Agnostic.com

5 5

“I believed that if I came forward, my voice would be drowned out by a chorus...."

To the cis men that are having difficulty understanding this, it isn't about you being unjustly accused and it isn't about all men being painted with the same broad brush and it isn't about deflecting criticism because "women abuse men, too."

It is about your failure to confront your own belief systems, opinions and attitudes, failure to confront abusive peers and failure to overcome your own silence.

It is about your failure to demonstrate empathy and solidarity with your fellow humans and, instead, zeroing in on how the victim supposedly has enabled their own victimization instead of holding the perpetrator accountable.

ESmith 5 Sep 29
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

5 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Well said! Until us guys realize that this way of thinking and acting is not just 'out there' but a part of who we are, things are not going to get better.

0

I believe that it's men who need to speak out and everyone who deflects the conversation or shift the blame is complicit. The response prior to mine exemplifies this behavior perfectly.

EDIT: I guess I should add indifference to the list of complicit behaviors.

JimG Level 8 Sep 29, 2018

I guess a narrow, simplified version of history is more suitable to the SJW mentality along with virtue-signallers. SJW beliefs seem to trump facts and always create a fascist response to attempts to understand our society in an objective way. Flag-waving, mansplaining, judgemental and condemnatory statements like those posted above just seem to imply a neurotic personality unable to handle a different opinion.

@brentan or it's just easier to pass the buck.

I guess you have nothing after all!

@brentan nothing to counter name-calling and unsupported claims? I fail to see how anything you said necessitates any effort to refute it. If you had anything you wouldn't need to use name calling, straw-man fallacies, and claims of facism in place of a legitimate argument.

@JimG You were quite willing to try to refute when you thought you had an argument. Now you're reduced to using my arguments about you to criticise me. You really have nothing to offer by way of argument. Keep signalling!

1

This post comfortably omits the fact that societies in general swept crimes under the carpet and women were often the most severe in their treatment of other women.

Which in no way justifies anything or even contributes to a meaningful discussion, but if it makes you feel better, by all means continue to deflect.

sorry, was the post supposed to cover all bases? i think the poster was making her (quite valid) point, not making all possible points. but now that you've brought it up, there is that perpetual myth that women naturally hate other women and will climb all over each other to get ahead. myth it is, despite there being examples of it (there are examples of lots of crap, if you look for it, but those examples don't make the generality true). if any portion of what you've said is true, consider who was in power to control what women did or did not do, or did or did not feel they HAD to do, not to be completely suffocated. ALL of that notwithstanding, how does any of it, real or imagined, justify victim-blaming?

g

The post was not written to justify anything, rather to try to understand it. That interpretation was misapplied by the other person. The comment about women's maltreatment of women is a historical truth and not a myth. The fact that men ruled societies in no way excuses the unjust behaviour of women.

@brentan Find a way to connect how horrible women are to each other to the original post or else your comment is just another 'what aboutism'.

@kmdskit3 What you call whataboutism is a direct response to the idea that (cis) men in general, and men only, are guilty of this wrongdoing.So it was a pertinent comment.

@brentan It is a direct comment to cis men. Nowhere is there any indication that only cis men are the only ones guilty of this behavior.

To the cis men...
It isn't about all men...'

Guilty men can suck it up. The idea that all white men should suck it up is preposterous.

0

ok

1

Very well put! I agree.

By the way, this website has a bit of a learning curve, so here's some info, in case you need it.

For members who are open to dating, certain thumbnails and profiles have a heart symbol on them with a percentage. This identifies which members are open to dating, and the percent shows approximately how compatible others are with them.

You gain website points by answering all the profile questions and writing a bio, which also earns website points, and helps other members get to know you.

Commenting on posts and writing your own posts earns more points. At level two you can private message people, and at level eight you get an agnostic T-shirt.

If you want to date, the website uses profile algorithms to find member matches, so the more details one includes, the better the match.

Many people prefer to see a written profile talking about interests, hobbies, and backgrounds that can be quickly perused to find others with similar interests..

In case you didn't know yet, to find members near you, click on the "Browse" button at the top of the page, then on "Members," and enter your preferred search parameters.
Click on the "Discuss" button, then "Nearby" to find members near you also.
Or click on the "About" button at the top left of the page to find links to FAQ or the website tutorial.
Points are now being given to level 3+ members who chat. You can see chat rooms on the group main page.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:190018
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.