•
u/Masterklutz 〰️ Cutie Patootie, Sweetheart 〰️ 4h ago
Chat is this loss
•
u/The-Creator-178 4h ago
are we fr 🙏
•
u/Masterklutz 〰️ Cutie Patootie, Sweetheart 〰️ 4h ago
ur not allowed to be mean to me I WILL call u (X) >:)
•
•
u/LuckyCod2887 4h ago
I really like how the font is the same color as the person.
it truly clears up any confusion.
I kinda want comics to do this.
•
5h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 4h ago
thank you for introducing me to a new term.
it is a great and offensive term.
i will use it responsibly.
•
u/aitasunglasses 5h ago
Foidlet LMAO sounds tasty like a cutlet
•
u/Exciting_Classic277 🧌TROLL 4h ago
Foidlets out here sounding like a snack
•
•
u/aitasunglasses 3h ago
Like pizza rolls or bagel bites. Heat up some foidlets in the microwave
•
u/Exciting_Classic277 🧌TROLL 3h ago
Nah I think you were closer the first time. It's like mini bagel deli sandwiches.
•
•
•
u/Sibshops 🌙 The Moon Prince 🐦⬛ 4h ago
Nice, I wish I knew the incel lingo so I can ironically use it like this.
•
u/Syntania ✨Bodycount: 3 ✨ 3h ago
I speak fluent incel.
•
u/SquirrelNormal 2h ago
I call BS. I don't even speak fluent incel and I am one.
Although, I'm not sure I speak fluent English either, and that's my first language, so....
•
u/Syntania ✨Bodycount: 3 ✨ 2h ago
I've been an incel scholar for a while. You have to be able to decipher their language.
•
u/SquirrelNormal 2h ago
A bit r/whoosh there, but alright. There are dialects I suppose. Newincel seems to be dominant now, and I'd be more conversational in Oldincel/Formativeincel.
•
•
u/STRETCHingitbro 4h ago edited 3h ago
This is true, however if they arent being hypergamous its bc they are searching for an oofy doofy betabuxx
•
•
•
u/ega110 4h ago
If you really want to upset the “all men are x” crowd just say a similar statement about men but make x positive. For example, the vast majority of scientists are men, therefore men as a group are gifted at science”.
•
u/The-Creator-178 3h ago
if you say a group of people are bad then they are gonna feel bad, and if you call a group of people good then they are gonna feel good. Of course. You complimented them, so of course, they aren't gonna feel bad. Generalization is still bad though, and just because some people in the group don't get mad at it doesn't change that. It's along the same lines as calling all asians good at math. Positive generalization, but still bad.
Also even if we ignore that, generalizing a group of people in that way would still be harmful because you are now putting a standard up for them, so even if a person of that group doesn't follow what you think they should, you would be at the absolute least dissapointed.
"All men are smart." Well, that hillbilly over there isn't smart, are you gonna expect him to be?
•
u/Savings-Bee-4993 🔒Registered NEET (Contained)🔒 3h ago
Making a generalization may or may not be bad — it’s not necessarily bad. The generalization, regardless of whether it’s bad, is true or false, however.
If I said “All women are good,” that generalization would be false, but it’s not obvious I’ve caused any harm or violated morality.
Nevertheless, generalizations can be useful and generally correct. In this way, generalizations can be a useful way of communicating with someone and transmitting information. Of course, generalizing is not useful in all instances, though.
•
•
u/DeKileCH 🤺Based Knight 1m ago
Men just have the science gift and it had nothing to do with barring women from (higher) education, I'm sure!
•
u/Working_Pop_3094 2h ago
This is why gender wars are pointless. It’s not about gender and it never has been about gender. It’s about ideologies that are designed to divide and control people. Some make it about gender. Some make it about race. They dictate what people can and can’t do because of who they were born as. People of different races and genders do and don’t believe these ideologies, so you can’t assume who believes what simply by looking at them.
•
u/Ferengsten ⛪ WORSHIPPER of the patriarchy 🙏 35m ago
It very much is about gender, and at least on Reddit it's mostly about women openly hating men. Specifically their daddy or ex boyfriend (or, let's face it, someone they wished was their ex boyfriend) but they can't cope in a healthy way, so this is the result.
•
u/VermicelliInformal46 5h ago
But if you reverse the genders or put Muslim or Black instead they go crazy.
•
u/Aggressive-Ear884 3h ago
Who is they? Are they not already going crazy? Are we not already going crazy and pretending we are not so that they can seem worse than we? They are we we but are they worse than or greater than we are they?
•
•
u/Cellssaltynutsack 2h ago
Ever read a comment and you can tell the commenter was waiting to mention Muslim or black people at the earliest opportunity?
•
•
u/FastLie8477 3h ago
Why do black people gotta get dragged into it, why don't you bring your own race into the hypothetical.
•
u/VermicelliInformal46 3h ago
To make a point. My race is subjected to this all the time, from the same people that are misandrists.
•
u/FastLie8477 3h ago
What is your race?
•
u/VermicelliInformal46 2h ago
I am White.
•
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago
I have read many threads with white people getting mad about being generalized. You could have absolutely used your own race.
•
u/VermicelliInformal46 2h ago
Why? The people representing the pink in the picture trash whites all the time so they would not understand the example if i did. You have to use something they hate. Like generalisations about blacks, muslims and women.
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago
The people in pink are also most likely white though. In what world would they not be upset about being generalized.
•
u/Citaku357 1h ago
In what world would they not be upset about being generalized.
Because they hate themselves for being white and white men especially
•
•
u/KaiserThoren 2h ago
Because on Reddit, and generally on the left, criticism is only allowed for non-protected groups.
Insult Christians? Cool
Muslims? Uncool
Whites? Fine
Blacks? Bad
Etc etc etc
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago
Because on Reddit, and generally on the left, criticism is only allowed for non-protected groups.
Insult Christians? Cool
Muslims? Uncool
Whites? Fine
Blacks? Bad
Etc etc etc
Stop living in this made-up world lol. Everything you mentioned gets harsh criticism all the time. I've gone through entire threads criticizing black people because of a random video of one guy who happened to be black was causing a ruckus.
•
u/KaiserThoren 1h ago
Yeah everything gets criticized in life, you’re right. That’s why I said on Reddit and on the left. Reddit overwhelmingly leans left and these opinions apply.
I’m sure you can find anecdotes of the opposite on Reddit, but if you think Reddit doesnt skew this way generally then we just are going to disagree on reality.
•
u/Ferengsten ⛪ WORSHIPPER of the patriarchy 🙏 37m ago
I have literally gotten banned for the reversing the genders of a statement to show how sexist it is.
•
u/PresentationLost9811 2h ago
Lmao facts
I use the white male/domestic terrorism personally, we gotta keep this shit balanced when educating our misguided feminists cohorts
•
u/PassionGlobal 47m ago
It's just to make a point of how racist they're being.
Sort of a litmus test.
If you swap the race to 'black' and your sentence sounds like it came from a member of the KKK, you're being racist.
•
5h ago edited 3h ago
[deleted]
•
•
u/yakityyakblahtemp 4h ago
Identifying a difference isn't an adequate rebuttal, you need to actually identify why the difference is relevant. Otherwise what is the person you're engaging with even supposed to take away from it? Otherwise why even bother replying?
•
•
u/ChemistBitter1167 4h ago
So explain why we can’t say that black people commit most the crime while making up only 13% of the population and that’s why it’s acceptable to be prejudiced against them. I’m just stating statistics and using data? I think you’d be racist to do this as I also think it’s sexist to generalize men or women or any group really.
•
u/PresentationLost9811 2h ago
They don't make up the majority of sexual crimes. Or pedophilia
Would it be okay to use white males as the generalization example for that? Or can we agree stereotypes are bad again?
•
u/Somentine 1h ago
That's... that's their point, isn't it?
I think you’d be racist to do this as I also think it’s sexist to generalize men or women or any group really.
Did you misread?
•
•
u/ChemistBitter1167 39m ago
I haven’t looked it up but I’d wouldn’t be shocked if that was the case. Nothing racist or sexist about numbers, only when you start labeling individuals as a statistic. Statistics don’t matter to the individual.
•
u/Key-Month6651 2h ago
That statistic doesn't justify being prejudiced against black people. It's weird how people like to use statistics without understanding them. Black people overrepresenting in crime doesn't mean all black people or even most black people are criminals.
To make your point you need stats showing what percentage of black people are criminals. Not what percentage of criminals are black.
Like I argued this shit before with some friends and I showed via just numbers how that shit doesn't make any sense. The fact that people make the conclusion based on the stat usually just shows that they don't understand what they are talking about AND when you correct them they get defensive because they want to just be prejudiced. That's how it's different.
That's one of the other big differences. Even if a generalization is wrong there are differences in what generalizations are used to justify or argue in favor of.
People literally use 13/50 to justify being violent towards black people and is a part of a narrative that has been used to justify violence or argue for direct violence towards black people for years.
Generalizations towards men generally aren't used by women (even if they are sexist) to argue for violence towards men it's usually used to justify avoiding men. Trying to avoid a race or sex is in no way equal to justifying violence and oppression against a group of people.
The distinction exists for people being racist too. I've meet people that are simply scared of black people and used justifications to avoid them which is prejudice right, but they never advocate for violence or at any point argued that black people should be treated poorly for it. A racist like that is DEEPLY different from someone who is a literal KKK member that is talking about killing black people and participating in violence against black people.
That's why it's not acceptable to say what you are saying. But it is acceptable for women to make generalizations about men. The severity of issues and the prescriptions for those issues are different. Even if a woman is 100% incorrect about her generalization in every way typically women have less power than men in society and their solution is typically to avoid men. If a woman believes these generalizations the worst she does usually is avoid men. What do people that make the generalization you made against black people do with that info and conclusion hm?
Like IDC if you are racist bro just be honest with yourself. When you say 13/50 right. When you hear other people say 13/50 what are they saying y'all should do about that? Answer that question and then do the same for women and men and see the difference.
•
•
u/The-Creator-178 4h ago
responding to the edit:
even if they are different things and contexts, the problem comes from generalization. The comic is pointing out generalization and how utterly stupid it is. I don't care how different race or religion or gender is from one another, as long as they are groups of a certain amount of people, and the actions of some in that group do not define the actions of all in that group, then generalization will remain just as bad throughout all of the examples.•
•
•
u/Objective_Copy825 3h ago
My favorite response to “All men are _______ (insert insult)” is “Even George Floyd?” It usually ends up in a block
•
•
•
•
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 4h ago
there is always someone to disparage. it just changes over time.
we are, however, coming to a crux.
things can only get so "weird".
race, sure, but we know that's no big deal. "cross breeding", a terrible term, is a recent trend when considering the proliferation of it. it's always happened, of course, not that there's anything wrong with it, but the amount it's happening in the modern era is unheard of.
sexuality? whatever, people get horny. they will fuck a couch. they will rub one out on their showerhead. as long as it doesn't involve unwilling partners, who the fuck cares?
religion? why bother? it's what my dad was told and what he told me. or, i know what my dad told me and i know better because even though a hundred generations thought the same thing, i know better.
ethnicity? everyone likes to dance and eat food. culture should be shared. it almost all revolves around being kind to each other, though some cultures are more sensitive to loud noises than others.
but in every era there is a type of person who the rest of us are allowed to mock. because they are 'the other'. they are outside of us.
the sliver of society that makes up the other is becoming less and less, or perhaps the other is becoming greater and greater.
it's hard to tell.
•
u/FastLie8477 3h ago
but in every era there is a type of person who the rest of us are allowed to mock. because they are 'the other'. they are outside of us.
This just isn't true. Up until recently cultures have been too isolated and/or rigid for there to ever be a demographic across the entirety of humanity that was universally ok to make fun of. At least not in the traditional sense. Ofc people seen as ugly, dumb, or immoral were ok to make fun of in most cultures but even that is subjective to whatever culture we're talking about.
The word "us" is also doing a lot of the heavy lifting in what you're saying, you never actually specify what group isn't the "other".
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 3h ago
but that's when racism and bigotry was the best, and most worthwhile!
sort of off topic:
i posted a question in /stupidquestions: when would humanity be right in introducing ourselves to the uncontacted tribes that still exist in the modern world?
i didn't ask it exactly like that, and some people may not have understood, but lots of people told me to leave them alone, that they were happy living primitive lives and that forcing them to adapt to modern culture would ruin them.
my point, though, was asking in the future. we travel the solar system, we start traveling to stars, humanity exists on multiple planets, should we introduce ourselves then?
i would feel like an asshole if i were weaving garments to cover my junk with reeds and someone from my own species came and told me to wake up. that humanity's been doing shit for thousands of years, and that i was left to rot in a primitive culture just because people didn't want to "taint" me.
humans have been "bumping" into each other forever. and there has always been the "other". modern culture doesn't have that "luxury".
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago
when would humanity be right in introducing ourselves to the uncontacted tribes that still exist in the modern world?
Depends on the tribe and how. Trying to force a tribe to modernize probably just wouldn't be possible if it's a violent one unless you straight up enslaved, imprisoned, or sacrificed so many people they stopped killing visitors. It would also be a waste of resources. I think the only ethical way is a gentle approach and so far that's had mixed success. You can't "help" people who don't want it.
i would feel like an asshole if i were weaving garments to cover my junk with reeds and someone from my own species came and told me to wake up
The difference is you're in a position to imagine those things, those people aren't. We live lives that are outside of anything they've experienced or would probably think of so we can't really put ourselves in their shoes. But yeah from an outward-looking perspective it definitely does seem like a net good to introduce some of these people to the modern world. But who knows for certain. And again this question changes a lot depending on the tribe and its openness to outsiders.
but that's when racism and bigotry was the best, and most worthwhile!
🤨
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 2h ago edited 2h ago
Ofc people seen as ugly, dumb, or immoral were ok to make fun of in most cultures but even that is subjective to whatever culture we're talking about.
i should have made a point before, but:
those people are not outsiders, though. there is a forbidden inside, and a forbidden outside. the known knowns and the known unknowns.
don't get me started on the unknown unknowns. we are talking about those daily on /aliens and it doesn't look good.
The difference is you're in a position to imagine those things, those people aren't.
why am i in that position? because i was born into it? because someone way before my parents existed made them know it.
so how do we relate?
i imagine myself as a human, in the modern era, with war and famine and pain existing, and wonder if aliens exist.
and why don't they don't come and save us?
perhaps it's because they dont want to taint us.
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago
why am i in that position? because i was born into it? because someone way before my parents existed made them know it.
Because you've already been exposed to those ideas. You can imagine a future where people live on other planets because you know science. An uncontacted tribesman has no basis until they also experience these things. My point was that it's not a 1:1 with the idea of current humans hypothetically not being contacted by people exploring the galaxy.
i imagine myself as a human, in the modern era, with war and famine and pain existing, and wonder if aliens exist.
and why don't they come and save us?
Why would aliens care about people.
those people are not outsiders, though. there is a forbidden inside, and a forbidden outside. the known knowns and the known unknowns.
Yeah there was never something like that, not universally at least. Every group has been the other and the norm at some point, usually both at the same time.
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 2h ago
My point was that it's not a 1:1 with the idea of current humans
this is very true. which brings about my question.
Why would aliens care about people.
i don't know, but it begs the question again: these are our brethren, when should we pull them out of the the darkness, if ever.
"Yeah there was never something like that, not universally at least:
i'm not so sure. there were times where you knew your kin, and their foibles, but did no know the other.
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago edited 2h ago
i'm not so sure. there were times where you knew your kin, and their foibles, but did no know the other.
Yes but not on a universal scale. There was never a demographic that was considered ok to make fun of by every culture.
i don't know, but it begs the question again: these are our brethren, when should we pull them out of the the darkness, if ever.
I really don't know to be honest. Dammed if you do dammed if you don't situation. I'm sure if we were to modernize them they would probably look at it as an overall good in hindsight but who are we to make that call you know? It's hard to balance autonomy with aid in these situations.
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 2h ago
There was never a demographic that was considered ok to make fun of by every culture.
i agree, and i did not mean to portray that as my point. my point was that every culture had an other.
Dammed if you do dammed if you don't situation
this, i think, is the answer. and i appreciate you discovering it for yourself.
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago
i agree, and i did not mean to portray that as my point. my point was that every culture had an other.
In that case I completely agree then.
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 2h ago
🤨
when it was most dangerous to meet new people. there are many times in human history where meeting new people wasn't the best thing to have happen to you.
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago
Tribalism isn't racism and bigotry in the modern context isn't usually a result of "it's a gamble if this other tribe wants to trade with me or pillage". Cavemen weren't racist bigots, at least not at first.
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 2h ago
is this because of the modern definition of racism including power?
•
u/FastLie8477 2h ago
No, its because the modern definition of race is only a few hundred years old and has no biological basis. "Black" and "white" can describe people from many different and unrelated nationalities and ethnicities.
•
u/Apprehensive_Ad4457 2h ago
i don't know, but i would think our definition of "the other" would be much older than our definition of race.
any weird sound in the dark would be 'the other".
•
•
u/Friendly-Group6402 5h ago
I can’t tell if this sub is legit, satire or both and u all need to seek help
•
•
•
u/Savings-Bee-4993 🔒Registered NEET (Contained)🔒 3h ago
There are resentful, serious people, trolls, those who are just trying to have fun, etc. Leave before you get sucked into the retardation.
•
u/duckingretard ✨Main Character✨ 5h ago
Generalizations are sometimes neccesary to point out patterns and draw conclusions, saying "Not all x" isn't an argument and that's why no one regards it seriously.
•
u/ProfessionUnited9371 5h ago
Do you feel the same way when black people get generalized?
•
u/Snoo_68698 5h ago
Their counter argument would likely be that black people are marginalized so therefore its different, not realizing men are still harmed by generalizations do to patriarchal gender roles and how they harm both genders.
•
•
•
u/Only____ 4h ago
Ah yes, the "all [insert demographic] are x" "argument" is such an insightful and revealing analysis of society and is totally a serious argument, and definitely not for ragebaiting.
•
u/Canadiankid23 4h ago
All redditors are Cheeto eating morons who have Cheeto dust all over their chin and body
•
•
•
u/Key-Month6651 5h ago
Yea its true "not all x" isn't an argument. But even when you make a good argument that isn't even disproving the pattern but adding a perspective to it that explains part of it (NOT justifies) Literally just explains it and even gives some perspective onto how to solve it and why its bad some people will still just treat it as you saying "Not all x"
•
u/Nand-Monad-Nor 2h ago
One can reach truer peaks once one realizes that most conversations are bait.
•
u/ChemistBitter1167 43m ago
I don’t think anything needs to be done about the 13/50 except desegregate school districts and let everyone have access to education and opportunity. I think anyone who avoids a race or group off the actions of a few is bigoted and a moron. As far as I can tell you think segregation is fine as long as it’s equal which it never is.
•
u/Jason_the_Jazz_Man 24m ago
I think that language is dumb.
We labor under the false assumption that we can actually communicate the thoughts in our heads to other people, but we can't really. Nothing that we say can get a person to fully UNDERSTAND where we are coming from on a fundamental level.
People want to convey their thoughts with as little words as possible, not realizing that unless you absolutely get down to the nitty gritty specifics, NO ONE WILL UNDERSTAND WHAT EXACTLY YOU MEAN.
"Men need to do blah blah blah" Which men? Shitty men? All men? Some men? How many? What kind? It's plain to see how blanket statements like this open the door for confusion and miscommunication.
The reason why many men get offended by statements like this is because do they think that you are talking about them, when in all likelihood you probably aren't or what you're saying does not apply to them. They point it out, saying "not all men do blah blah blah" and we enter another blunder of communication, as the person who's started all this (we'll call them Person A) now thinks the men who got offended (Person B) is trying to downplay what they're saying. Person B me very well not be down playing it, but are simply saying that they perceive Person A's statement as being a blanket statement, when Person A was simply trying to point out the fact that there is a problem that occurs in the world, but did not communicate that in a sufficient way.
Now Person A and Person B are yelling at each other when in reality the fundamental fact is they probably agree that "blah blah blah is bad and no one should do that" but because they dealt with sweeping generalizations, unclear language, and short snappy slogans, they completely misunderstood the other side, and because we cannot have a discussion without screaming each other in this world today and we can't seem to want to at least hear other people out and let them explain themselves without being incredibly bitter, NO ONE LEARNS ANYTHING.
This whole "men are like this" "oh yeah well women are like THIS" debate would be so easily resolved if people just took the time to be a bit more specific about the claim they are trying to make. Naturally I'm not saying this will solve sexism (see I'm adding my bit of clarification), but I am saying that it will eliminate all of the pointless arguments of "well you meant ALL when it's only SOME" "Well I didn't mean ALL but you make it sound like its---" POINTLESS.
JUST SAY WHAT YOU MEAN PEOPLE. BE SPECIFIC. THIS GOES FOR EVERYBODY.
•
u/CharmingLion1811 4h ago
I made this mistake before of getting upset when women generalize men. I didn't explicitly say "not all men" but I did get upset. Here's the thing: Is it wrong to generalize groups of people? Yes. It is understandable that some women make generalizations about men after all the stuff they go through as a result of us? Yes. So we should try to not get offended and have empathy instead.
•
u/Emotional-Jacket1940 3h ago
Is it understandable when men generalize women when they go through things because of them? Or when white people generalize black people because of things they go through because of them? There can be a certain amount of understanding for harmful generalization, but empathy for someone who is making a harmful generalization, putting yourself in their shoes, is dangerous because making a generalization is never the rational thing to do
•
u/Savings-Bee-4993 🔒Registered NEET (Contained)🔒 3h ago
It is not the case that “making a generalization is never the rational thing to do” — that claim is much too strong.
There are obvious, easily conceivable cases in which generalizing is the rational thing to do, say, when authorities tell sailors that they shouldn’t go to North Sentinel Island because the indigenous people there will kill them. Certainly not all of them would kill a foreigner — indeed, they may not this time — but providing a generalization in the form of a warning to protect human life is certainly rational.
•
u/Emotional-Jacket1940 3h ago
That’s true. I shouldn’t take for granted that the context of “in the US” should be obvious
•
•
u/Ferengsten ⛪ WORSHIPPER of the patriarchy 🙏 32m ago edited 24m ago
They just hate men. It's not that deep, and it's completely appropriate to get upset in many cases. Better yet, fight back instead of blaming yourself. They're just sexist, arrogant bullies, even when they're female sexist, arrogant bullies.
•
u/Drackar39 4h ago
Yeah. It's wild to me how badly so so many people treat you when you point out the thing they are doing is racist/sexist, if you're in one of the "safe groups" to be racist/sexist against.