"b-but bears are actually dangerous!" Shut the hell up.
this post was submitted on 11 May 2024
801 points (75.0% liked)
memes
10450 readers
2419 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
yeah this pretty much.
Polarized speech does nothing for anybody. If woman are talking about this bear thing to make a point, i feel like we would be better off actually making sure that people understood that it was about making a point, rather than a literal fucking interpretation of the problem
but no, funny internet points are more important, capitalism ruins everything it fucking touches.
These kinds of things are great for letting off steam with friends, but absolutely TERRIBLE at getting a point across to people who dont already know said point
specifically the intent here is to drum up drama, controversy and attention. Which obviously worked, but the problem is that nobody is using it to do something productive with.
Some people are definitely using it to create drama sure, but others are using it to vent, and yet others dont understand why some men wouldnt just try to understand why women would choose the bear... basically its a clusterfuck of a meme
i only said drama since i think the point of it is to bring up discussion around the problem at hand here, the problem being that people dont understand that part of it.
Yeah the whole "any press is good press" idea mostly applies to things you want to make money from because for any position you can think of, there's people out there that will support it. So, given your position, if you can get more attention by creating loud arguments, even if they are generally against you, that extra noise means you'll reach more people that might be sympathetic to your position, and you'll increase revenue from those people.
If the goal is to capture hearts and minds to change the world, controversial attention is the opposite of what you want because antagonizing a group of people will always generate opposition, sometimes where there was none, and sometimes even where there was formerly support.
One of the real dangers of sexism and racism and all that is that it generates more sexism and racism. So even if you decide that you really don't care about group x, you're done with them and they can all die in a fire and you don't even care if that makes you evil, expressing that will contribute to a cycle that will come back to hurt others in your group.
It's why genocide keeps coming up in human history. That's where this all leads when it's a racist or cultural thing. Sexism is different because the genders can't survive without each other, but it is a reason why we're seeing a resurgence of conservatives willing to unironically talk about the worst parts of patriarchism as if they are good things, like women just existing as servants to men.
Though when I look at everything going on in the world, it really feels like humanity in general needs to get the fight out of their system because so many conflicts are caught in this kind of cycle with no peaceful resolution in sight for any of it that doesn't involve some major compromises on things I'm not sure anyone is willing to compromise on. WWIII is going to be messy because I think the national conflicts might be overshadowed by domestic ones, which will cause even more issues as they spill into each other.
i think the intent was to be inflammatory to gather the obvious negative responses and double back on those so you can use the whole thing as publicity stunt essentially. Though there are going to be negative aspects of it, that's why i've been pretty critical over most of it.
As for patriarchy, i think it's both a bit of thinking back to the good old days, and trying to edge a little bit of "trust me bro, it's going to work" out of people. Because for men, it obviously has some advantages that we don't need to talk about, but they also have to sell it to women, so they're selling it by claiming stuff like "you won't have to work anymore" and the list goes on really. None of that is true or beneficial, but an incorrect statement sells a good story, so.
Honestly, i don't forsee a world war 3, i feel like it would've already happened if it would have. At best north korea is going to try and pull some shit, but that will almost certainly do nothing. I think realistically a lot of places are going to collectively agree on "enemy bad" "kill enemy" and there is a non zero chance that some sort of mutiny happens during or immediately after, but given some time people won't want it. I don't really think it's a significant concern to be honest, i think most of the political shit is mostly rhetoric, things seem a lot worse than they are, a lot of bark and no bite essentially.
If ww3 ever happens it's going to be incredibly messy, because ww2 was, and ww1 even more so before it.
But many do just that, then you focus on the ones that don't, every cycle. Over and over. You choose what to focus on. Not we as a society, literally you. You choose to engage with that negative part of it and continue to. Nobody is forcing you
it's been getting better as of recent, initially when i first dug into it things were quite a bit worse than they are now, people seemingly have had some time to think about it, and figured out that "yeah this is kind of stupid"
i have a fascinating idea for you to consider. I being an individual person of my own accord, can simply choose what i want to think about. The problem that i have is with the people who aren't engaging with it productively, it'd be weird for me to insult people who were, or pretty fucking pretentious for me to compliment people who do, although i've probably done that at least once. Given that the singular me, doesn't constitute the whole of society, and the fact that i don't proclaim to be god or something, i think that's pretty reasonable.
Like here's another fun fact, you can just ignore me. I won't be offended.
It'd be rather weird to identify a problem in a system, and spend 50% of your time contemplating and observing the working portions of it that you already understand, no?
Instead of absorbing some kind of stance where now I am the one contradicting myself, you could just skip the defense where I get to be pretentious, and go straight into the realisation that it's only trying to be helpful. I'm not sugarcoating it because it just makes it even harder to understand the root of your complaint, which is that you, yourself, focus on something you don't want to. Not that others do it. Because they choose also what they focus on and have already chosen that. I focus on something I want to when I write to you, I like helping real people that deserve it, to get out of shit that I have been in. So essentially, it's just a long dialog with society that they should x or y, that you are focusing on but you wish it was yourself you were talking to. It's not going to make any difference who reads it and it's easier to run over the choice to make sure stuff in general in your life don't also get more and more compulsive
i'm not sure how that would make you contradictory with yourself. I'm just saying that this is a micro specific, not a macro specific, like you were stating. I'm aware that i'm looking at through an incredibly tight view, that's kind of the point actually.
I'm not here to talk about the broad environment here, because if i was, i'd have written a three hundred page study on it, and published it by now. I'm here specifically to discuss the aspects that seem to capture my attention. Which leads to me micro focusing on specific details.
no? I'm focusing on it because i think it's interesting.
yeah, and you did, which is why i mentioned that you could just ignore me, because you were pretty clearly just attacking the way that i was thinking about it specifically, which you are allowed to do. But doesn't help me, because i understand that. Notice how i never said that feminism bad? Or that women lying bad? Or anything like that, i was specifically talking about the interactions that i've been observing as of recent, and had been curious about, and like any good curious individual, i prodded for information, because it's healthy to do that.
You could've asked me why i was being so specific, and focusing so aggressively on things, and i would've said what i just said now. But instead you hit with something relatively inflammatory. Acting like you somehow have knowledge of my understanding of the world, and i don't and wanted to "inform me" about it, through a rather obtuse statement frankly. Why wouldn't i respond in kind?
that's great, i haven't been in that shit or experienced it before, so i'm not one to talk about it, which is why i'm focusing on the parts that i know i understand in a very explicit manner.
perhaps? Idk how you expect people to make their points more clearly understood by others. Yeah i'm essentially talking with myself here, that's kind of the point, i'm trying to clearly identify how i think about these things so others aren't outside of the loop, unless you think that other account is my alt account or something? In which case, that's pretty funny.
i'm not even sure how i should read this, it doesn't really make any sense.
Escalating defense mechanisms... Yo man I'm backing slowly away okay, you good luck with your scientific studies and whatnot peace out
alright then, see you on the flip side i spose