this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
1425 points (97.9% liked)

Microblog Memes

6027 readers
1271 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 month ago (14 children)

Idk who is that, and probably is a moron.

But it is a genuinely good question: "what's a woman?" "what's a man?" "what's gender?"

Not an easy question, with not universally accepted answer.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 month ago

Honestly I think, as a cis man, cis people are probably very bad at answering the question.

humans tend ignore "harmony". When you walk through the field, do you look each blade of grass or at the cow? Do you feel "non-pain"? How could you possibly explain someone pain that doesn't know pain? Do you remember the last time, you sat next to your friend watching a show on tv, in the same detail, you remember the conflict/discussion that you had with them?

Generally we will remember and pay attention to the things that are "wrong".

If your gender is right for you, why would you pay attention? What would you even pay attention to?

If it is wrong for you, you feel the "pain", see the cow and remember the conflict.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago (42 children)

Outside of a philosophy discussion, it's not a genuinely good question because it is irrelevant to our daily lives. In any way that matters to society, a woman is a person who says they are a woman. It's that complicated.

[–] Mesa@programming.dev 11 points 1 month ago (13 children)

"Is irrelevant" and "should be irrelevant" are two different things. Fighting by saying the issues are not there—regardless of your actual opinion—has rarely, if ever, worked. It's the same as the "I don't see color" argument.

Also, why would we exclude philosophical discussion? The point is to make you think. I also don't know who this particular person is in the OP, but the question itself has no bias. Maybe this highlights our philosophical differences, but I firmly believe that understanding a system is the most crucial step to revolutionizing it.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Bgugi@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

So long as society feels it necessary to provide protections for women, the distinction has real consequences. Drawing a line anywhere is a tradeoff between inclusivity and effectiveness.

Taking the party line "high ground" stance of either conclusive self-determination or dodging the question entirely is why this question is so effective.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 month ago

I'm sorry, is "conclusive self-determination" the wrong answer? Why?

[–] Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Assuming good faith on the part of those involved, I don't see how inclusivity comes at the cost of effectiveness. Would you care to elaborate?

[–] gimsy@feddit.it 2 points 1 month ago

Assuming good faith, that's a hell of an assumption

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Gendered bathrooms? It certainly does not require a lot of good faith to come up with this example.

[–] Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago

That's a terrible example. Gendered bathrooms would still fulfil their function if anybody could use them regardless of gender, causing no measurable harm to anyone.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] Bgugi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Honestly? I think that equal treatment should be afforded regardless of gender. I also know that opinion is wildly unpopular, and so long as society expects unequal treatment there has to be hard conversations and hard decisions made to support those structures. You can't have it both ways, and no amount of party-line fingers in your ears "wouldn't you like to know"ing makes that go away.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This would be nice if we lived in a vacuum an didn't have thousands of years of patriarchy built up...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago

Not the person who you were talking with, but I think it's nuanced. Short term tradeoffs should be made for effectiveness, while long-term strategies should be relentlessly pursued for inclusivity.

E.g. as a man, I think that the women-only carriages in a lot of SEA countries are a necessary thing, but it has to be a short term solution with a healthier society should be always consistently pursued, for example with educational measures.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If the question is so irrelevant, why do you even try to answer it in the same comment? Not only answering it, but also making it a fact. As if your opinion is the only one that matters and suddenly it's irrelevant when there's a different opinion.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

My opinion is not the only one that matters. I'm not sure where you got that impression unless you think people should automatically agree with you for no reason other than you want them to when they do not.

I base my opinion on my observations on how the world works. I could be wrong, so feel free explain to me how it negatively affects in our society in any significant way if you don't define a woman as someone who calls themselves a woman.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If other opinions matter, then it is not an irrelevant question. Since it prompts people to tell their opinions.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You did not explain to me what I asked you to explain to me. I think you just want someone to fight with since you're clearly not discussing this in good faith and I'm not particularly interested.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I didn't answer your "request" because that has nothing to do with what I originally said.

If I wanted to get into an hours long conversation about gender I would've said something completely different. Got better things to waste my time on.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Then I have no idea even what your issue is? That I dare to think my opinion on something is correct? Isn't that how opinions work?

Can you tell me about one of your incorrect opinions?

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

I don't think it is that simple.

Women are treated different that men in many societies. In my country there are multiple laws that apply different to a person if it is a woman or a man.

If we are making legislative differentiation because those words, we ought to have them well defined and understand what we are meaning and why we say that a women gets X law applied that a man gets not.

If it is irrelevant it should be, at least, legislatively irrelevant. If it's meaningful we should be clear on what we are defining by woman (or any other gender that gets particular legislation applied for all that matters).

That without talking about the social importance of being a gendered society. I don't know any single society that is not gendered. Once again, if it is irrelevant then we should aim for genderless society. If it is relevant we should know and agree on what it is to be one gender or other.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (38 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)