this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
107 points (95.7% liked)

entertainment

91 readers
51 users here now

founded 1 year ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] atro_city@fedia.io 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

There are many feminists who like blaming men for stuff. Men sexualise women, only see them as objects, don't respect them, and so on. But when you look at women's magazines, many articles written by women themselves, they tear each other down the entire time. "Look at what she wore to the gala! How ugly!", "Big faux pas by FAMOUS ACTRESS!", "FAMOUS ACTRESS really shouldn't go outside looking like this", and so on. And other women absolutely love. It's all some can gossip about. And somehow that get turns around to "the patriarchy" and in turn "men are to blame".

[–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

You read that shit? I've never been into it myself, but some people love gossip rags. Calling them women's magazines is the insult, they're lowest common denominator garbage. Like the daily mail. Equating them to all women is like saying all men are Andrew Tate fans.

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago (1 children)

“The patriarchy” is not code for men, just fyi. Women policing other women’s clothing and appearance fits into the patriarchy, because it’s a reinforcement that women’s only value is based on their sex appeal.

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Oh of course not. It's just the system created by, controlled by, and made for men as a way to oppress women by equating their value to sex appeal. Who would ever think of implying patriarchy = men. Why would anybody get that idea?

[–] BluesF@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

Except the patriarchy isn't made/controlled/for men exclusively. It's upheld by both men and women. Some women are benefactors of the patriarchy, just as some men are victims.

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s a way to oppress everyone, by reducing women to mothers and sex objects and reducing men to laborers and cannon fodder. Women are too emotional and men aren’t allowed to show emotion without being pussies. It’s a double edged sword.

[–] atro_city@fedia.io -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s a way to oppress everyone

Ask yourself who benefits from this and you might find out it's not a "patriarchy".

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nobody really benefits as a demographic as a whole. It leads to mens higher suicide rates, prevents women from fully realizing their potential, and precludes the existence of NB people. Individuals benefit in various ways, for example: men receive higher pay and women receive more emotional support. I (AFAB) “benefit” from women’s parking spots that exist because of rape culture, but is that really a win?

[–] atro_city@fedia.io -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's really no section of the population that benefits from infighting between the sexes? No section that benefits by distracting large parts of the population by having them focus on their perceived differences? No group that can afford to influence the narrative, conditions, and perceptions to their benefit? No group comes to mind?

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 4 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Why don’t you just tell me what you think instead of making me guess.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I believe they pointing at the rich again. As everyone does once you drill down into most inequalities enough.

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

If they are, I disagree. Peter Thiel, Mark Zuckerberg, and Elon Musk are all very clearly affected by the patriarchy. For older money, Barbara Bush, Jackie Onassis, and FDR were clearly harmed by the patriarchy.