When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

Post by antisthenes » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 1:40 AM UTC

weddpros wrote: post #68

Are we witnessing the birth of a new idea, something like "there is no right or wrong if it hurts people's feelings"? will "non binary truth" emerge as law? You have the right to say anything that's wrong, and nobody can say it's wrong because that would be discriminatory, but if you say something that's right, nobody should say it's right because it would be binary thinking and discriminating? yet you can say it's w…

Post by slowhadoken » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 2:05 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #64

slowhadoken wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don’t like how the term “men’s rights advocate” is thrown around. Maybe some groups that use that term are crazy or something but men deserve rights and advocates for those rights. Men are often treated as second class citizens. People laughing at that is senseless.

Men are politically, economically, and socially dominant in pretty much every society on Earth, though there are a few where that has been reduced so that women are near parity. Advocating for “Men’s rights” pretty much anywhere on Earth is like advocating for “White rights” or “Christisn rights” in the USA (and, in fact, there's substantial overlap between those groups.)

Post by leereeves » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 2:32 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #66

Maximus9000 wrote: post #7

> "And if it was just flat-earthers, I’d say fine, it’s harmless. But you’ve got anti-vaxxers and Men’s Rights Advocates and anti-global warming folks and TERFs and incels out there, all fueled by one central pivot point of humanity – namely, that it’s lonely being wrong." It seems quite odd that he lumps "Mens rights advocates" in there. Are they crazy?

> It seems quite odd that he lumps "Mens rights advocates" in there. Are they crazy? Crazy or not, MRA invariably is grounded in a worldview as at odds with facts as climate denialism or anti-vaxx advocacy. (Honestly, I think TERFs and incels, who are not categorically factually delusional, are the ones that don't fit, though it's possible the use of “wrong” was meant to encompass not only factual delusion but also w…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 2:40 AM UTC

phil248 wrote: post #42

Maximus9000 wrote: post #7

> "And if it was just flat-earthers, I’d say fine, it’s harmless. But you’ve got anti-vaxxers and Men’s Rights Advocates and anti-global warming folks and TERFs and incels out there, all fueled by one central pivot point of humanity – namely, that it’s lonely being wrong." It seems quite odd that he lumps "Mens rights advocates" in there. Are they crazy?

Are you familiar with the men's rights movement? The term or concept of "men's rights" could certainly be discussed in a neutral, non-crazy way. But the actual movement as it exists today and the logic that commonly defines it is absolutely as detached from reality as any of those other cult-like ideologies.

Post by leereeves » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 3:08 AM UTC

phil248 wrote: post #42

Maximus9000 wrote: post #7

> "And if it was just flat-earthers, I’d say fine, it’s harmless. But you’ve got anti-vaxxers and Men’s Rights Advocates and anti-global warming folks and TERFs and incels out there, all fueled by one central pivot point of humanity – namely, that it’s lonely being wrong." It seems quite odd that he lumps "Mens rights advocates" in there. Are they crazy?

Are you familiar with the men's rights movement? The term or concept of "men's rights" could certainly be discussed in a neutral, non-crazy way. But the actual movement as it exists today and the logic that commonly defines it is absolutely as detached from reality as any of those other cult-like ideologies.