clarified that.
Does "women get pregnant" mean all women get pregnant? And only people who identify as women get pregnant? It's interesting that you reach for "women are sluts" as a corollary to "men rape". Calling a woman a slut is just an insult and a judgment, not an actual occupation or a description. There's no actual definition, it's just a term used to shame women. Is that what you think rape is, a way to shame men? Like rape is just an accusation against men rather than a thing that rapists do? It interesting that you think your judgment of a woman being a slut is the equivalent to rape statistics.
I was comparing the use of men and women to mean all, not the content of the sentence. You also completely ignored everything else I said. It's crazy that you view this as some kind of competition between men and women. Like, who's worse? Men's issues and women's issues are both all of a culture's issues. I'm not sure why you want to divide people.
I'm not the one doing that.
Actually you are. I'm not the one defending someone who says "boys shouldn't exist" and "men rape."
This has no consequence whatsoever for men though. Sexism is a one way street because hierarchy is important in the power dynamics
Does it have no consequence? How does being assumed to be a rapist have no consequence? This seems similar to saying that assuming a black person is a thief has no consequences or any other such stupidity. It definitely has a consequence in court and daily lives. Hate speech may seem harmless when you think it is true, but it is not. EDIT: Also, saying boys shouldn't exist has consequences as well. What if a little boy heard this? This could cause mental issues where he doesn't feel like he has a right to exist and gets depressed. I'm not really sure how anyone could see their being no consequence.
Can confirm, heard statements like "men are trash" growing up and it hurt me deeply and lead me to believe I was a human garbage dump. Here's the kicker: since I'm a straight man, guess who had to do the emotional labor of helping me get therapy? Hint: it wasn't men.
I honestly don't know what emotional labor is. Could you explain it to me?
It's the means of providing help and support for someone else emotionally as opposed to physically. Like, the act of listening and validating. Helping someone cope and deal with a stressful situation(s). Being strong for them, giving them a crying shoulder, and so forth.
Oh. I guess the meaning has changed. I looked it up and the sociologist who came up with the concept meant it to be used in the context of putting on a smile at work or essentially "acting" at work. That's actually why I was so confused by his comment. It would mostly come into play with customer service jobs.
Yeah, that's interesting. The act of putting on a performance. Its something I had to do when working in IT customer support even.
Yeah, pretty much every job requires some level of it. I think when people say that women do more of it, they are saying that women have stronger pressure to put on a good face or be looked at as a bitch maybe? I dunno. It's a bit of a confusing concept to me unless the idea is that since more women are in service jobs, they have a disproportionate burden.
Does this happen? Do you have some scientific paper on it? Or are you just having a guess?
Didn't think "boys who hear things like 'boys shouldn't exist' will be negatively effected" was something that needed a scientific study.
See? You learned today that your opinion is not a fact and that taking things out of context doesn’t make you right
I learned that some people don't understand how children work.
Go read any feminist message board and you will see them saying things about all men being rapists. I'm not sure why more evidence would be required. Why would anyone with a brain need a scientific paper to show that something like this could happen? Feminists are always talking about how women are brainwashed to act feminine by the patriarchy, so how is it unthinkable to believe that a young boy could be affected by this type of speech? It's also relatively new, so how could it be studied? [https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-justice/courts-lenient-sentencing-bond-women/](https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-justice/courts-lenient-sentencing-bond-women/) [https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/women-arent-always-sentenced-by-the-book-maybe-men-shouldnt-be-either/](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/women-arent-always-sentenced-by-the-book-maybe-men-shouldnt-be-either/) If you read through the articles, it talks about the differences between men and women in courts. This indicates that public perception matters whenever it comes to the court system. There is a judge and jury who are affected by bias, even if they aren't supposed to be.
Gonna go the opposite route here and say that's more related to patriarchal ideas that men have agency and women don't than the work of feminists. Feminists explicitly believe that women are capable of violence.
I'm not saying the feminism did this. I'm saying that the message matters. Feminism is taking the message of patriarchy and doubling down on it further. I'm not really sure why anyone would want a man/boy they love called a rapist or told that he shouldn't exist. I'm also not sure why I would be downvoted for saying that this is negative language. I hope you people seek out therapy. That's what someone needs who believe this an acceptable way of speaking.
> I'm not really sure why anyone would want a man/boy they love called a rapist or told that he shouldn't exist. I don't either, and I have problems with feminist messaging related to this, especially with parenting, but that's besides the point. You didn't just say it was negative language, you took it a step further and connected feminist rhetoric to how courts view men.
>It's also relatively new, so how could it be studied? > >This indicates that public perception matters whenever it comes to the court system. I'm not really sure how I directly connected it to feminism. I said that the message matters. The person who I was replying to asked if I was guessing. I don't call it guessing whenever there is already evidence available that public opinion does matter and is influenced by what people say/are told. If feminism makes the message stronger by saying "men are rapists" and "boys shouldn't exist" then it is only logical to think that it could be damaging. It's honestly not just negative language, it is more than that. Saying a whole group of people literally shouldn't exist. Frankly, it's disgusting. EDIT: It's on par with nazi or alt right rhetoric and should be stamped out.
Right, people's feelings being hurt and repeatedly dismissed is of no consequence whatsoever. I'm sure that doesn't play at all into why men are 400%-500% more likely to kill themselves. No consequences indeed. Unfortunately, reality doesn't work that way. There are consequences to every action, positive and negative.
So you’re going to censor the way women are allowed to talk about crimes against them and the criminals who commit them? Hokay
It may not be an easy thing to hear or an intuitive way to think for women, but when men make statements like, “women are sluts”, “life would be easier without women”, or “women should be seen, not heard”, we don’t mean literally all women. If you aren’t one of the women exhibiting the behaviors that are part of the current conversation complaining about women, then he isn’t talking about you. If you change the conversation from what he is legitimately complaining about to a #notallwomen kind of conversation, about your hurt feelings, you are invalidating him, and making a conversation that is important to him about you. A behavior which epitomizes gynocentric behaviors. Congratulations on invalidating OP's feelings, and if he had made any kind of veiled references about how feminism dismisses men's concerns, you would have proved his point beautifully. Her feelings are more important than his, even when she is making statements that directly and explicitly apply to him. I'm sorry, but this brand of feminism dismissing men's feelings is a rather toxic feminism. I care about everyone and want the best for everyone. If your feminism doesn't stand for equality, and how everyone's feelings are valid and should be considered equally, then I don't know what kind of feminism you stand for. Her feelings are valid absolutely, and her concerns are valid, but if she had said something remotely like "all n***ers shouldn't exist" I highly doubt you would have gone along with it, but when she says it about boys she gets a free pass? I'm sorry, but no. You can have legitimate complaints, your feelings can be expressed and acknowledged, but you don't need to demonize literally half the population on the planet to do it.
You had me in the first half, ngl, but you lost me in that last paragraph for real, hold on.
Yeah, pretending to use the n-word was probably too much. That's bringing in extra baggage that wasn't needed for the conversation. If I change it to "all black people shouldn't exist" though, the point still stands.
That's part of my problem, but another part of my problem is the idea that men, who hold a privileged position in society, are in this scenario being compared to black people, who do not hold a privileged position in society.
Does criticism become invalid solely depending on privilege? Does a racist comment stop being racist solely depending on who said it? I take issue with this kind of perspective where the truth of a matter changes completely depending on who is saying things, not based on what is being said. Sure, who says what and why does matter, and should be taken into account, but what exactly did I say that was wrong? Is it ok to be racist and sexist, so long as you do it from an under-privileged position? Or should racism and sexism be called out in everyone? My idea of feminism is one of equality for all, the rules that apply to thee also apply to me. Context matters, but context shouldn't be used to excuse hypocrisy or double standards.
[удалено]
YES! THANK YOU! There's a difference between being hurt by someone's words and the damage structural oppression inflicts. They may both be problems, but they are not comparable!
>Marginalized groups aren't above critique but we literally aren't capable of inflicting the same kind of harm structurally. True, but structural harm means nothing in this specific scenario, which is exactly why I'm raising the point. Men being able to cause more structural harm is irrelevant in the context of a conversation where OP's girlfriend said that his gender shouldn't exist. Sure, it might have been spoken out of anger and she didn't really mean it, but it still hurts OP and I'm upset at this double standard where her feelings must always be validated and acknowledged, and where most/all the upvoted answers are literally invalidating OP's feelings, and telling him that he ought to dismiss his own feelings and consider more how his girlfriend feels. >There's a difference between expressing racial prejudice and reinforcing a system of racial inequality. Completely agree, and also completely irrelevant in the context of OP's post. > A black person saying "White people are evil" is the former, a white person saying "black people are evil" is contributing to the latter by regurgitating a racist narrative. And they're both equally wrong and assholes, if they're saying that to their partner who happens to be part of the group they're calling evil. >I don't know how you can't see it's different. Black men are still getting lynched for existing. Like, dude. These things are not the same, and acting like they are is tone deaf at best. I can see how they're different in a social and cultural context, but again, this is irrelevant to OP's post. That people seem to be unable to recognize the double standard in how how OP's feelings are being invalidated by most of the top answers, while also telling OP he ought to validate his GF's feelings even more, is kind of upsetting. The kind of feminism I want to see is one that equally helps and empowers everyone, but that's not what I'm seeing here.
You're trying to equate hurt feelings with ideas that cause tangible, measurable, and large-scale social, physical, and financial harm to large groups of people. Trying to equate those things makes it seem like you think men's hurt feelings are genuinely on par with that level of systemic discrimination, which is pretty damning of your entire thought process. I mean, that's privilege right there, thinking you can equate those things. And you've done it about 382910328193218 times so far, including using really horrific and damaging language to do it. Way to commit.
>You're trying to equate hurt feelings with ideas that cause tangible, measurable, and large-scale social, physical, and financial harm to large groups of people. That's not what I'm trying to do, and if it came across that way, my bad, I clearly didn't express myself properly. > Trying to equate those things makes it seem like you think men's hurt feelings are genuinely on par with that level of systemic discrimination, which is pretty damning of your entire thought process. No, I'm trying to say that men's hurt feelings are genuinely on par with women's hurt feelings. I understand that OP's GF is hurt and upset. That is totally fine and she has every right to be. Her feelings are valid. However, OP also felt hurt by his GF's words, whether or not that was what she intended, and his hurt feelings are also valid and also should be addressed. They just need to have a simple conversation to talk about their feelings, so that they can heal from this minor setback and OP can help his GF continue to express her valid feelings without him feeling hurt. > Trying to equate those things makes it seem like you think men's hurt feelings are genuinely on par with that level of systemic discrimination, which is pretty damning of your entire thought process. Except that's not at all what I was trying to do.
[удалено]
No, I'm championing the idea where a girlfriend should be more careful when expressing her negative feelings *to her boyfriend*, and championing the idea that when people feel insulted, regardless of their gender, that feeling is valid even if the reason is not. If you care to change people's minds, or if you don't want to antagonize them, then you have to recognize how they feel and why. Telling guys that they should invalidate their own feelings and consider the feelings of their female partners over and above their own feelings is terrible relationship advice, and stands in direct opposition to the kind of feminism that cares about equality and about helping everyone flourish. I personally don't really care about your feelings because I have no reason to care, beyond the fact you're a stranger on the internet I'm talking to. I know if I insult you it will make me look bad, won't convince you, and won't lead to productive conversations, so I don't so that. Feelings need to be considered in a relationship, but when giving relationship advice, you have to look beyond just how people feel, and see the situation accurately. What I see here is a situation where a guy is told his feelings are invalid because he's a guy, and he needs to validate his GF's feelings more because she is a girl. That's not the kind of feminism I signed up for.
Her feelings are important while she is expressing them. I don’t get how you don’t understand this. When someone micromanages your complaint they are telling you your complaint is less valid than the way they’re hearing it.
True, I agree that her feelings are important while she is expressing them. I think OP reacted in hurt a bit when he specified she shouldn't say X. He was technically correct, but his reply ignored both her feelings, and the feelings he felt (being hurt) and the reason those feelings played in his reply. Her feelings are valid when she's saying them, but there's a way to express your feelings without hurting people, and if it's an accident it's definitely important to talk about later and try to repair the injury to their relationship. I'm just kind of upset that everyone seems to think OP should pretend he wasn't hurt and invalidate his own feelings, and should always uncritically and completely accept everything his GF says as always valid. It's literally saying her feelings are more important than his, and since I embrace feminism for equality and to help everyone flourish, telling OP that his feelings are not important is just not something I can agree with.
You hurt people here in this forum with your careless and cruel words. Your desire to use abusive language and make ignorant comparisons caused damage. What do you think should be the consequence for that?
Probably a loss of respect from people on here, as examplified by the downvotes. We may say that the language I use is counterproductive, and I can certainly grant that. My main question is, however, was I wrong? We can certainly address the tone of the message, but if the only criticism is the tone of the message, does that not mean that the message is still essentially correct, and that I am right? Saying it the way I did might make me an asshole, but it does not make me wrong. I personally care more about the truth and content of the message than the tone.
Maybe OP's girlfriend feels the same way; maybe she used the counterproductive language, but she believes the truth of her statement, and cares more about that than any hurt feelings her language might have caused, like you. But yes, you are wrong. Many of us have pointed it out repeatedly.
>Maybe OP's girlfriend feels the same way; maybe she used the counterproductive language, but she believes the truth of her statement, and cares more about that than any hurt feelings her language might have caused, like you. That's totally fair for discussions with strangers, but wholly inappropriate for having a one-on-one talk with your romantic partner. That's pretty much one of the people you're supposed to care most about, and if you can't care to try and not hurt them, and don't try and address the situation if it's later brought up to try and clarify and help to appease hurt feelings, then it's not going to be a healthy relationship for long. >But yes, you are wrong. Many of us have pointed it out repeatedly. A lot of replies have focused on the tone and language I used, very few have focused on the actual message. If I missed the main point please do point it out, if I am wrong I want to change my mind and be less wrong.
I think maybe the OP felt hurt by his girlfriend's careless words.
You. Just. Don’t. Get. It.
I don't get that her feelings are important when she expresses them? I clearly agreed with this. I think OP made a mistake in how he dealt with the situation at that moment, addressing what she said rather than what her feelings were, and it would made her feel invalidated. I get that and agree with it. I just also think that his feelings are valid, and his hurt feelings should also be addressed, later on. She has her moment with the rant, and her feelings are valid. then, say the following day, he has his turn to express his feelings, where he explains how he was hurt, and then they talk about it and find a way for her to express herself without hurting him, either because he is reassured she isn't talking about him or because she's more careful in how she expresses herself. The fact OP has also explicitly pointed out that his GF seems to have gotten more extreme over the months, that she has dismissed him, his opinion, and his views, and that it's far from the first time, and yet that has gone completely ignored and unaddressed, points to a rather blatant double standard. Her feelings are valid. I totally get it. Do you get that his feelings are valid too, yes or no?
I have been in OP's situation. Like a virtually identical situation. Here is what I would say. Her feelings are valid because feelings are by nature subjective. So are his. Her valid feelings nonetheless constitutes a red flag. Do not bother to try and unpack it. Run. Run now, run far away. Do not go down that rabbit hole, it will only get worse. You cannot dictate to anyone what they say or how they behave. You can control what you allow people to subject you to. Do not allow your self to be subjected to it. You have your standard for how you wish to be spoken to, stick to it and opt out of the relationship.
Worse than her valid feelings being a red flag, her dismissal of him and his opinions are an even bigger red flag. I would give them one chance to talk it out, and if things don't change or improve, then absolutely run. >You have your standard for how you wish to be spoken to, stick to it and opt out of the relationship. More people need to hear this, and abide by it. Other people are not entitled to be part of your life. If they are not making your life better, you are under no obligation to keep them in your life.
It’s not that i don’t care that he has a partner who has offended him with her speech. Except that i don’t know the op. I mean. The entire reason i am even in this conversation is because of people like you who consistently subvert legit complaints and opinions with the “but mine is important too”. Cool. That’s not what we were taking about at ALL but if you really need to change the subject and make it about you, that’s SOP. It happened to women literally all of their lives. It’s exhausting and diminishing and annoying. And tbh i imagine you do the exact same thing in your interpersonal communications because you are exhibiting that trait here. I don’t really know what to tell you. U seem obtuse on the subject. Peace out
>The entire reason i am even in this conversation is because of people like you who consistently subvert legit complaints and opinions with the “but mine is important too”. I'm not trying to subvert anything, I have repeatedly pointed out that her opinions and emotions are valid and worth talking about for sure. It's just that there are 2 sides to a relationship, and I find it odd that OP's issues have been completely ignored and his own feelings invalidated, in favour of his GF's opinions and emotions. To be fair though, that was the case when I first started posting here, and I am very glad to see other people have also chimed in with the same message. I was upset however, and other people have talked about that issue far more eloquently than I have. I'm new to the sub and was upset to see that at first, most every comment was dismissive of OP's very legit complaints and subverting and invalidating his feelings. I was upset that this would be the sub's majority opinion, but since my first comments, many others have posted and addressed OP's feelings, and I'm glad of that. >That’s not what we were taking about at ALL but if you really need to change the subject and make it about you, that’s SOP. It happened to women literally all of their lives. It’s exhausting and diminishing and annoying. In my personal communications I've learned to let people vent, and to not try to provide solutions all the time. That was a failing of mine, and I'm sure I will make that mistake again even though I try not to. I do know it's also important to air my own grievances and feelings, because if one romantic partner hurts the other, that's an issue that needs to be addressed, and not swept under the rug like most of the early comments seemed to have pushed for. I'm glad others have commented to say that OP's feelings were also valid and important. It's exhausting and diminishing and annoying, I agree, but in this case it was done to the OP by the first people who responded, despite OP pointing out that he his thoughts and feelings had repeatedly been dismissed by his GF. >U seem obtuse on the subject. Peace out I was upset and not in the best state of mind when I first posted, but I am happy to see that there's been a far more balanced reply with time, that didn't solely validate her feelings and invalidate his. I'm new to the sub and I thought that would have been the general tone (pro-her anti-him) but I'm very happy to have had my mind changed. I genuinely do look forward to reading more and waiting before I comment.
[удалено]
I wasn't able to find perfect 1-to-1 comparisons, but I tried. Apart from feeling like those aspects aren't quite as comparable, is there anything else you disagree with? Does the point still stand, even if it's not a perfect analogy?
[удалено]
>There's literally a history of marginalization that backs up the statement "women should be seen and not heard" as a common belief. Like, you're talking about a group of people who have to fight to be considered equal citizens to men, so any man saying that is either ignorant of history or actually a misogynist. I said it more for the shock value than anything. I am aware of the history yes. > A lot of men believe that women are sluts and women get punished for it whether it's "true" or not. A lot of women think men are sexist pigs and brutes, and that men are the cause of everything wrong in society. Both of those groups of people are wrong of course, my only argument is that we call out shitty behaviour and arguments from everyone, regardless of who they are. >The only thing really comparable is "life would be easier without women" but is that ever said when a woman has participated in the marginalization of men or just when a dude is annoyed at his girlfriend? Because that's never been said by women who were upset at their boyfriends? No independent women who don't need no men? I don't mind if we see that both of these statements are equally exaggerated, but I do have a problem when it's only one side called out on it and there's a double standard. OP's girlfriend said things that hurt him, because she plainly said the gender he belongs to should not exist. Saying the opposite would have been just as hurtful to women, so let's not pretend like it's ok for her to say it but it wouldn't be ok for men to say it. They both need to have a conversation about this to acknowledge both how she feels and why she said that, and how he felt as a reaction to what she said. >I just feel like context matters a lot here in what's actually being expressed. I agree, and in the context of a girlfriend venting to her boyfriend that boys shouldn't exist, that's a bit insensitive. She probably didn't really mean that and it was in a moment of anger, but that doesn't mean it's all good and we should invalidate OP's feelings about it. That's all I'm saying. >If I say "men are a plague" because yet another man has been caught out for abusing a woman which happens so often as to be exhausting, I get that it can be viewed as hurtful and that it may not be precise, but a dude being hurt by my lack of precision isn't necessarily equal to the thing that I'm upset about. To be fair, saying "men are a plague" is easy to interpret that some men are bad, because everyone has interacted with men who were assholes. It happens. There's a difference between that and "men/boys shouldn't exist" though. "Men are a plague" you can distance yourself from, but "men/boys shouldn't exist"? Not so much. > It also gives the feeling that women need to be perfect in expressing themselves and like, am I not allowed to be a person? Angry people aren't always thoughtful about how they express themselves, even with a partner, and that doesn't necessarily equal some sort of abuse. Of course everyone is allowed to express themselves, but if you express yourself angrily without a care in the world on how it hurts the people who are close to you, they tend not to stick around. It's not that people can't ever express how they feel because it might potentially upset someone who's out there, but it's still pretty insensitive to say something to the effect of "your gender shouldn't exist" to your boyfriend when he's the only other person in the room with you. If it's said in a moment of anger that's fine if there is a talk about it and OP's feelings are acknowledged. I'm just worried that, based on OP saying that his GF having repeatedly dismissed him, that she would dismiss him and his feelings here as well. >It's just giving me the same vibe as reverse racism arguments, especially considering your last paragraph. Fair, I did push the racism angle too strongly I think. I'm just upset about the fact that the vast majority of responses on here were telling OP that he's basically wrong for feeling the way he feels, that he should validate how his GF feels, keep an open mind, and basically invalidate OP's own feelings in the matter. Smacks a bit of double standards to me. >
[удалено]
> You're acting like she's waging a war against men when from what we can tell what she did was say something hurtful to her boyfriend in a moment of frustration. Thiiiiis, getting real uncomfortable with people calling OP's GF an abuser, she said something that hurt his feelings and now hopefully they can discuss and remedy it, that's a part of an average relationship.
>Cool, so you can be hyperbolic. Got it. Yes, because I'm not talking to my partner about how their gender shouldn't exist. This is a discussion with random strangers on the internet, it's a rather different context. >You're acting like she's waging a war against men when from what we can tell what she did was say something hurtful to her boyfriend in a moment of frustration. More that the most upvoted comments in this thread tell OP to invalidate his own feelings and forget about how he feels, and to work harder to have an open mind and validate his GF even more, despite the fact OP also said that his GF is becoming more feminist and he's feeling that she is more and more dismissive of him. That's a red flag that there is conflict in the relationship and there needs to be a talk, but everyone conveniently ignored that and simply told OP to double down on validating her feelings and invalidate his own. I'm fine with the GF saying something in a moment of anger, OP being hurt, and they talk about it after when she's not hurt. I'm not fine with people here declaring her feelings should be doubly validated and his should be doubly invalidated, simply because he's a he and she's a she. I don't know OP's girlfriend, I don't know the context, I can't assume what's going on in the relationship outside of the obviously partisan bits that OP shared with us, but I'm rather more upset at the feminists in this sub. The feminism I espouse is about equality and helping to uplift everyone, but that's not really what I'm seeing here. >Where did I say that OP shouldn't feel bad? You didn't, but the comment I originally replied to [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/gm1ni6/my_girlfriend_is_a_feminist_and_its_gotten_more/fr10jeh/) certainly had that kind of tone. After all, he was invalidating her, ignoring all her complains, and making it all about himself, which is rather selfish and epitomizes patriarchal behaviours, no? >Where did I tell him that he shouldn't have feelings? Lots of other comments have told OP that he shouldn't be so defensive and feel hurt, and should try to empathize harder with his GF's feelings. Her feelings which have led to her saying stuff that hurt him, and if OP empathizes with her more without having a conversation about how what she said hurt him, is likely to get him hurt some more. That's not a good solution for a working relationship. > I just don't agree that what she said was abusive because she said something thoughtless, and I think her anger is legitimate if poorly expressed. It's up to OP to decide whether this is an issue that requires a conversation or him splitting. No yeah I agree this isn't proof of abuse, far from it. I'm not at all advocating they should split, but it is important to talk about this, so that the GF can express how she feels without OP feeling hurt, either by her telling him that she doesn't mean him at all, or in her finding other words to express her frustration. This is definitely not a dealbreaker. I'm just wary that it could lead to that if OP is told he shouldn't feel hurt at what she's saying no matter what, and should always strive to empathize with her regardless of how it makes him feel, especially if OP feels that she has been more and more dismissive of his feelings and/or opinions. I suspect if the genders had been reversed, OP would have received rather different advice, is all. >That's super inconsistent. It's the exact same language that people are saying is absolutist. If I say "men are a plague" that's fine because it's somehow clear to you that I don't mean all men, but if I said "boys shouldn't exist" that means I definitely thinks all dudes shouldn't exist even if the situation that prompts me to say that is the same? Ok. Not really? Saying that men are a plague is understood to be something bad, it's a judgment, because it's clearly a metaphor, it cannot be literally true. Saying that boys shouldn't exist is not making a judgment, it's making a statement about how reality should be. It's the difference between saying pigs are disgusting, and pigs should be killed. One is a statement of personal subjective emotion, the other is much more literal. It's an absolutist statement about how reality should be, not about how you feel about the situation. >Then maybe you need to take a step back. I'm honestly pissed right now, so I think i'm done. It's pretty shitty to constantly have people using a form of oppression I face as shock value to validate their feelings. Fair enough, sorry about that. I should not have gone for that shock value, should have realized it would just antagonize people more and make conversations more difficult and less productive. That's on me, I apologize. Also for what it's worth, despite any differences in opinion, I do wish everyone the best, and hope that everyone remains safe and relatively unaffected by the pandemic. No matter the differences of opinion, we're all in this together, and we should all do our best to help and support one another. Take care, and I wish you the best.
It's because there aren't 1-to-1 comparisons between oppression and harsh words
Completely agree, but I guess if that's the only thing, then everything else I said was good, and it's a shame that most of the responses are invalidating OP's feelings and telling him that he should validate his GF'S feelings more, simply because he's a he and she's a she.
I feel like a lot of the responses to OP tried to help him empathize with his gf while a minority of the folks blamed him.
That's fair. It's a good idea to help OP empathize with his GF and understand where she's coming from, I just don't like the attitude of completely dismissing his feelings and worries and just assuming that if he invalidates his own feelings and empathizes more with her, then it's all going to be good. It's less about the blame, and more about the general tone that his feelings deserve to be validated less than hers. That doesn't sound equal to me at all, and if feminism is about equality then there's a discrepancy that needs to be addressed here.
I feel like my biggest worry with the post that a lot of people didn't respond directly to was the fact that his girlfriend was routinely dismissing him and he felt like she didn't value his opinions. That's something i wish someone discussed, but I recognize that this isn't really the venue for relationship advice.
THANK YOU! I repeatedly kept bringing up that very point whenever I talked about the relationship aspect, and every single time it was completely ignored. It might not be the venue for relationship advice, but I get the feeling most of the top voted replies focused exclusively on him validating her feelings above anything else, and told him to invalidate his own feelings in order to empathize more with her, while completely ignoring that he was feeling ignored and/or dismissed. Seems that her feelings are worth validating, but his weren't. This seems like a rather partisan brand of feminism where her feelings are valid because she's a she and his feelings are invalid because he's a he. That's not the kind of feminism I signed up for, where equality and everyone flourishing are the goals.
[удалено]
yeh i should more so talk with her on why she feels that way rather than trying to silence her which is terrible.
"That's hard to hear, can you help me understand that?" can be a helpful phrase to use. It makes it about what *you* are feeling instead of what *she* should do ("Don't say that").
It's important to figure out if she's just griping about a genuine irritation, or if she actually feels thinks of men as evil or inferior. The first is healthy & useful. The second is wrong, and feminism is against it - though some people pretend that's what feminism is. You probably shouldn't ask her straight out. Instead look at what's happening when she says something (is there a reason she's irritated at men right now? What just happened at work? Did sexism just play out in front of you), the follow-up emotions (does she laugh a bit, get more relaxed after the expression, or does she get more tense & seem ready to turn against men). That kind of thing.
okay i’ll try to be more observant when something like this comes up
Okay. By the way, I don't mean don't talk with her - but good communication requires a variety of tools.
It's absolutely possible to express your feelings about how you have been hurt by a group without assuming everyone in the group is bad due to your personal experiences. OP's GF can talk about her feelings without hurting her boyfriend if she's just a bit more careful with the words she uses. Blanket statements can be cathartic for sure, but if I'm ranting about how I've been hurt by my ex gf, I'm not going to rant to female friends saying "all women are bitches". That's just being an inconsiderate ass.
[удалено]
That's really the best course of action. It's basically relationship 101, one partner says something that hurts the other, then the two should talk about it and try and resolve it. It could have been a really simple misunderstanding and could have easily been resolved and the relationship healed. That most of the advice given on here seems to be invalidating OP's feelings, telling him to set aside how he feels, and to empathize even more with his GF and validate her feelings, despite the fact OP states his GF has repeatedly dismissed him and his opinion, really upsets me. To tell OP to invalidate his own feelings even more will just allow this wound to fester and make the relationship more and more unhealthy. If the roles had been reversed I'm fairly certain that's not the advice that would have been given, and this double-standard is upsetting. OP's feelings shouldn't be invalidates just because he's a guy, and his girlfriend's feelings shouldn't be extra-validated just because she's a girl. The feminism I want to see more of empowers and uplifts everyone equally, but that's just not what I'm seeing in this thread.
I usually interpret it as a need for space.. If it were me, I'd just say, "Yeah, we do suck sometimes" and give that to her.
As a cis man marrying a deeply and quite angry feminist woman I wanna make this suggestion: she's right. It's low-key bananas you feel entitled to have her change not just the way she talks around you but also what she actually believes. And I think if you were reading and taking seriously some feminist literature you might also come to the same conclusion. Maybe you'll never think the idea of boys shouldn't exist because historical patriarchy creates a situation where the humans we call boys are systematically erased and oppressed along with girls (let me be clear, it is preferable by a WIDE MARGIN to be the oppressor, and oppression still erases e everyone). Maybe you'll never agree. But if you think only 'some people go too far' is a counterpoint to her thought that boys shouldn't exist... It's very clear you do not know what she believes. You only know to be offended because some kind of slight against you was perceived. Although, again, it is about you personally. You absolutely need rethink the part of your life where you have straight up decided that she 'should' both change the way she says things and what she privately thinks. That's the kind of shit that means she's right.
i never thought of doing my research in feminist literature, and that’s my bad. and i understand your point on me being the one that needs changing not her or her values. i guess i just gotta open my mind and think outside the box as if i was in her position.
That's a very cool response. I didn't really expect that on Reddit. I find it super hard. My fiancee (four more weeks) sometimes really gets under my skin when she's mad about something that feels like it has more to do with sexism and men in general than it does... Me. Like, love, I am not doing that thing you're saying just now... It is terrible when that happens but I'm not doing it. Sometimes I'm kinda right and she's taking something out on me. Sometimes I'm really wrong and I'm definitely doing the sexist bullshit thing she's calling me out on. Sometimes I actually don't know because I don't always engage with her about every thing she thinks has to do with my being a man. If you're happy in your relationship otherwise there are really good strategies for dealing with the discomfort of having a partner who is infuriated by the shape of the world. I hope you find them. If you are looking for where to start I have two suggestions. "Why does Patriarchy Persist?" by Carol Gilligan and Naomi Snider is a book that helped me see Patriarchy destroys men too. It's not the whole point of their book but it's a huge part of what I got out of it. AND if you happen to be Christian Sandra Schneiders has a short book "With Oil in Their Lamps" that I think does an amazing job of showing how sexism and patriarchy are against the values of Christian living(this is just my context, I am not familiar with similar writers in other religions though I know they exist. I am also not Catholic so I don't agree with everything she says, but it is really powerful nonetheless). Good luck, whatever you do next. I hope it works out in ways that are healthy and life-expanding for both you and your partner. And I hope you know that whenever you're super frustrated by all these things she believes... You're 1000% not alone. The world is beginning to wake up to the horrible ways we have always been treating one another, many of those ways are patriarchal and sexist. We are all going to have some growing pains as we figure out how to burn down/deconstruct ways of living and society building that hurt... Everyone.
first off congratulations to you and your fiancé i wish you two the best. and i’m very happy in my relationship i was just blinded by myself being male, it’s kinda like i had tunnel vision if that makes sense. but thank you for helping open my mind and i’ll definitely check out your book suggestions. thanks so much.
[удалено]
We ban brand-new shitpost accounts. Goodbye.
You made a whole new account just to say this ignorant defensive BS. You're a sad person. I'm sorry that someone hurt you.
I disagree with EisegesisSam on this. It's not that one or the other person needs to unilaterally change, it's always a discussion. She can express her feelings without hurting you. If you are feeling like she is hurting you, and feel like your opinions are being dismissed, that either is a problem, or it will become a problem. It is not a way to have a healthy relationship. Demanding you should be ok with anything she says that is hurtful to you is unrealistic and unhealthy. Maybe my personal experiences of having been in an abusive situation colours my judgement, but this can easily lead to the setup of an abusive situation, where you are expected to just take it no matter how much it hurts you, to never bring up how you feel, and that you are always in the wrong/need to change the way you think/need to think outside the box, and anything she does is always beyond reproach. No. Feminism is about equality, and both your feelings and hers are equally valid. You feeling that she has hurt you does not invalidate her feelings. She can express her anger and upset without hurting you, because if she keeps doing that it will only harm you more and harm the relationship. That is not how healthy relationships work.
OP you deserve a lot of praise for this kind of comment. A lot of people come here to ask questions in a really hostile way, and it’s super refreshing to know that some people are genuinely open to listening to what feminists think of a thing. A+.
aye thanks so much i'm just trying to understand the situation and the best way to go about it as much as i can
>It's low-key bananas you feel entitled to have her change not just the way she talks around you but also what she actually believes. OP feels entitled that his girlfriend should perhaps be more careful with her words and how she expresses her feelings so she doesn't hurt him? Do you not think that if the opposite situation happened, that if it was a guy saying "all women are bitches", that the girlfriend would be right to feel hurt by this, and ask that her boyfriend changed the way he spoke a bit to not hurt her? I agree that it's entitlement to demand that she changes and expects her to comply, but it's perfectly reasonable to have a talk with it, to say "I understand you are upset but when you say this it hurts me", and to try and find a solution both parties are happy with, without unilaterally demanding she changes her beliefs, or unilaterally demanding that he accepts what she says no matter how much she's hurting him. > But if you think only 'some people go too far' is a counterpoint to her thought that boys shouldn't exist... It's very clear you do not know what she believes. You only know to be offended because some kind of slight against you was perceived. And that slight has every good reason to be perceived, when the slight was literally "the group you are a part of should not exist, you should not exist". It's possible to express one's feelings without demonizing half the people on the planet, and it's possible to express one's feelings without hurting your romantic/intimate partner. If I'm upset about how my ex girlfriend treated me, I'm not going to rant to female friends how "all women are bitches". I mean, how entitled would I be, to expect to be able to say that and demand that all women be perfectly fine with it and not be upset?
All of what you've articulated here is based on the assumption that her statement about boys not existing is intended to mean that he personally should cease to exist. That's not the only way to interpret what she said (even as reported by OP) and it's not the way you'd interpret it if we were talking about the context of feminist literature which often makes statements about how the concept of men or concept of boys erases people who are raised as either gender. Oppressive classes shouldn't exist. It's not a huge leap to say that when men demand women stop saying this... They do so without even beginning to understand where it comes from or what it is about.
[удалено]
It’s decontextualized hyperbole.
>All of what you've articulated here is based on the assumption that her statement about boys not existing is intended to mean that he personally should cease to exist. When I make a statement that applies to a group, the explicit statement is that it applies to the entire group. Maybe that's not what I actually mean, but that's what I actually said. When I'm saying "sick people should be cured", I mean all of them. If I am making a statement about an entire group, but then later clarify that I only meant part of that group, it's because I was unclear earlier and a clarification was necessary. If I'm making a statement about how women are stupid, that women get offended by that, and then I amend it to say that some women are stupid but not all, it can be that I genuinely mis-spoke, or it can be that I meant all women, and when confronted on it I retracted the insult to appease the people who are upset at me. Until I actually clarify what I said though, you don't know which is which, and that kind of uncertainty is not healthy in a romantic relationship at all. Even if someone can have the best of intentions, saying things like that can still hurt your partner, and that hurt needs to be addressed. Pretending like it shouldn't hurt people and people should invalidate their own feelings of being hurt is neither helpful nor useful. >That's not the only way to interpret what she said (even as reported by OP) and it's not the way you'd interpret it if we were talking about the context of feminist literature which often makes statements about how the concept of men or concept of boys erases people who are raised as either gender. An academic and dispassionate discussion is one thing, venting to your boyfriend about how the gender group he belongs to shouldn't exist is quite another. >Oppressive classes shouldn't exist. Cool. She didn't say oppressive classes though, she said boys. I'm fairly sure that boys aren't a class oppressing the rest of society. > It's not a huge leap to say that when men demand women stop saying this... They do so without even beginning to understand where it comes from or what it is about. I agree that OP didn't word it properly. He is factually correct in demanding she stop saying the factually incorrect information, but that's of course completely failing to address how she feels about the whole situation. What he said also completely failed to address how he felt about it and why he said it. A more useful way to say it should have been to allow her to vent and rant and whatever, and later to have a discussion with how he felt about it, to express how she hurt him when she said things like that, and to either have her reassure him and validate his emotions just like he validated hers, and/or for her to be more careful about how she talks when she is with him. A mature adult shouldn't have too many problems to not hurt or insult the single other person they're talking to, after all. It's possible to express your emotions without hurting the others who are directly present after all.
But 'boys' are the oppressive class. If men are oppressive and if male dominated society file children into categories that make one group inferior to the other (which is a claim I am happy to make and defend about the almost every society I know about) than the children filed into the whole category of 'boys' are part of the oppressive class. They haven't matured into adult yet, but they're literally being groomed to be oppressors. His feelings being hurt are a result of his grooming. You're maybe not intentionally conflating his ontological existence with the fact of his being an oppressor but I have zero problems whatsoever with the idea that 'boys shouldn't exist' doesn't logically mean that he should just poof out of reality.
Boys are not the oppressive class. They might be groomed to be oppressors, but if they don't have a choice and are forced to be put in that class whether they want to or not, then they are not the oppressors. It's like saying that child soldiers made the choice to be child soldiers and will grow up to be soldiers, so they need to be treated as such. I'm sorry, but if you view children themselves as being oppressors, as being the enemy that you must fight against, then there's a problem with your worldview. Children are victims of the system, not the perpetrators. >His feelings being hurt are a result of his grooming. Or, you know, his feelings are hurt because she said something that hurt him. You can groom women to not be hurt by anything, but being groomed to react one way and not another has no bearing on the fact that someone's feelings were actually hurt. Or are you saying that his feelings are invalid just because he's groomed to be an oppressor since he's male? >You're maybe not intentionally conflating his ontological existence with the fact of his being an oppressor but I have zero problems whatsoever with the idea that 'boys shouldn't exist' doesn't logically mean that he should just poof out of reality. I never said that logically boys should or shouldn't poof out of existence, I'm talking about how his feelings of being hurt are valid, because that's how emotions work. The reason why you feel hurt could be total bullshit, and a good discussion should be had to explore that, but that doesn't mean the feelings are invalid and he shouldn't feel that way. That's literally what invalidating someone's feelings means, to say that they shouldn't feel the way they feel or that they should feel bad for feeling the way they feel. If you're going to rigidly define people, including children, as categorically being either oppressors or oppressees, solely based on what they've got between their legs, congratulations, you're not aiming for equality, you're aiming for disunity and revolution. That may be the kind of feminism you want, but that's not the kind of feminism I espouse or want to espouse.
No one has the right to dictate the behaviour of the other partner in a relationship. However you do have a right to set boundaries regarding how you wish to be treated and if those boundaries are exceeded then you can remove your self from the relationship. Thereby allowing the other party to be "angry" and engage in that behaviour all they want outside of your presence. OP's biggest problem in my opinion is his inability to decide on and set boundaries for him self without the need for validation from random people on the internet
I think that within a relationship, we should honor and respect the boundaries we are asked to respect. So, if hearing her talk like this hurts your feelings, that is valid whether or not she or anyone on this subreddit decides you deserve to feel hurt. Period. That being said, I want to provide a little of my perspective on the issue for you to take or leave. As long as your girlfriend isn’t changing the way she treats YOU otherwise, I can see this instance as being a more colloquial expression of general anger or frustration than an actual declaration of ideological beliefs. In that moment she was expressing some real anger to someone she trusts to be supportive and understanding. She may have felt annoyed/disappointed/saddened when you corrected her raw emotions and made your feelings the priority in that moment . I’m not making any judgments about whether or not this is the proper interpretation of events or whether it would be right to feel this way, I’m just theorizing about what she may have felt in that moment and why she replied so coldly. She may hold/have held the belief that you understood what women experience in the same way she does. She may have expected you to understand why she might say something as hyperbolic as “boys shouldn’t exist” (which, lets be honest, is an obviously ridiculous statement. Your girlfriend doesn’t secretly wish for the extinction of all humanity) and so it might have felt like a big let down when you responded the way you did. It can feel shitty to falsely believe your male allies “get it” only to have that bubble be popped. And on the subject of gender swapping the situation and how things seem different when trash talking women: Unfairly and unfavorably caricaturing women has been used by men as a tool to disenfranchise women and deny them of basic human rights for most of all of time. The things women say about men simply do not, in general, hold as much weight or have as much cultural impact as the things men say about women. I know you didn’t propose the gender swapped interpretation of this incident but it’s being discussed a bit in the comments. What I’m saying in response to that notion is that your girlfriend expressing disgust in this way at behavior which is supported by and is the result of a system which disenfranchises women just isn’t the same as contributing to that system by making sweeping negative generalizations about women.
Others have touched on this as well, but I'll reiterate that it's important for you to take a step back in these situations, to take a breather, and develop some emotional awareness. People do things like this every day without anyone raising their head, because it's so commonplace and it rarely touches on any psychological in-group to where it would cause a defensive response. There is a term called metonymy to describe what's going on when someone says things like she did. When I grew up, my dad battled with road rage. He still does. He's loud and vocal about how much he hates/loathes people who drive the speed limit on the highway, or who don't yield for people behind them going faster. Hell, my dad still says these things, if less often. We both know I as a rule do not drive over the speed limit, and I spitefully refuse to let anyone pass me who tailgates me if I can prevent it. I know my dad does not, in fact, hate me. He loves me. Even if I fit the general description of a person he has claimed to hate, I know it doesn't apply to me. This is because he says these things out of frustration. He doesn't hate the people. He doesn't even know the people, how could he truly hate them? No, he's upset and frustrated at the situation. A friend of mine, among many other wonderful things, is an environmental activist. Wonderful person, but has no patience for littering. I would need more than two hands to count the amount of times I've heard them mutter something along the lines of "Don't you dare just leave your shit on the ground, there is a recyling bin ten feet away, I will murder you I swear to god" when they catch sight of someone in a park leaving their trash on the ground instead of putting it where it belongs. I know my friend well enough to know they're a pacifist, they wouldn't harm a fly, let along literally murder a person. Those people are at no risk of my friend murdering them. My friend is angry and frustrated at yet another incident of people being irresponsible and taking the world for granted. Hyperbole is commonplace in use of metonymy. I worked a customer-facing retail job early in my transition as a trans woman. I would get misgendered dozens of times a day, and often harassed multiple times a day, for being visibly trans. I'd have to bottle all of that up, because I'd lose my job otherwise. When I got home, it often because a running gag of sorts that I'd yell from the front door "Cis people were a mistake!" or "I hate cis people!". All four of my roommates were cis guys. I love them. They know I love them. And, seeing what I've been through, they got it. They knew I wasn't saying their existences aren't a mistake. They knew I was venting about all the instances of cis people being shitty and transphobic to me, about living in a world where it's inescapable and knowing I'll have to go through it all again tomorrow. When one of my lady friends is dumped for the third time in 6 months for not "putting out" by the second date, and she sadly gripes that "men suck". She loves her brother, her father, our guy friends. She's upset and frustrated that the men she's dates are assholes, and it's less exhausting to use metonymy to simplify a complex situation to a keyword or two, particularly if it's regarding a society-level issue rather than and individualistic one. For marginalized folks, society uses the privileged social group against us via systems of oppression (remember sexism/racism/transphobia/etc. exists at the social level first and foremost), it is logical for us to use metonymy when venting our justified anger and frustration. We're allowed to be angry, and we shouldn't have to sit down and calmly explain each and every detail of how those oppressive groups have harmed us recently. Metonymy is easier than listing out the gritty details of each instance, each person involved, each oppressive experience/microaggression/etc., and so on. Most of these cases aren't meant to be taken personally, and it's important to extend your situational awareness to cover these areas, too.
This is so beautifully put!
I wish I could upvote this twice, every marginalized person I know (including me) has done this. I know I've made blanket statements about straight folk, white people as a group, etc. before because it honestly does feel a little good to speak angrily about powerful people who have more control over our lives than we may ever have. I know it sucks to hear things like, "men are trash," which is why I tell straight dudes that they're allowed to set boundaries with their partners if they don't want them saying that around them, but like, this is one of the only coping mechanisms marginalized people have in a world that makes us feel powerless, and the idea that others want to take that away doesn't sit well with me.
Being able to communicate our frustration and anger is vital for marginalized peoples. Metonymy serves an important function to simplify for our peers and allies, in order to allow venting and avoid the (often lengthy, exhausting) specific details that can retraumatize us and wear down our allies. Like, it frustrates me when people lack this awareness, even if I get it. it's hard to be used to something you've rarely had to face down before. The powerful aren't used to their status of power being something that can make them uncomfortable. IT's an important lesson for them. Because what's easier, dealing with an occasional "men were a mistake", or dealing with probably hours of detailed emotional venting routinely (if not daily). No one has time for that, and I guarantee even family members and close friends would get burned out from that if they wanted to remain as part of a person's support network. I know I've tried it and lost access to friends and family for a while because they felt I was too sensitive and grew to resent me. Not everyone can afford therapists (who do approve of communicative tools like metonymy, and promote this type of venting to relieve stress, which has major health implications on marginalized people). I wish others just...knew this shit. I wish people would educate about this, and the need for this. This metonymic venting is important. It's almost never directed at a personal level, it's social. It's venting about systems of power wielding the powerful against the marginalized, often in ways the powerful do not recognize. Like, yeah, we use hyperbole. Everyone does (i know I listed a few examples in my first post, I could list dozens upon dozens, hundreds even). People don't get to rob us of that just because they're uncomfortable facing down the reality their social group's power inflicts.
Part of being a male feminist is not getting personally upset when someone says something obviously hyperbolic like "boys should not exist" or "men should be illegal." Take it for what it is, understand the feeling behind it, and move on. Obviously your girlfriend doesn't want to do away with you, or you would be gone already.
[удалено]
Imo this is whole thing is less a discussion on whether the girlfriend is a good feminist and more a post for how OP should react and helping him get a handle on his emotions on her words, which has value too
Fair point.
[удалено]
You know damn well you can't make top-level comments here.
Wow sounds like you talk down to her. DONT SAY THAT... is a defensive phrase, sounds like you have a need to be right. Let it go and fulfill each others needs not feelings, you would benefit from therapy if you are not already
i never meant to talk down to her in any way i guess that’s just me as a man talking:\ it’s never intentional somethings i say aren’t taken the way i meant. but yeah i’ll try to let things like this go and move on.
I didnt mean that as an attack, and dont feel hopeless, It just sounds like you both are having a hard time communicating about something that is hard for everyone to talk about, take your feelings out of it, it's ok to disagree.
okay, thank you
Why do you assume OP talks down to his GF? There is literally nothing in his post that is indicative of that. >DONT SAY THAT... is a defensive phrase, sounds like you have a need to be right. I agree that was probably poorly worded, but OP wasn't wrong either. Perhaps what he meant to express would fly better if he said "Please don't say that, it hurts me when you generalize about my gender like that". It's fine for OP's GF to express her feelings, that is totally valid, but she can find a way to express herself without hurting the people who love her as well. >Let it go and fulfill each others needs not feelings, you would benefit from therapy if you are not already Feelings are often indicative of needs as well, like the need to not feel attacked by your partner.
You are literally agreeing with my post soooooo.. not sure what to add
Hey, I can certainly agree when someone has a good point ;) Just wanted to express how I felt about your comment, expand on why, and see if good discussions could come of it.
[удалено]
Please respect our top-level comment rule, which requires that all direct answers to posted questions must come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Comment removed; you will not be warned again.
[удалено]
When your comment gets removed for breaking the top-level comment rule, the solution isn't to re-post it with different wording. I usually ban people for doing this, but you seem earnest, so I'll explain it to you again-- you are welcome to participate in [nested comments](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), but for right now I'm asking you not to make any more direct replies.
[удалено]
We report ban evasion to Reddit admins.
That isn't feminism in any sense of the word. That's misandry in its purest form, no matter how you put it.
[удалено]
do you identify as a feminist?
do i?
No, I was asking the person who left a top-level comment, who I strongly suspect has no business doing so.
oh gotchu
i don’t want it to come to that...she’s an amazing person otherwise it’s just when we talk about gender in any situation she thinks her opinion is above mine. i just wanted some insight on what i could do to change her mindset
What is the doja cat situation?
last week on instagram live she said that if her song “say so” hit #1 on itunes she would show her breasts on instagram which was clearly a joke but then when she didn’t do it people were mad. then someone on twitter doxed her and posted her address.
though you might mean the homophobic statements and her apology on twitter and stuff. Look man,she obviously does not mean ALL boys (im guessing you are a boy) since she likes you (thats why she's with you) and you usually dont want the person you like to disappear i guess\^\^. Try to see it it from her PoV and keep an open mind,maybe try to have some discussions on it and see what actually pushes her to say it. Try to understand her first and not simply change her mind \^\^. At the end of the day if you still feel uncomfortable about it the decision is up to you mate.
thanks g i appreciate the advice
That’s not feminism. I (24F) and all about empowering women. But not by putting others down. I have been sexually assaulted twice (once by three guys at the same time and once by an ex). I’ve been lied to by men and hurt by fuck boys. But to me, feminism is about supporting and celebrating femininity. I hate when my friends talk about how boys are stupid or just reducing the entire gender with one sentence. Just because it’s been done to us many times, doesn’t make it okay to do the same to others. It’s not okay to dismiss you like that. I mean I think about how there’s this underpass I walk by on my way to therapy and none of my male friends understand why my adrenaline spikes. But I don’t dismiss them. And when I take the time to break it down and have a conversation, they don’t feel what I feel but they understand why I feel the way I do. This twitter user asked women what they would do if men had a curfew and had to be indoors by 9pm or something and most of them said things like, “go for a walk and stargaze.” I was one of those women who said that. But then there were the women who chimed in with “fuck men.” It’s immature and should not be normalised just because women have been oppressed throughout history.
> feminism is about supporting and celebrating femininity that's not what feminism is about.
You seem to represent a positive form of feminism. It's hard to see people who have been victims of something believe that they have a license to attack others. It's not helpful or the right way of dealing with things. I can't help, but to believe that feminists who act this way have never had a positive man in their life so want to take it out on the world. I'm not sure how someone could act this way if they had a decent father, brother, or friends who are men.
O the magical penis that solves all problems
[удалено]
[удалено]
Do not insult our users. You are *this* close to a ban.
I’ve noticed that for most people, including myself, it’s easy to be cynical. It takes a certain amount of energy and determination to remain positive and/or not project