I'm a cis, heterosexual, white male. I also pretty heavily defend human rights, try not to be a skeeze ball, and like to think of myself as generally a pretty decent dude. During the height of the MeToo movement and the #NotAllMen thing, though, it really felt like society as a large, or at least the parts of it I want to occupy, viewed many aspects of my simple existence as villainous.
Believe me, I KNOW that no one reasonable has ever thought it was all men, or all white people, or all straight people, or all cis gendered people. That doesn't stop it from hurting anymore when you're walking around the city with a woman you consider a really good friend, and she's posting pictures of stickers that actually DO say "all men suck" she finds to social media.
I'm also not blind. I know this is the same treatment that marginalized groups have faced since the dawn of time. Maybe it's finally time for men to get theirs. Or, we can all acknowledge that any condemnation over an immutable human feature just plain sucks. Just my 2 cents on the matter.
Mostly the "man" part. Pretty clear in the OP I thought. I was quite simply born as a male, and happened to identify as that gender. A significant enough portion of the population seems to believe that, because a patriarchy exists, all men have benefited from it, and all men want to continue it. The same idea plays through well enough for skin color, and orientation.
I know what I am, I know my thoughts, my feelings and my intentions. It starts to play with your sense of self-worth to be told that these things, things that have never caused you to do anything to harm anyone else, must be bad parts of yourself, because look at what people have done in their name.
It's not the same scale, no. I'm not facing segregation, and don't have to fight for my right to vote. Any of a number of other advantages you want to point out. Yeah, I benefited in some ways from the circumstances of my birth. All of this, common talking points from the sides of the aisle that I want to belong to. The side of the aisle that believes that no person should ever feel marginalized because of something that they had no control over. To hear that, and then feel like these same people are telling you you're part of the problem because of your existence... It's not hard to see how that can really impact one's sense of worth to the world.
Right. I explained in both of my previous comments that I understand that. I recognize that it's a similar mechanism of action, and that relatively speaking, I've got it good. It's really disheartening to see so many (the 'left' not you) getting so close to understanding that -everyone- deserves to be treated with respect by the default, and somehow turning it into a zero-sum game where, for it to get better for some, there must be a class that suffers.
Is it necessary? If so, it's a zero-sum game. Fine. That's just going to encourage an endless cycle of warfare to be the class currently not suffering.
If it's not necessary, if it's NOT a zero-sum game, then why are we treating it like it is?
Are we though? Are we bastards, or is that a product of the environment, the society, we've been born into? Is there something specific to men that makes them somehow evil, aggressive, bad, whatever word you want to use to describe them? Are there no good men? If there are, how do we explain them?
I believe there are good men. The existence of good men means there isn't something inherent to man that makes one not good. So again, why are men right bastards?
It's a self feeding loop. Men have to be bastards because men are bastards, and only bastards get ahead. Or, we can accept that, regardless of these arbitrary lines and divisions, each human is an individual, capable of acts of good, evil, and everything in-between.
Slow down your speech a bit (like listen to it in super slow mo) and you’ll realize there’s definitely a schwa sound between the N and the L sounds. Just how our mouths work moving through the shapes for them creates a schwa sound.
Out of curiosity, what words does your accent pronounce without a schwa? Every single vowel sound in that is a schwa sound in those sentences sounds perfectly natural to me with a schwa sound.
Do the minimum to put the food you like on the table, to afford a place to live, and then fuck off for the rest of the time. No OT, no projects outside of work hrs, no checking email overnight. Do your job, to the level that is strictly required, and reprioritize yourself any other time.
I think the idea is that a lot of people prioritize only their work. The whole hustle grindset thing, working obscene hours to try to get rich. Instead of doing that, seeing that whole rat race for what it is, doing enough work to get by, and then actually enjoying your time elsewhere seems to be what this is advocating for.
I never said you’d be able to comfortably retire. That’s another part of it. The younger generations know they won’t retire at all, or at a reasonable time, so just do your 40, get enough to live, and go do something actually fulfilling.
Just look at the hustle grindset, or sigma grind, or whatever you want to call it. No, most people aren’t working 120 hours a week at a McDonald’s, but a lot more are getting multiple jobs, side hustles, etc to get to “get ahead” in the game.
The “sacrifice” is number of total man hours going down. Nevermind that the remaining hours are vastly superior to the ones you lose, that’s a number that’s smaller, and unless that’s “how much we’re paying”, numbers being smaller is a bad thing, mmkay?
I took this option. 10/4 is significantly better for me than 8/5, so when I saw the availability in the schedule for that, I took it. Granted, I have a job where working 10 hrs and working 8 hours is a negligible difference, but it’s a trade I’d personally make regardless.
xkcd #2947: Pascal's Wager Triangle ( xkcd.com )
Alt text:...
Boys Get Everything, Except the Thing That’s Most Worth Having ( www.nytimes.com )
Gift article, no paywall
The Perception Paradox: Men Who Hate Feminists Think Feminists Hate Men ( msmagazine.com )
He found a new friend! ( lemmy.world )
xkcd #2907: Schwa ( imgs.xkcd.com )
xkcd.com/2907...
xkcd #2898: Orbital Argument ( imgs.xkcd.com )
xkcd.com/2898...
Gen Z is prioritizing living over working because they've seen 'the legacy of broken promises' in corporate America, a future-of-work expert says ( www.businessinsider.com )
A future-of-work expert said Gen Zers didn't have the "promise of stability" at work, so they're putting their personal lives and well-being first.
Challenge accepted ( media.kbin.social )
92% of young people would sacrifice other perks for a 4-day workweek—here's what they'd give up ( www.cnbc.com )