Lemmy is a worse platform for women than Reddit was
Lemmy is a worse platform for women than Reddit was
(Content warning, discussions of SA and misogyny, mods I might mention politics a bit but I hope this can be taken outside the context of politics and understood as a discussion of basic human decency)
We all know how awful Reddit was when a user mentioned their gender. Immediate harassment, DMs, etc. It's probably improved over the years? But still awful.
Until recently, Lemmy was the most progressive and supportive of basic human dignity of communities I had ever followed. I have always known this was a majority male platform, but I have been relatively pleased to see that positive expressions of masculinity have won out.
All of that changed with the recent "bear vs man" debacle. I saw women get shouted down just for expressing their stories of being sexually abused, repeatedly harassed, dogpiled, and brigaded with downvotes. Some of them held their ground, for which I am proud of them, but others I saw driven to delete their entire accounts, presumably not to return.
And I get it. The bear thing is controversial; we can all agree on this. But that should never have resulted in this level of toxicity!
I am hoping by making this post I can kind of bring awareness to this weakness, so that we can learn and grow as a community. We need to hold one another accountable for this, or the gender gap on this site is just going to get worse.
Source for the hostile comments? I know that these types of people make up the minority of users, but I would still like a source for these hateful comments.
Here's my take: the bear thing is causing such a visceral reaction that it is very hard to take a step back, not take it personally and have a rational discussion about it. Even if you know the statistics. Even if you're absolutely certain you'd do the right thing (or maybe especially then).
I was exposed to a somewhat similar experience in college: while walking through the campus one evening I realised the girl in front of me was a good friend of mine, so I rushed to catch up. When she heard me she quickened her pace close to running, and only stopped when I said her name and something like "wait up!". I was just happy to meet a friend. She, on the other hand, was absolutely terrified, and told me all about it as we walked towards the exit.
That evening I realised that women experience the world much different than men. That there's an underlying level of potential violence that they evaluate and weigh against potential benefits from encounters and interactions with men in almost all social contexts. And knowing that has recalibrated my behaviour to a certain extent, as I realised women can't afford to give me the benefit of the doubt, especially in contexts where they feel vulnerable.
I wish more men would get this point, especially in their formative years. It's not a judgement on their character when women that barely know them are careful around them. Trust needs to be earned. And for a woman, the cost of misplaced trust is too damn high.
Yeah man, thanks for sharing your story, genuinely very poignant.
But at this point I genuinely don’t care about the bear thing. Women were harrased into leaving the platform, nothing was done to the accounts who did it, and that’s the story here.
Harassment should not be tolerated, period. Totally with you on this.
And thank you for the kind words.
I didn't see any abuse, but I did notice how livid some people were about the whole thing. I am still at a loss as to how the original statement could cause such outrage. I took it as some hyperbole to highlight a serious issue. That's nothing any remotely stable person takes offence at. Any guy berating other people over dumb shit like this is exactly the kind of man the original statement was about.
Here's my take: the bear thing is causing such a visceral reaction that it is very hard to take a step back, not take it personally and have a rational discussion about it.
Imo the bear thing was phrased in a way to cause that visceral reaction. It was intended to be antagonistic. If the same point was phrased the way you phrased it above, I want to believe we would have much more civil discussion about it. But instead, the posts put many male readers on the defensive and those that tried to explain were seen as defending this antagonistic stance.
That is no excuse for DM harassment or harassment on other posts, just my take on the reason the discussion turned so uncivil.
I don't think it's the phrasing. You would need an entirely different question to not elicit the response we saw. It wasn't that the question that was asked that angered people, it was that women consistently chose the bear. this question would have been a nothing burger otherwise. At the same time, though, the question was pitched because the author already knew what the answer would be. They understood how frequently unknown men pose a threat to women.
What this response from many men the shows is that most dudes are still not ready to talk about just how much more dangerous the world is for women at a baseline measurement - quite explicitly because of predatory dudes.
That evening I realised that women experience the world much different than men. That there’s an underlying level of potential violence that they evaluate and weigh against potential benefits from encounters and interactions with men in almost all social contexts. And knowing that has recalibrated my behaviour to a certain extent, as I realised women can’t afford to give me the benefit of the doubt, especially in contexts where they feel vulnerable.
Once, I noticed once I was being followed by someone on my college campus once. Sure it made me a bit anxious, but as a reasonably large male-presenting person in a place I felt relatively safe, I didn't really think they were a threat as long as I kept to crowded areas so it was just a mild discomfort. Turns out it was a random teacher (not one of mine) who just decided to try to keep pace with me because I was walking fast. At least he eventually explained himself eventually, but like isn't it obvious that you shouldn't just follow strangers around? Did he just think I wouldn't notice them following me? Are many guys that oblivious to their surroundings that they wouldn't notice? Or unaware of how that would make someone uncomfortable? Not implying you trying to catch up to a friend is comparable: just something your story reminded me of.
I think most people are somewhat oblivious to them making others feel uncomfortable because they can clearly see you and they don't feel nervous, so their brain tells them no one around them feels nervous. The more the reverse happens (them feeling followed) the more aware they'll become that they're doing it.
Very true, but I think there's something lost in translation when people go on the internet and turn "I need to be cautious around men because they might be dangerous" to "Men are dangerous," and this generalization is what causes so much of the backlash online.
I needed to read this. Thanks
I wish more men would get this point, especially in their formative years. It’s not a judgement on their character when women that barely know them are careful around them. Trust needs to be earned. And for a woman, the cost of misplaced trust is too damn high.
yeah it'd be nice, the funny thing is that this bear fiasco doesn't do a whole lot to express this point, nor does do it do a whole to not talk about it even remotely at all to people.
Doesn't help that speaking about gender broadly in classrooms is "technically not allowed anymore" because this would be a really fucking good place to be talking about it.
We seem to be shooting ourselves in the feet one step after another here, and i'm not quite sure how we got here.
The irony is that the poor behavior explains why many women would pick the bear
Yeah, it's like... The fact that it's controversial is why it's controversial.
You're either willfully ignorant or you understand to some degree where the controversy is (even if you don't necessarily in your heart agree that bear is better), and can concede that there's maybe a problem with what humanity calls "masculine."
And if you're willfully ignorant, then, that's why some people say bear. And it's also a canary in the coalmine example of this form of dangerous masculinity.
you are correct and i appreciate your comment except for
willfully
i have in fact seen some men come around. it takes some patience but it happens. :) sometimes men are young or literally just so ill exposed to feminist theory (or even femininity) that they just don’t get it on their own
I don't know that I would classify it as irony because the toxic male's response is very predictable. It's closer to a paradox. If men could universally accept women choosing the bear then would women still choose the bear?
At the surface, the strongly negative male reaction appears as a subset for why the bear is chosen but upon further exploration it reveals itself as the ultimate example for why the bear is preferred; many men cannot accept female agency.
At the same time the question reveals the rawest example of toxic masculinity. Despite the toxic males perspective that unlike women, they are not highly emotional creatures, the reality they present of themselves is they are not only highly emotional but are unable or unwilling to control their emotions.
The bear scenario is the perfect division inducing shitstorm.
It’s understandable what the memes portrays the danger that women face, daily. The fact that they frequently don’t feel comfortable or even just basic safety is definitely valid and worth discussion.
However, the bear vs man thing was just the worst vehicle to induce that discussion. On one side men who may not be the most well informed about women issues; will get immediately defensive at being compared to a large animal known for tearing people apart and eating them alive.
The members of the other side who see all the angry men getting defensive at them for expressing this view and think it’s purely because they aren’t empathetic to these issue, they “hate” women or they’re marginalising what is a real and daily danger.
Of course there are actual trolls, toxic arseholes and people who have 0 interest actual discourse or understanding but fuck them, I agree ban em.
It was never going to end in a productive, calm or rational discussion and frankly I think tarring the entire of lemmy for it is equally as unproductive. I’ve seen plenty of people initially aggressive to the meme, come around. I’ve seen more and more people make light jokes about the same meme without the accusatory tone. If you want discourse theres space to do so; it just has to be done better(imo). Preferably without snark or accusatory tones.
Okay, but, speaking as a woman, we try to explain these issues nicely, with gentle terminology and a big helping of ‘not all of you, but some of you…’ and we get ignored, dismissed, belittled, or flat-out gaslit.
So, we try going for the shock value to get you to at least pay attention instead of dismissing what we say as background noise or ‘us silly little women worrying our silly little heads over nothing’. And then we get told we can’t talk like that, that it’s insulting, that no man would listen because we’re belittling them, that it ‘doesn’t foster discussion’.
Although at least you heard us say something so many of us take it as a small win…
So, honest question. How do we explain it to you, so we don’t offend you, but you actually hear us? Actually get an idea of what it means to be afraid of footsteps behind us when we go out at night? To get leered at when all we’re trying to do is get a good workout at the gym? To have men just take liberties, like touching us, grabbing us? To not want to mention that we are a woman online, especially in gaming circles, because of the sexist bullshit and dismissive attitudes that will inevitably show up and run us out of a group we just want to be in because we like the game, damnit?
To weigh the decision to even make a post like this, because I know it will be brigaded and will attract sexist jerks who will try to shout me down? Or even attract stalkers who will follow me across instances to harass me?
Please, tell me how. Because we want you to understand. We don’t want to chase people away from discussions. But it’s so hard, and gets so discouraging…
When you're arguing on an online space large enough for a position that doesn't yet have overwhelming support, you're always going to get some pushback of some kind. It's never going to be completely pleasant. The silver lining is that, if you're arguing for your positions well enough, you're going to bring some more people to your side each time. Many of them will not be vocal, many of them will have to meditate of what you've said, for many of them it will just be a fleeting thought, but it might be a stepping stone that leads them to actually change their mind in a later discussion. I have this mindset because it's coherent with how I've changed my mind over the years after engaging with different people, and so, when I'm advocating for something on a space that isn't overwhelmingly welcoming (which might usually be autism advocacy, anti-capitalism, secularism, depending on the site), and I'm in a tempered mood at the moment, I immediately assume that I'm going to get pushback even on things that I'm objectively correct, but that doesn't mean I'm not making useful progress, so I should argue with more charitability than I think the other person deserves.
On the gender issues topic specifically. Discounting a minority of people whom you're never going to make see reason, your goal is to make your positions understandable to the men who either don't have a strong opinion yet or are only mildly hostile. I'm going to use the example of an user I saw the other day out of memory: picture a man who has had an aggressively mediocre life: few meaningful relationships if any, no romantic or sexual partners, hating his job or whatever it is he's studying, he hasn't (or hasn't seen himself having) acted particularly mean towards anyone in his life but he has particularly vivid memories of women or girls provoking him pain (be they a rude teacher, an abusive mother, high school bullies, or whatever). Now picture him reading these two messages:
(...) Life feels very unsafe to me. I have been catcalled, had my opinions dismissed and driven out of spaces I wanted to be in ever since my teens, (...) There are always some men who make the world a dangerous place for me.
and
(...) Life feels very unsafe to me. I have been catcalled, had my opinions dismissed and driven out of spaces I wanted to be in ever since my teens, (...) Men make the world a dangerous place for me.
I've made the nuance very obvious here, but it will usually be far more subtle. Sometimes it will be someone not making their position as fair and impartial as possible, sometimes it'll be that they literally do not realize their words might be misinterpreted, but a good chunk of the individual shitshows I've seen in the past few days here are easily understandable if I picture someone saying: "I've been a sad shit for my whole life without harming anyone, and if anything, I've been treated unfairly. And now you're telling me I'm the culprit!?", and the difficulties of this guy through his life might have been several degrees less severe than your own, but if he's misunderstood what you're saying, or the message he's read is less charitable, or if the person he's just read has been perfectly reasonable, but five minutes ago he's read a different message from someone else who hasn't been, which twists the context, he isn't entirely wrong, because he was minding his own business but now he feels accusations fall upon him out of nowhere.
On the bear argument specifically. Ignore the goddamn bear. You can make a lot of good arguments about why choosing the bear is wrong, and this derails PLENTY of discussions that could otherwise be useful and meaningful into a stunlock where one side wants to argue about why some people choose one way, and the other about the specific hypothetical. Don't go into "(...) and that's why I'd choose the bear", ignore the metaphor, redirect the conversation in an useful direction, such as the actual living experiences of women, what kind of society would you want to see and what kind of specific changes would you like to see people make.
This advocacy is almost never going to be completely pleasant. This isn't a justification, or discouragement, it's just acknowledgement of the fact that plenty of people are going to be predisposed against your position, or skeptical, or outright hostile, and you personally are not going to see the fruits of your own, individual, specific labour, because whatever useful progress you make will be brewing on the background. Plenty of people whom you've made think will perhaps upvote you at best, but very, very few will admit "You've completely changed my mind on this", but that doesn't mean what you're doing isn't useful. Sometimes you won't make the perfect argument, because you don't have the exact perspective of what the other side is thinking, and because no human is omniscient, and you might have to rethink nuances, strategies and approaches, but engaging other people with the ultimate goal of creating a society where everyone is accepted in equality and freedom is always, on the long run, worthwhile.
This is an excellent analysis of the reasoning that led into this. Thank you for sharing.
Plenty of people are dismissing this as “ragebait,” which, sure. But like, what on earth is more rage-worthy than systemic rape culture and silencing of women?
There is definitely a time and place for tone policing. But that’s never the exact minute a woman expresses her lived experience in a way that actually grabs attention. ❤️
I really appreciate that you made this post. Every top-level comment here is complaining about it being "rage bait" and that the question would "never foster productive discussion." Why? Why aren't men capable of seeing the scenario, recognizing why it's necessary to say something like that, and getting over themselves just a little bit to get the point? The original question wasn't even a "not all men" thing, there's no actual reason to get mad about it enough to dismiss the dicussion. We have to be able to have a conversation where the other side is allowed to say something a tiny bit outside of our standards for what we want them to say, or we'll never have a conversation at all.
I just want to let you know that when women share their experiences, some men like me will process what they've read and understand, and not reply or anything. I don't have anything to add. I'm probably part of a large silent group.
That was before the bear thing. I actually hadn't even seen the bear meme.
When I read a woman share her experiences, I just get sad about it all and move to the next post in my Lemmy feed or whatever I'm reading on the internet.
Okay, but, speaking as a woman, we try to explain these issues nicely, with gentle terminology and a big helping of ‘not all of you, but some of you…’ and we get ignored, dismissed, belittled, or flat-out gaslit.
ok so, as a result of the bear debate, i wouldn't exactly say it was all roses and sunshine over there, probably a thunderstorm and bristles more like.
I think most people want the statement laid out very literally in front of them. Usually being pretty fucking obtuse about shit, tends to get peoples attention. Sitting in a corner and vaguely looking in the direction of someone isn't going to.
maybe i'm just really fucking autistic or something, but if that shit doesn't work, i wouldn't do it. I'd click into a thread titled "men raping women is a problem" and see what's going on, and chances are, it's going to be more civil than the bear incident.
i'd be up for just fucking talking about it. I'm sure a number of other people would as well. You aren't going to appease everyone, that's impossible, you just need to appease the majority. And frankly, anybody who is reading about "hey uhm, rape bad, no do?" and gets fucking pissed off about it? They're probably not a good person to be honest.
genuinely, i just think straight up, open conversation about it. People can't play nice? Don't let em, i guess? there are a few options there. I'm not an admin/mod, so don't ask me lol.
Yeah at this point I don’t care about the bear thing. So two weeks ago. I do however care about the abject harrassment that happened. Thank you for your perspective.
Sure. However, the two aren’t unrelated. Not that it justifies the harassment you’ve seen (which as mentioned mods are pretty solid on most instances but reports help them a lot). Given what shitshow it turned into it’s clear that more conversations around the topic are needed. I think those type of people will still pop their head up. When they do, if the entire conversation isn’t already a shitfight because of how it was initiated, these type will be easier to identify and ban. Focusing solely on the outcome and ignoring how we got here only ensures it will be repeated. Lemmy is growing still, there will be challenges on the way.
On one side men who may not be the most well informed about women issues; will get immediately defensive at being compared to a large animal known for tearing people apart and eating them alive.
I don’t think I’ll ever understand this reaction. I can only assume it’s stupidity leading these people to think all men are being accused of this.
Well, all men are being accused of this. Rightfully so. From my point of view, the scenario illustrates that a woman has to consider a man that she doesn't know to be at least as dangerous to her own personal safety as a bear and act accordingly. Even men she knows well may still attack her.
Statistically, the odds of being attacked in any particular scenario may be small, but they're definitely not zero. Similar to encountering a bear. Bear spray is a deterrent in both scenarios.
On one side men who may not be the most well informed about women issues; will get immediately defensive at being compared to a large animal known for tearing people apart and eating them alive.
Nah. Defensiveness in this context is a red flag because it is transparently obvious why a woman would choose the bear. It needn't be a strictly rational choice; it's a vote of no confidence in men earned through lived experience. The fact that it's even a question should be a seen by men as deeply sad: a reminder of the work that must still be done. The very act of trying to convince a woman of the error of her choice is a sign of a failure to understand the nature of the problem, the exercise, or both.
large animal known for tearing people apart and eating them alive
This is by no means what bears are known for. Black bears will frighten off easily. Brown bears are dangerous, yes, but much depends on the nature of the encounter.
It was never going to end in a productive, calm or rational discussion
It already has, but thanks for the self report?
Every time I see something about that bear vs man thing it just turns into a shitload of people straw-manning the hell out of the opposing gender. The whole thing is fucking stupid.
It's almost like it was planted to make men and women mad at each other for no reason. Fuel it with bots and bad faith arguments and it's a tempest in a teapot
It’s almost like it was planted
I swear the left gets more conspiratorial every day. There doesn't have to be some grand plan to sow dissent. Dissent is something that just happens naturally because this conflict is deeply ingrained in our culture. Nobody has to scheme to make it happen.
I wouldn't call it "planned", average people do stupid things all the time, and I wouldn't blame the average person for not realizing the bear thing wouldn't help get the points of each side across. I just wish more people acknowledged that arguing about the hypothetical is pointless, and we should actually discuss gender issues, personal experiences and how to make things better.
people have been asking "would you rather" questions since before Plato.
Divide and conquer
To be a woman online means to feel unwelcome. Leaving a new community is pretty much inevitable unless you are willing to swim in toxicity.
I've lost count of how many 'welcoming' communities for game/hobby/interest that I have left because of the inevitable creep of (male) toxicity and harassment.
And it sucks to watch so many people not speak up, and to be targeted for further harassment simply because I said rape jokes weren't funny. (Or tying and drugging up a woman so T could have a girlfriend, if the group I play online games with are stalking my account read this. You guys are part of the problem.)
I just want liked minded people to share my interests and play games with.
I, and other women shouldn't have to navigate or ignore toxicity to simply exist in public spaces.
[Downvotes prove my statement. I'm not welcome or wanted, I get it. See you after my funeral.]
Thank you for expressing this experience. 🧡
To be a woman online means to feel unwelcome.
i think this is a rather interesting take, as someone who lives on the social fringes myself, and has no "support network" or real "social group" I'm what's best described as a social drifter, i don't like hanging around places all that much, and i don't like, and or am incapable of having proper friendships with others.
So when it comes to feeling unwelcome, for all intents and purposes here, i'm just going to argue that for the latter half of my life, that has been pretty much my experience of life. This also means i don't have certain types of experiences with people being dicks, because i can just fucking ignore them. But what i do understand, is how the isolation plays a factor, and how to pretty effectively deal with people you don't like in these situations.
And what i've learned is that you need to keep a distance. You shouldn't be attached to the community if possible, because being able to leave them is often a valuable asset to have. Notably, it doesn't solve the problem but it does keep you nomadic, and in control, which helps alleviate it.
Also for what it's worth, i don't think that this is uniquely female. I think it's a unique female account of the problem, but men also experience similar things. They just happen to be in different manners, so this is very much an "internet problem" more broadly.
Has been for the past 20 years, and will probably continue to be as such.
I don't actually want to be nomadic, I'd love nothing more than to have a group of gaming friends that lasts. Inevitably, each time finding a new group gets harder.
I have no support network, No real social group either. I am for all intent and purpose a ghost. My opinions don't matter, my presence isn't wanted. No one notices when I leave.
Don't wack yourself kid. Your too much into the whole business. If I was you, I'd turn off all media, and go and involve yourself in the real world. I don't know what the bear thing is, but I do know that your gonna come across men and women who are not nice in life. Just keep looking for the good ones. 🙂. Keep your chin up.
IME of online communities it was the women who supported the abusers in the community and ostracized anyone who called them out as 'attacking the community'. Quite a few of them were also abusive.
I am a cis male mod of multiple communities here on Lemmy and all I can say is that I try to moderate as fairly and equitably as I can, but I also don't have time to read every single comment on every single post in the communities I moderate, so you have to flag posts you find violate community rules. Every community I moderate has a civility rule, and shouting down or harassing women who are telling personal stories would be against those rules.
But I may not know that it's happening unless it's getting flagged.
You can't moderate women's perspectives getting constantly downvoted while men's get upvoted. I doubt any of the comments OP mentioned actually violate any rules but getting ten comments ignorantly telling you you're wrong whenever you share your perspective tends to make one feel unwelcome even if the comments are all technically civil.
Good insight. While there definitely was quite a bit of rule-breaking comments (largely now acted on as of today), the consistent wall of "technically respectful" disrespect did not help and provided a level of camouflage for the very bad actors to get by.
It doesn’t matter friend, nothing is enough because the bottom line is they what Lemmy to be better than Reddit and that’s a problem because that’s impossible in that Lemmy is a decentralized system of instances and there will never be a single standard across them all when it comes to moderation for topics like this post.
All you can do is try your best to find/maintain good instances that reflect your values
🖕🏻🖕🏻🖕🏻🖕🏻 guess you can't handle a fucking emoji
https://theangryblackwoman.com/2008/02/12/the-privilege-of-politeness/
politeness is a social construct that disenfranchises the rightfully pissed. idk who is moderating here but they are clearly dumb as a box of brix if they think they're helping anything by blocking my comments that are clearly constructive as well as profane
If you are not willing to follow the rules of this community clearly outlined in the sidebar, moderation action will be taken as necessary.
Your original comment, which was removed by another moderator, was a very clear attack towards the OC; Do note that attacks directed towards other users are not allowed in this community.
You are free to share your views in this community as long as they adhere to the community and this instance's rules. However, if your views on "civility/politeness" means you are complicit in attacking other users here, you are free to contribute elsewhere on the internet.
the challenge with lemmy is its immaturity with moderation, and many instances allowing pretty vile members and communities to flourish, which then spill over into other less extreme communities
Same goes for harassing those men who rejected the notion of the meme with civility.
Plenty of simple trolls trying to insert the word "incel" wherever they can, and plenty of people trying to invalidate everything men have to say.
Lemmy is becoming more known, and with that comes the point at which bots and trolls emerge. We have to respond accordingly - and remember to be united and civil, even in disagreements.
And yes, ragebait content should be banned. The bear hypothetical is one of those, since it does imply anti-male sentiment, but does it in a way that can be minimized to "women just complaining". It is a very malicious attempt at generating a lot of hostility, to the point where it's hard even to give benefit of the doubt.
As per "how we attract women" in particular, I think the most important part is to make Lemmy less about tech and politics and more about all sorts of hobbies, occupations, and a fun time. While women are very welcome in the tech and politics spaces, those spaces are historically dominated by men, and for as long as those are the pillars of the Lemmy conversations, we'll see this gap over and over.
We can't take bias in support of women just to attract more of them on the platform, this won't end well. We need to protect everyone from the harassment and trolling, regardless of gender.
my favorite irony is those who are supposedly 'agasint the patriarchy', are the very same one who are so fervent in their use of it when it comes to putting down men and 'keeping them in their place'.
"But have you thought about challenging a man who does?"
This was one of the comments in response to me calling the post divisive.
The only people defending this garbage meme are troglodytes. Plenty of trogs in this thread.
Seems to me that the rage bait did it's job, but the only who won was the author and website that got all the clicks and ads serving, while lemmy got a shitstorm for nothing.
This is the equivalent of saying that MS Outlook is a community. It's not and neither is Lemmy. Each server has its own rules, and each community on those servers can add rules beyond that.
Address a specific community or server, there's no central control over the fediverse.
This bear thing has got out of hand lmao
The bear thing was rage bait to spread hate. Hate against men, reactionary hate against women, presumably hate against bears.
People shouldn’t have dignified the ridiculous scenario with a response.
This here is the biggest woosh that supports the whole thesis of the hypothetical. It was never meant to be a logical hypothetical. It's intended to elucincidate a prevailing feeling among women about what they perceive as safer. The fact that this still has to be explained after so many days is....I don't know.
all you have to do is say 'men are bad mmmkay?' and nod along with the majority opinion and get your subsequent pat on the back.
The right to bear men.
god what i would give
Ahem, the right to manbearpig. Whatever that means...
People get really upset over a hypothetical. I don't like posts that put all men down, but this wasn't one of them.
Also bears generally mind their own business as long as you keep your distance, with statistically less than one person per year dying from a bear attack in America. The last time it happened in my state was several years ago and due to some dumbass intentionally getting close to it to take photos.
People keeps downplaying the situation as a "hypothetical". Plenty of comments can be made in the hypothetical that should be reacted to, and some hypothetical comments can even get you sent to jail. Tbh
Literally saw a bear this weekend and it just kinda minded it's own business and wandered away. Can't say the same about a lot of men.
i hate that i'm still commenting about this, because i know whats going to happen, but maybe im just too fucking autistic for this shit.
"bears generally mind their own business" and humans generally don't rape other humans. It bothers me that people talk about the bears statistically, as if that somehow overrides the statistics present with humans. But then again, that's not the point. The point is something entirely different, and the problem is people don't really understand how to express it properly.
it just feels wrong to pull out stats for bears, and then ignore the existing stats for humans. I mean surely human to human interactions, and bear to human interactions, like interaction interactions, are probably not statistically all that different?
Someone might have been to the woods several times without encountering a bear but also have been assaulted multiple times. The same person could've seen a bear irl and had it move along without incident. Statistics probably aren't what they think of first in the scenario.
I mean surely human to human interactions, and bear to human interactions, like interaction interactions, are probably not statistically all that different?
You don't like that the person you're replying to didn't give you the comparison information you desire but instead of doing your own research and bringing the results here you're suggesting "surely" you've already got the answer you want?
because hypotheticals are clean, not messy.
it's easy to be against incest hypothetically. it's a lot harder to be against it if your sister asks you to have sex with you.
If my sister asked to have sex with me I'd be worried about her, not horny
Sounds like a you problem.
Wtf is wrong with you
The bear thing; good god, yes... the number of people just not getting it was/is incredible. It's a good example of how arguing for the logical position completely misses out on any nuance over why someone might say they're choosing, for example, the bear.
I know some of it is folks having difficulty reading between the lines, spectrum stuff, male socialising, etc etc... but man. That was a tough one
It’s because of the way it was presented, which is very much a “you are enlightened, or you are the monster”. This is not the reality of the situation of choosing the bear and is as disingenuous as the incel arguments.
amen. the whole thing is bad faith.
There's a similar concept that has sprung up in discission around here about how basically all women have a sense of danger around men they don't know or the ones obviously being creepy.
Way too many people here think that without a form of physical assault involved, taking measures to distance yourself from someone you get a bad feeling about is sexism and as bad as racism because not all men are bad.
Like, if I'm walking down a sidewalk and the person walking towards me decides to cross the street because I'm a man, I get it. It's not hard to grasp that some people don't want to be close to someone who might objectify them.
But I've been in probably 5 separate arguments on lemmy about how women who do that are misandrist garbage because every man deserves a shot and you should always give men the benefit of the doubt.
There's definitely a higher concentration of man-centric conversation here.
Like, if I’m walking down a sidewalk and the person walking towards me decides to cross the street because I’m a man, I get it. It’s not hard to grasp that some people don’t want to be close to someone who might objectify them.
I feel insulted because I've never hurt anyone in my life enough to even remotely justify this, and also because some men I would be cautious about usually don't get the same treatment. At least it takes them more time and effort to get it, LOL.
my working theory is that is that it was doomed from the start, I saw quite a number of people not immediately understanding it, probably due to lack of experience. And in response, people immediately re-iterating the statement made in the post above, i guess somehow hoping that it would make sense the second time it was said. Though people did explain why they were saying what they were saying. It didn't explain why anybody was talking about bears in the woods, which is inevitably kind of irrelevant. The second post that resulted later down the line was better, and the recent meme has been quite a bit better, except for my criticism of vague statements. (please for the love of god, stop using vague statements, they help nobody. Just talk about what you're talking about, some of us don't fucking understand ok?)
I'm not really sure what people were thinking to be honest, oh and of course it devolved into "well, you're part of the problem" I'm sure that didn't help.
Maybe i'm autistic, but like, i don't know why people kept screaming metaphor at people expecting it to suddenly make sense to them. That's not how english class works, im pretty sure.
I want to put out there, that as a man I shared my story... And I was down voted and disrespected.
So you can probably remove 'for women' in the title. Lemmy is very much an echo chamber. You don't have to look around very hard to see that there's a large amount of intolerance on Lemmy.
Yep. The gendered disrespect has gone both ways unfortunately. I am sorry to hear you went through that, no one should have to.
Except it's not an echo chamber. I've seen a great variety of comments on the issue at hand. If you haven't, check out some other communities. And downvotes are different from intolerance. Of course intolerance can exist (if you're getting blocked or direct messaged, for example), but that's not what you experienced.
And the question is not whether intolerance exists "here", because it probably does in some communities some of the time. That's not surprising. We're on the internet. The question is whether it's worse "here" than it was on Reddit, and if it is, what can or should be done about that.
I haven't seen any data indicating any trend on the issue. If people have different experiences, that's just to be expected, and we should sympathize with people getting harassed, but we shouldn't assume the sky is falling when it's not.
You ended your comment with "but I'll get down voted because of the circle jerk" and ended up with a whopping -2. Seems reasonable.
i'd like to make this about me, a man, who will think of the men etc etc
Case in point
Mistake number one is sharing anything about yourself online. There's wackos everywhere, just make shit up and look at memes.
And then when get people get mad at your made up shit, it's funnier.
ironically when you make shit up, people believe you.
when you tell them truth stuff, they say you are making it up.
Also porn, dont forget about porn pls.
“… make shit up and look at memes.” Wise words.
I think the distributed nature of the Fediverse is a big part of it. Lot of moderation policies at play, on a lot of different instances and some allow some real jerks to flourish and spill out elsewhere. I have zero tolerance for any of that garbage and am very quick with my block/ban buttons, but those are only effective on my own instance or the few communities I moderate outside that.
OP, best I can suggest is to report them. Most of the communities I interact with are pretty responsive to those kinds of reports and similarly don't tolerate it. Mods, unfortunately, can't read every comment and often rely on reports to know when to look deeper/take action.
And don't feel bad about blocking the jerks. There's a lot of them, lol.
best i can suggest is to report them
good, please do likewise. that’s an excellent start :)
Regarding Man v Bear I think the topic is rather silly. Most bears aren't looking to have a meet and greet if you do come across a bear one of three things are true. It's here to eat you, it didn't leave because its a she-bear and it has cubs its protecting, or you just startled it. If any of the above is true you are at best in serious danger. If it is actually trying to prey upon you then you are probably fucked. Whereas 100% of the bears you surprise in the woods are extremely dangerous 99.99% of people you meet man or woman are just people like yourself not looking for trouble.
It's not shocking that the 99.9% of men who aren't predators waiting in the bush feel justified in feeling unfairly vilified.
My proverbial beef isn't the pointing out of how manny men are predators and that the risksfor women are non-zero; my problem more specifically is that the meme stacks handily on top of the already vexing racial profiling I deal with as a black man who's had false allegations leveled in the past and lost jobs because of the weaponization of this fear. I have already spent damn near a half century being presumed some kind of feral Mandingo rape beast purely for existing while black. The presumption of interest in all of these women like a scene out of Kentucky Fried Movie gets really old and they get super vindictive when rejected.
Yeah that’s what I found the most surprising. Even after you understand what women really mean in this thought experiment, it’s just textbook discrimination and no different than targeting certain races as a cop.
I thought as a society we all agreed that was bad but apparently it’s okay if the victims are men.
So this thought experiment does reveal sexism, the sexism against men.
I feel for you, the casual racism and sexism against black men is pretty crazy. Used to work with a guy that wore a suit every day in a very casual office, because women wouldn't get on the elevator with him otherwise.
Yep. It's incredibly fucked up to think how prevalent that 1920s horseshit still is in many people's minds 100 years later.
People still seem to think Birth of a Nation is a documentary.
This was moving to read. It’s a fucked up situation, thank you for sharing.
Everything you mention is one strange assumption after another.
Dunno man. I'm not a woman, but I have met a bear while hiking. We just stopped and looked at each other for a bit, then he grunted and went back to shoveling blackberries into his mouth and I just walked away. They are pretty common in the city too. They just knock down five or so garbages to pig out then go home. We've had a few tranqued and moved but nobody has been eaten. One guy got mauled and somehow survived after failing to take a selfie with a bear, I figure he went easy on the guy to teach him a valuable lesson. Maybe bears and the people here are just too used to each other.
Anyway anyone who feels attacked by the whole I'd rather a bear thing needs to stop being a pansy little shit. I guess all these "not me though" or "but a bear will kill you" types don't get that they are outing themselves as being of questionable trustworthiness. The bear is imaginary yet men all over the place have come out of the woodwork to fight it. It's weird really. And I don't believe such a high amount of men who aren't predators are bothered by it. They might not be sexual predators but I have no doubt they would gladly vote away womens rights because its their party or its the christian way or some other shit like that.
Truly innocent men would just leave women scared of them alone and that would be the end of it. There is no reason to convince them and doing so only makes them more afraid.
if you get offended by being called a predator, you are definitely a predator, checkmate bearists.
Anyway anyone who feels attacked by the whole I’d rather a bear thing needs to stop being a pansy little shit.
I mean, the casual misandry stung a bit. Not sure why that'd make me a "pansy little shit", lmao.
Anyway, the whole thing was ragebait and a big part of the internet fell for it (me included, at least initially).
I'm not engaging further with what I think is a bad analogy.
I guess all these “not me though” or “but a bear will kill you” types don’t get that they are outing themselves as being of questionable trustworthiness.
Maybe outing themselves as pedants who don't like shitty analogies. How do you get from disagreeing with labeling all men predators to ... must be a predator. That just seems like you glued two concepts together and expected it to make a coherent thought. If A in some universe and B in some universe then if A thus B.
I don’t believe such a high amount of men who aren’t predators are bothered by it
I'm not a predator. I'm bothered by it
They might not be sexual predators
So because I disagree I might be a rapist. Super real there.
but I have no doubt they would gladly vote away women's rights because its their party or its the christian way or some other shit like that.
I'm an Atheist who votes Democrat and supports women's rights
Truly innocent men would just leave women scared of them alone
This is a discussion forum. The poster started a thread to discuss the topic. I'm discussing the topic. Nobody is attacking anyone with their words.
There is no reason to convince them
This is a many to many discussion forum people aren't just engaging with the poster they are engaging with other readers interested in the same topic. Notice how our discussion is a sub-thread to each other and merely about the topic broached by the original poster.
doing so only makes them more afraid.
You are infantalizing the poster by imagining that she creates a topic but is rendered afraid by the mere fact that some people don't agree with her. I don't think that is even slightly reasonable.
This post could be a subject of an entire paper on how to write dishonestly and for emotional impact instead of honest argument. Please stop doing this.
Anyway anyone who feels attacked by the whole I’d rather a bear thing needs to stop being a pansy little shit.
to pull a page out of a book that some fuck that spent an entire thread worth of material to yell at me for being homophobic over.
I would just like to share with the world that "pansy" is technically used to refer to "fags" specifically. So do with that what you will.
I love the casual entitlement of using a "Lemmy is growing more hostile towards women" to just give your opinion on Man v Bear.
I guess that's not entirely true, since you did use your last sentence to tell them they deserve it.
The poster brought up the man vs bear debate it was the entire topic of discussion. This is the last sentence in my post.
It’s not shocking that the 99.9% of men who aren’t predators waiting in the bush feel justified in feeling unfairly vilified.
Please explain how I told them they deserve it. Use small words.
Narrowminded cisgender ragebait did what? Please tell me it ain't so!
The bear thing isn't controversial, it's just ragebait. You ragebait, you get rage. It is not a serious argument, which is why it constantly has to spark as ragebait over in the meme communities. The people taking it as a serious argument are making their serious arguments look bad.
This was such obvious rage bait, I skipped over it the first few times, but it kept coming back. So, who’s toxic now, the rage bait demonizing an entire gender because some are bad, or all the deniers/haters? I hate to say both sides, but both sides should have dropped this rage bait and opened their discussions in a more serious thread
you wouldn't believe if i didn't tell you, because you wouldn't know about it (some light humor, humor me, ok sorry sorry.)
I've been having some conversations with people in these threads, and i've had a few long winded very civil threads. It's literally just the sensational aspects being sensationalized that are causing problems lol.
It was so obvious bait to dumb misogynists it was painful, which isnt to say that if I posted "If I found myself alone in the forest with a bear or a feminist I'd pick the bear because it cant destroy my life with a baseless allegation of sexual assault" that the feminists wouldnt have bitten just as hard.
Rage means engage. Any time someone is trying to piss me off I look for the money. Are they getting booked on talk shows? Is there a book? Do they do speaking tours? Do they have a sponsored podcast?...
The most charitable interpretation is that the original bear vs man was to spark conversation. Making it ragebait/controversial increases spread exposing it to more people and potentially educating more of the population.
The downside to ragebaiting, is that now the people who need to learn most are raging, have their defenses up and miss the point entirely. They then get argumentative, and now the pro-bear side has their defenses up too. And then we have a vicious rage cycle... and now here we are
Just a doubt. Isn't rage bait the whole tactic of andrew tate and his like? Why is it qualified to be called misogynistic but this is not misandrist?
DISCLAIMER: I DON'T LIKE TATE, NOT ENDORSING OR SUPPORTING HIM. JUST FOUND THIS THING CONFUSING ME RECENTLY. PLS PROVIDE NON TROLL ANSWERS. I'M AWARE THE BEST WAY TO DEAL WITH CONSTANT RAGE BAITERS IS TO BAN THEM LIKE TATE.
because in this case it isn't about hating men, there seems to be a few subtexts about hating men. So it's technically misandry adjacent more than anything.
Yep. I agree. I’ve been bullied on Lemmy for sharing the fact that I have been bullied in my own home town because local law enforcement hired exes of mine who have abused their law enforcement powers. I now have a person, or group, that follows each of my posts and comments to immediately downvote them, even if they aren’t even controversial. I just receive an automatic downvote. That pales in comparison to the verbal bashing I’ve received from that group, or person. Each time I speak out, I have this one commenter that tells me that I’m crazy and need meds to make me shut up about having been abused by an ex that was hired by our local sheriff’s department. I wonder if they sniffed my phone to follow my account. I guess that would be crazy and just earn me more hateful comments from “random” people on Lemmy, huh? My question is, do I blame Lemmy as a whole, or will people on here finally admit that some certain local in my area is stalking my account?
When comments have become as bad as “strangers” telling me to “get raped with a rusty lawn mower blade”, I have to wonder if it’s all coming from the same IP address and if the mods even care.
I've not even heard of this issue you are talking about. Maybe it's not representative of the Lemmy experience as a whole? Besides, most social media postings seem fake as hell. Why put any emphasis on what people have to say. I think walking away is probably the healthiest thing you can do. No one is going to fix this place or any place for that matter.
it may not be representative of the whole, but it is certainly representative of underlying failures of moderation policy, as @breadsmasher said.
you are encouraging me to just be quiet about people being harrassed when moderation failure is a fixable problem. i can’t in good conscience do that.
I definitely do not want to quiet anyone. Other than maybe myself from time to time (you know, before I've said it; maybe I'm too late this time, maybe not). I just don't see how you fix this ultimately. But, since I don't know the specific harassment you are referring to, I'll simply refer to your comments. I trust what you've said. I don't want you to hide what you want to say, but I also want to say how I feel about it.
There is literally nothing better about the clientele of this platform than reddit except people are nicer and probably less miserable on average in the comments. If anything its users are less socialized and more insular - e.g. I use linux server extensively for work where it controls most of the internet, but most of the hot takes here about linux here are beyond stupid. If anything, between Lemmy and reddit, the users here are even more convinced they're knowledgeable and infallible connoisseurs, if that's even possible. So when fallout does happen, it's generally more ugly.
Also, the bear thing is not controversial - except with infantile man-children. Those people don't get to represent a demographic.
The bear thing is controversial because people are interpreting the core of the question differently and assuming everyone understands the question the same way. Some people view the question as fundamentally "which are you more afraid of?" while others view the question to be "which is more dangerous to interact with?" The answer you give and your justification will depend on the question your answering. If your conversation partner is viewing the question through the other lense both your answer and reasoning will sound idiotic. People who claim the other side is just plain wrong aren't trying to understand why the other side might have their "wrong" position. People who claim the other side don't understand them should look to demonstrate to the other side that they can understand their viewpoint, down to the core interpretation of the question, so that they can lead them back up through an alternate interpretation of the question and into their own perspective.
Nope, there's nothing controversial about it. If you're in a wooded area with a bear and a man you're more likely to be harmed by a man. Doesn't matter how you view the question, just matters how much of a basement dweller you are.
Edit: By nothing controversial - no mainstream news or popular opinion pieces or the general public at large don't understand it. There is no controversy. Be insular on the internet all you want, I'm not attacking your opinions. But controversial is not this.
controversial
i mean it depends on how you define it, if it causes controversy. It's literally controversial. It doesn't matter how stupid people are, if there is a controversy, it is controversial. period.
i use windows for all my company services.
I missed the kerfuffle, but my $0.02 is Lemmy is still in infancy. It's also a federated system made up of different instances, some of which - and you know who I mean - aren't as cool.
So utilize the tools provided, reporting, blocking, etc. and find the communities you like. /$0.02
You’re telling me that something that was intentionally supposed to induce division between normal ass people is inducing division between people?
Oh no!
Anyway, moral of the story, don’t get caught up in silly ass things like this. It was created to do exactly what it is doing.
There have been plenty of (subtly) misogynistic comments on Lemmy long before the bear thing
The point that I’m making though, is that there will ALWAYS be bad actors. There will ALWAYS be a group of people who are just hateful, and will do or say anything to upset others, because they have nothing in their life that gives them actual happiness.
So, to me, this whole man vs bear thing is just incredibly stupid, and I am shocked so many people would get so upset about it, from either side!
It truly worked, and that’s more sad than anything else here.
The bear thing is misandry because it groups all man as bad.
Not even about Man v Bear, but just seeing all the casual misogyny on Lemmy is extremely exhausting to me. It’s so clearly obvious that Lemmy as a whole is dominated by men. There are no spaces here for women. It’s why I still frequent Reddit, because at least there are communities there that are more diverse. I really want Lemmy to take off more, but I just don’t get enjoyment out of this platform, after the initial hype died off.
Anyway, I’m really glad you posted this, OP. I think it’s incredibly important to foster a diverse community. Unfortunately the diversity just isn’t there, and I’m unsure as to how to help that. As it is now, I can’t recommend Lemmy to my other friends who identify as women.
Absolutely. I think the powder keg of a problem has always been here, it's just recently that there has been an opportunity to show those colors en masse.
and I’m unsure as to how to help that.
as of recent i've started following eudaimonia on dbzer0. It's been a rather pleasant space so far, though pretty dead as it's a recent sub.
Spaces like that specifically dedicated to shit that isn't sensationalized is probably what's going to help. And the fact that it's specifically structured around that one concept, also helps to keep things in check.
Ultimately, i think the problem is more broad than just lemmy itself, i think it's actually an issue with social media in particular. It really just feeds this kind of interaction like government regulations when lobby money is introduced in the US. The only real solution here i think is anti-social media type communities.
life is casual misogyny.
I think regardless of the platform it will get ugly when topics are controversial. How ugly it gets is mostly depending on the level of moderation. It doesn't need many trolls or ill willing people to derail a discussion among hundreds of good meaning people.
We also tend to concentrate on the things we consider unfavorable. If among 100 comments 5 are sexist, these 5 will get far more attention than the other 95.
I mean, I've seen people uttering death threads on YouTube, because the YouTuber used butter in a recipe, not margarine. One of several hundred comments under that video, but the only one I remember...
The whole "bear vs. man" thing proved that there are still a lot of people out there totally unable to get over themselves. On one side you see people piling on women not knowing the everyday struggle the average woman goes through everyday, on the other side there are people that get mad at memes not accepting that the statement was meant to be over the top in the first place, so it's ok to find irony in it
the response to the bear vs man thing is basically proof why most women chose bear.
Responses like the one OP is talking about were for sure, but since those weren't the only kind of critical responses I wouldn't band the whole thing together
people who are unable to get over themselves:
also people, unable to get over themselves: "you are actually just like hitler"
(this is satire, i'm not legitimately comparing hitler to you people, calm down.)
the irony will never cease to be indescribably funny to me.
If the fear for a typical woman is this bad, then we need to be better about teaching boys. I’m a pretty empathetic person, just ask my new very rapidly made female best friend. But despite the wife, and a few pretty damn close female friends, close mom, sister…. The fears expressed in my short reading on the current discussion have never been as clearly communicated, well the fear was definitely clear, but not the magnitude.
I agree with the sentiment that it’s just a bad premise. It puts everyone straight into a defensive posture, and no one learns anything when they’re trying to defend their sense of self.
On the other hand, if people are going to DMs to harass beyond the context of the heated conversation… well they ARE DEFINITELY the kind of people who are a threat, and need to be dealt with.
takes like this are fascinating to me because it seems like people have finished the war, and come to terms with the horrors it's caused, so to speak.
The internet is a weird fucking place bro.
Nice to see someone say this out loud. At the end of the day no platform is immune to hive mind thinking or ignorance, but hopefully there are solutions for open platforms to enrich people's lives some.
I've been away for a few weeks and I've missed this whole thing I think, does anybody have a link?
thread that explains it pretty concisely: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/8694944
Oh wow. Thank you for the link, my faith in humanity would be going further down if it was not already at abdolute zero.
no link. just people flooding lemmy with man vs bear nonsense from tiktok.
then whining about how it's toxic and now lemmy is toxic, and making hateful comments about how if you don't agree with them you're clearly a rapist or incel.
it's classic leopards ate my face nonsense. most of the people complaining about the problem, are the problem themselves and fanning the flames of this gender war bullshit.
Lmfao sure thing dude, women are making shit up, and the women talking about men who have assaulted them are the real problem!
Fucking idiot
There is basically no faster way to advertise
- That you get no pussy
- You've never been outside around a wild bear before
- You don't know how statistics work
Unsurprisingly this is a bigly amount of people on any online platform, it turns out.
Just... exponentially more on Lemmy since a large portion of it is Linux related.
The last sentence makes the rest of the comment feel like an unfair generalization of Lemmy and Linux users, which in this context likely may make people even more heated, given the subject of the discussion.
While there technically isn't anything breaking the rules in your comment, please try and keep responses civil, since this was reported to us
The most accurate response I can think of is many people on Lemmy want to be technically right (and I am no exception to this myself). You can see this in our many debates if the Democrats are a hindrance or the "best of the temporary solutions we have" in our debates in the best way to eventually form a working government.
The post in question (man vs bear) summarizes how much fear men have caused women throughout history in meme hyperbole fashion. Most people would "just get the point" that the meme is actually making. Women have suffered a lot from men. However, some of these Lemmy users correctly point out that its predatory behavior that should be called out; not "man vs woman". After all, anyone regardless of age, religion, sexual orientation, gender, etc. can be a predator. The meme is correct but those who oppose the meme are "technically correct" as well.
also given the fact that it's a thought experiment, and people like playing those out from time to time, as a result when someone plays out the "wrong answer" people also want to be "technically correct"
Gotta love the internet.
I agree with your point here but, being the 12 year old I am, here's the meme.
The crux of the issue, in my opinion, comes down to those who have been victimized before. Without painting with too broad a brush, men like myself, have a had time viewing the question in the same lens. We don't experience victimization in the same rates or as the omni-present threat that is learned via experience or indoctrination by others who have been victimized. Its a form of dog whistle men cannot normally hear. I dont choose the word dog whistle for the emotional impact but the base idea of the concept. We arent aware because that sense iant built up over time. That's why its important for all those who are victimized that aren't middle class white women to speak up. I know many do and they are ignored but we dont have to be that way. Dispelling that notion requires stories that don't fit that narrative to blow out the mold and make use reckon with the reality.
I do understand the issue was more complicated than "misogyny". I do think it was unfair to simply waive away experiences as yours but I'm sure being labeled as toxic was due to a misunderstanding.
I don't have a solution to these problems myself (nor do I fully understand them). I do want to point out there are cultures out there who absolutely will not allow women to travel without a chaperone. Most outside of these cultures would call this misogyny while others will point out the same sentiments of this meme. Meaning I do understand why this meme was created and as pointed out beforehand, I get why some would oppose it.
Nobody needs my comment but here it goes. I don't take it personally, it has nothing to do with me. I don't have any issue with people's answers. I know that many people have PTSD and bad experiences and they'd prefer to avoid weird situations like this.
But privately there's a part of me that likes to solve problems and consider everything for myself. I think the question is set up to imply danger by comparing a wild bear to a strange man. If the scenario were different I would expect different results: You are hiking in the desert and you become lost and you have no water. After several days you see a man who offers you water and directions. Do you choose to turn away and continue into the desert or do you accept the man's offer to help provide water and directions to safety?
I have had traumatic experiences with people and one day I realized that I was negatively effected by them and I chose to start practicing Jiu-Jitsu where you need to be in close contact with people as you struggle to gain advantage and win points. I no longer feel the same fear and apprehension about being close to people like I did before.
If people feel a certain way I just wish them healing.
Yeah I really think you hit the nail on the head my biggest problem is that the question is worded and staged to make half the population look comparable not to mention how we already have tick tockers and Twitter phycos that are simply bigoted towards men so it's not entirely uncommon for people to just shit on men online and try to silence talk about men's issues because men's issues just aren't valuable in any way apparently I'm honestly tired of seeing this crap as a man and having so many people comparing people like me to a wild animal that doesn't even kill you before eating you alive and having everyone universally prefer to be with the wild animal is just rubbing salt in the wound
After several days you see a man who offers you water and directions. Do you choose to turn away and continue into the desert or do you accept the man’s offer to help provide water and directions to safety?
That actually is what happens when you get lost for a long time. It's called "Rescuer Syndrome"
Finally, an honest answer
But privately there’s a part of me that likes to solve problems and consider everything for myself. I think the question is set up to imply danger by comparing a wild bear to a strange man.
one of the ways that i interpreted it was that you were quite literally teleported into the woods at random, either ending up with a bear, or a man. Because that was one of the only ways it would make any conceptual sense. Idk about you guys, but i wouldnt walk my ass into the woods with someone i'd be worried about causing me harm.
The same is true of all social media platforms. There are always bad actors and jerkasses that have been banned everywhere else. Eventually, the admins of said social media platform must crackdown and ban those people. Eventually, that will happen to the Fediverse.
You are absolutely correct, but I am calling for that to happen sooner rather than later 👍
Everyone has a vested interest in 50% of the population feeling good about the other half. And certainly we should all feel safer about being with fellow humans than with a bear. The fact that some of us don't feel that way means we should try to make them feel safer.
Thanks for the post. Does anyone have advice on how to become a moderator?
This is essentially the problem with forums that grow faster than mods can keep up. Everything is fine until something like this comes along. When the brigades come out, trying to maintain order and read every comment for content becomes impossible. Unfortunately all we can do is hold each other accountable. Those that can take the abuse stand their ground for others that can't. And when the dust settles, hopefully someone will have learned something. Even if that something is just reinforcing their choice. It's all part of maturing, both for the site and for the people. Just don't let it get you down. This site is not representative of the general population. Neither is Reddit. There are more people in this world that empathize with you than there are on this site.
Well my block list on lemmy grew a whole lot faster and is longer now than on it ever was on Reddit.
But This was even before the bear debacle.
Lemmy is not as good as advertised.
It also depends on what you are looking for content wise. Lemmy the platform does have a ... Interesting... History for sure. On Lemmy.World I have very little patience for misogyny and being shitty twords queer folks. So I guess, "it's complicated" is a unfortunate answer. NGL Mastodon and BlueSky are where I go to interact with other folks, vs Lemmy which I just get the old Reddit doom scroll from.
This is really the terminal issue with Reddit alternatives. They are just Reddit minus the most recent controversy as of foundation. Reddit is overall just a popular content aggregation website with poorly design discussion features.
Upvotes and down votes, while intended to help users weed out bad arguments and spam, only achive in promoting sophistry and tribalism. What ends up getting upvoted is what "wins" the argument, while good arguments that come from unpopular viewpoints get downvoted.
And with that comes all the toxic elements from old Reddit ruat we all hope just won't be a part of our replacements. Reddit's format works at a smaller scale, where users are typically more enthusiastic and therefor better informed, but as the sites get larger you'll notice they typical hyper-snarky "owned with facts and logic" attitude take hold of a community as more people with a weaker investment jump on the bandwagon and upvote everything that makes them feel smart.
Eventually, the site becomes just like Reddit, but for a smaller and more insulated community, and users begin to question why they're here instead of Reddit which has the established user base that can reliably cover more topics you are interested in.
We have not learnt from history, and we are doomed to repeat it. Maybe it'll be different in the future.
Whoa I missed this whole man bear thing. Is it like ManBearPig?
Here is an excellent summary I came across: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/8694944
Thank you for posting this. I had no fucking clue what this was about but after reading that summary I immediately thought bear would be the answer. It makes sense because human men are more than just trying to survive - there’s a higher cognitive thinking and humans are fucked up so more than likely a man would result in psychological trauma on a personal level that is worse than whatever the bear would do.
For the record, I am male.
Think of it like this, we as a civilization stand on the brink of collapse. Can we change it? Yes. Are we trying to? Yes. Is it working? Debatable.
About Lemmy, there's all kinds of people here. Those with the know-how segregated themselves into particular communities and blocked out all the rest. They're just quietly doing their thing wherever, with no fucks given about what's happening outside of that.
Beyond that, in my opinion, are two types of people left to roam the default maelstrom. Those without the know-how and those who thrive in the drama. The former are usually driven out by the dramartists.
I'd see it to be the same as in society. There's people doing their own thing, trying to be left alone. There's people just stumbling through life, not knowing what they want or need, nor the means to get them. And then there's the people who thrive through conflict and making things miserable for everyone else.
Both on Lemmy and in society, guess which ones usually end up in charge...
The answer though is simple. Get involved. Don't want to deal with the toxic waste? Well tough shit, because the planet's full of it. We're at the stage where we all have to clean it up. There's nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. Want to give up and run away? Good luck with that! When there's no more room left, all that toxicity will just spill all over you, no matter how hard you tried to get away.
As individuals, each of us is a minority. And if we keep running from the issues that plague us as a group, we'll never be allowed to thrive.
I'm so glad to see someone share my mentality. If shit happens, and you leave, the people who let it happen are still there! It'll only get worse! Stay and fight it!
Meanwhile its the opposite for me. Character assasinating everyone who wasnt a fan of the bear meme and mods deleting any post that wasnt fully inflammatory has made me second guess whether I want to be here far more than the Tankies ever did
I am with you. At least one of my feet is halfway out the door unless we can stand against harrassment with the same energy we did against tankies. Because fuck that noise. I like the fediverse but not enough for me to just stand by and watch this.
Tbh, I might just give Gaiaonline another shot, yeah my knowledge of world news'll suffer a bit, but maybe thats not a bad thing
Edit: These downvotes are proving my point, this particular comment has nothing offensive in it whatsoever. Oh no, I'm thinking about going back to a Early 2000's anime dress up forum, what an awful person!
the internet is a machine that turns attention into currency, it does this at the same rate for negative and positive attention, and negative attention is a lot easier to get. you just burst onto a platform unbidden and say something that will piss people off. You get rewarded, the platform gets rewarded, everybody wins except the users who have a gross toxic time in the comments. Lemmy may not run ads, but it's structured the same way that other platforms are and we already have a way of using those types of platforms built into our cultural knowledge, so Lemmy just turns into a loose confederation of reddits.
pretty much.
I've been using this platform for 6 mos. and it's getting worse and worse with the negativity.... because that's what drives interaction for the vast majority of users.
people who see a funny joke will laugh and move on, maybe upvote. people who get offended by it downvote it, reply, and hope that you reply so they can continue to harass you.
I don’t know how you can solve this. Lemmy has become a refuge for outcasts. Men with social/personality issues are the biggest group of outcasts. Women are much less likely to be outcasts and so have far less interest in being here.
To create an environment that is welcoming to a particular group takes a certain critical mass of people from that group. If you’re such an extremely small minority you’re going to have a very difficult time reaching that critical mass and the negative environment further discourages people from joining.
If outcasts are people who don't feel welcome in any irl or mainstream communities; women are just as likely to be outcasts. Women online can avoid outing themselves because even female oriented online support spaces get brigaded by men. There are a handful of female artists in my circle who identify as male online because they kept getting creepy dms. They still get them, of course, but less so. Less violent and rapey.
Who knows how many women are out there, lurking in the shadows, just trying to look at memes about linux and communism.
I think they're including people that aren't exposed to communities even if they would be welcome. Men are more likely to become socially isolated (I've only seen studies for 30+ yrs of age), which means they generally turn more to online. Definitely a surprising amount of women lurking, but look at any group online meet-up and it's almost all men (even if all members show up)
Excellent explanation, thanks for this.
Yes, unfortunately Lemmy has gone like Voat - only the "extreme" (generalising) have stuck around. Hopefully something new will arise to displace Reddit and capture its mainstream users.
Idk man it's not that extreme
wtf been going on around here
lots of new users, lots of new problems
Sounds like growing pains.
Who will win: Gender equality or a funny bear
I hear what you are saying. It makes me think of the LGBTQ people when some Mastodon instances gave them a safe space to communicate. Safe spaces do however depend on well working moderation.
i'm just a little disappointed woman seem to consistently be a minority here
the unfortunate reality of the tech and IT space in the last twenty years and even up until now. It's better now, but not great.
The only way to fix it is to simply have more women on the platform unfortunately.
It was not interesting to see how different cohorts responded to the topic. It certainly landed the hardest in this one. More discussion to be had I guess.
im totally ootl. someone explain?
thread that explains it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/8694944
tiktok vid about man vs bear.
Honestly yeah, Lemmy overall has seemed like it's gotten a bit iffier over the last few months. I feel like maybe it needs to be tweaked a bit in how it functions. Or maybe just needs more people.
Which instances are we talking about? I've not seen this debate crop up on Kbin or Beehaw.
I've only seen it on lemmy and dbzer0
Lemmy honestly is not friendly or welcoming. My wife left after being attacked for any comment she made where she mentioned being a female. The man vs bear debate wasn't even around until a month or so later.
If you're not a tech savvy male and you're lurking just don't get involved. They'll belittle anyone who's isn't. You need to have PC for gaming on a Linux computer having the ability to program within Linux while running your internet through a pihole so your jellyfin server can remain hidden through the VPN. If you even ask any question about anything I said prepare to be shamed for not knowing how to already know.
What is this anyway ? :
“bear vs man”
Here is an excellent summary I came across: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/8694944
i blocked that "blahaj" long ago. it is a shit hole. if you continue to visit it you will get it.
Still, to be mindfull i read from your link :x says - - tldr :
if woman alone in a forest : is she better to encounter a bear or a man ?x says...
Okay very basically this whole thing started with a hypothetical posed to a bunch of women about which they would rather run into while alone in the woods; A random man, or a bear. A lot of women chose the bear. Reasons varied from “The worst the bear will do is kill me,” to “At least I know the bear wants to kill me,” with a general theme seeming to be that whatever tangible threat the bear posed was preferable to the uncertainty of wondering whether or not a random man would assault them.
The poster’s stated goal with the hypothetical was to get men to think about why the women were choosing the bear. Instead a lot of guys took it as a personal attack, like they were being punished for the actions of other men. Many started attacking the question, insisting that bears are way more dangerous than virtually any man. This led to a lot of dismissive responses of the criticism like “This is why women choose the bear,” or talking about women’s safety being more important than men’s feelings.
I’m simplifying a lot but that’s the basic gist of it.
op answer to x
@[email protected] ((OP)) Thank you for the detailed summary.
To add the final unfortunate details, there was a recent discussion on Lemmy where women were sharing their reasons for choosing bear, which involved sharing personal stories of SA. Unfortunately, many men responded in a toxic manner, causing some women to delete their posts or accounts. Very disturbing and this is what inspired me to make this post, as it is quite reminiscent of the Catholic church sweeping SA under the rug.
my opinion :
ideally if a woman had a gun she could kill the bear without any bad consequences ... but she could not kill the man without legal risks. So ideally she would be better off encountering a bear ... though in some countries there is no problem with encountering a man (most of the time).
I commented about it and some guy replaced every instance of the word “men” in my post with “Jews” to prove to me that I am a bigot. His comment was removed by mods, but later un-removed because we’re big fans of bad faith arguments and invalid comparisons on this platform.
e: argue this point with women in person and see how well it goes.
I’m confused how that is a bad faith argument or comparison in anyway. They changed nothing about your commentary except for the group you were singling out. Lol.
It isn't a bad faith comparison, you're just seeing cognitive dissonance in action. A person who believes that bigotry is wrong is having their deeply held bigotry pointed out.
Rather than reject one of those two incongruous beliefs, they tell themselves (and insist to others) that the person pointing out their bigotry is in some way wrong despite their argument being rock solid.
I already see people running with the same rage bait shit again and this is not the place for it. As for you, thank you for sharing your experience and I am sorry it was greeted with such toxicity. :)
For the rest of y’all, please see this and this comment which explains how this is a bad faith argument and be civil to one another.
This post is about combating harrassment. If you absolutely must discuss the nuances of feminism in relation to xenophobia, I ask you to make a post elsewhere about it.
God it sucks that people are replying to you just repeating that same argument.
PSA for those in the back: fear or even hatred of men is not equivalent to racism of any kind. Women have years of lived experience of men being shitty, from casual sexism to sexual assault. Knowing that any man could be dangerous is not prejudice, it's the truth, and remembering it allows us to exist and survive in the world.
Idk, to use another lemming's comment from this very post,
My proverbial beef isn't the pointing out of how manny men are predators and that the risksfor women are non-zero; my problem more specifically is that the meme stacks handily on top of the already vexing racial profiling I deal with as a black man who's had false allegations leveled in the past and lost jobs because of the weaponization of this fear. I have already spent damn near a half century being presumed some kind of feral Mandingo rape beast purely for existing while black. The presumption of interest in all of these women like a scene out of Kentucky Fried Movie gets really old and they get super vindictive when rejected.
To me it does seem analogous to the whole racist "black people are 12% of the population but commit 50% of the crime" thing, in that while it is true it is still racist to assume every black person will commit a crime against you and use it as a basis to fear them. Furthermore white people also commit plenty crime and get away with it, padding the numbers, and many women also get away with coercing/forcing men to have sex because nobody believes or gives a fuck about male victims (trust me, am one, 2 diff women,) so it often also goes unreported. On that note actually in many places in the us "rape" requires penetration, so if a woman forces you to penetrate her "you must've liked it" and no court case for you!
Personally I think it'd be prudent not to vilify an entire gender while also excluding victims from said gender.
Hell I understand though, at least with the bear I'd only be brutally mauled instead of forced to have sex with it, and 2/infinity women I've met have forced me to have sex with them so imo all women could, I'll take the bear too.
Ok but wtf is your name
The good thing about lemmy is that it don't get directive from any governments to censor certain issues like what happen to Google, reddit, meta and other social media For any other case, the mods will take care of the instances. If you don't like it, just block whichever instances, communities or users you want. Whats so difficult about that? Nobody is forcing you to be in whatever toxic instance/community is or to read posts that you don't like.
Bro there is like maybe 25 active communities on here... if I have to block half of them then what's the point of being here?
when the toxic behavior is spread over multiple communities and instances like this, that’s an indicator that the problem is systemic rather than individual
that the kind of people you'll come across in liber-media. You'll find toxic people, but you'll also find accommodating people. If you want to play safe, then I don't think any lemmy or any future-whatever-libre-non-lemmy will suit your taste. Make your own server and just make sure that whoever subscribed to that are up to your expectation.
Ya'll don't like getting called out on your bullshit. Ofc I'm not gonna let myself get grouped into something worse than a fucking animal. Go have your rights and empathy activism someway it doesn't clump men in the "not people" category
You are absolutely entitled to that. In fact I quite agree with you on many levels.
None of that makes harrassment okay. Which is the topic of this discussion.
Personally I think its possibly a bad reaction to the right thinking in a counterintuitive way.
Rape, sexual assault, domestic violence, stalking... they have all been reduced to some of the most vile crimes in the eyes of most men these days that when you hear people claim "Men" do this that some men have a very "Hey, FUCK YOU!" reaction.
Well, for that a public discussion like this isn't gonna shine much light. Report then block are the tools ya got.
The introverted tech nerds have always had a problem with dismissing anything they don't immediately understand
They/we do have that problem, I agree, but I still think it's worth holding people (even nerds) to a higher standard. For instance by taking the time to walk them through to a more empathetic perspective.
i'm taking this personally, as an introverted and probably very socially neurotic tech nerd. I don't always completely understand things.
But since i'm a fucking tech nerd, and i don't understand 90% of the things around me, i need to learn about these things in order to be capable of being a tech nerd. Thus i have it quite literally ingrained into my own being, that i shouldn't dismiss anything i don't immediately understand, or have a full opinion of. Because there are a lot of things out there, and i can't try all of them, but not all of them are bad, and not all of them are good.
I think its more or less you come in swinging most people are gonna swing back, the bear thing gave both sides a reason to 'rightfully' be angry when the question literally couldn't matter less than Lego fortnite
there's an unpopular community here? Funny that i haven't seen it until now.
Anyway, on the bear man thingy. I thought that was rather interesting, as a "man" myself i saw a rather similar situation but from the opposite perspective (i hadn't seen or heard of this before, so i was really fucking confused initially)
incoming personal opinion btw, if you're scared of those, you should look away :)
I think it's less "bad for women" more "The internet causing people to yell at each other over stupid shit for no particular reason" than anything. Naturally it was an incredibly polarized topic. The wording was specifically designed to generate outrage and attention around it (i feel like i don't really have to explain why) and a lot of people were taking very tribal stances on either side, with the information they had, without properly considering all factors (because thought experiments turn out to be more than surface level, weirdly enough.)
idk, i just didn't really experience anything that wasn't "fuck u/spez, he probably rapes little girls" levels of shenanigans. Then again, i'm internet hardened so you wouldn't be able to shake me with anything really.
So finding an instance that doesn’t allow that. There is no “lemmy” like Reddit. There are n instances you can run to for your preferred safe space. Beehaw for example
Surely you don’t expect every single lemmy instance to fall in line with your values do you???
Your post belongs in this community, it’s unpopular because it’s a naive take that doesn’t consider how Lemmy actually works
i don't expect random internet strangers, or even people i know irl... to fall in line with my values.
but i'm mentally ill like that. this crazy idea i have that other people have different values... and that's OK, and I can like them anyway.
Lemmy just sucks in general. It feels like almost every instance is run by extremists of some description that will ban you for disagreeing with them or criticizing them. That, or you have LW which is run like Reddit.
Lemmy people are the same people as Reddit people. I think both communities have similar personalities. I've been banned from multiple sub Reddits because I disagree with a mod. Every time I've been on topic and respectful, yet I've been told to shut up because they disagreed and then shortly later banned. I now recognise the authoritarian tone these mods give to being banned soon.
didn't know that. i was thinking of a small flower that doesn't seem very durable.
It used to be a place where mostly leftists hung out - now, unfortunetely, it's overflowing with liberals... with predictable results.
Personally, I don't think the bear thing is very controversial. I wouldn't even call the manufactured outrage peddled by the pro-rape brigade controverisal - that has become a mundane thing, too.
Hi, just a gentle reminder about Rule 1 in this comm - discussion of politics is not allowed; this includes usage of adjacent terminology
I'll consider myself gently reminded, then.