• Queen HawlSera@lemm.eeEnglish
    14·
    6 days ago

    Ciswomen were having sex?

    Then wait, why are there so many incels?

    Joking aside, there actually have been times when I’ve been at a social event and I’m gonna fuck a guy because why not… but he starts going off on incel bullshit and how far right he is because “Women aren’t women” anymore, and I’m like… “Yeah I gotta go…” while thinking “Can’t believe he talked his way OUT of a sure thing.”

    So I fully understand why there are so many incels.

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    21·
    6 days ago

    I mean, considering how many incels voted for trump, I think we’re pretty much already there. Many of the young men who voted red this election already have no close relationships with any women their age. Obviously women should exercise their autonomy as they see fit. I don’t expect it to change how anyone votes.

    I’ll probably be downvoted for this, but progressives have spent the last several years actively shutting down lines of communication with men, particularly white men. For the best of reasons, sure, but it hasn’t been an effective strategy for winning elections.

    Maybe this would sway some group of center-left men who didn’t bother voting, but realistically I expect it will have no effect on the ongoing polarization, or exagerrate it.

  • AnimalsDream@slrpnk.netEnglish
    15·
    6 days ago

    Everyone in here arguing against 4b need to take a look in the mirror. The fact that so many of you are trying push against it is in itself a demonstration of why it’s necessary. Respecting bodily autonomy does not have to be hard.

    • papertowels@lemmy.one
      15·
      6 days ago

      Bodily autonomy is the ability to choose 4b, not the reason to do so. Folks arguing against 4b have not disrespected the ability to do 4b. Therefore bodily autonomy is still respected.

        • Ponchy@lemm.ee
          27·
          6 days ago

          “It’s over internet commenter! I have portrayed you negatively in a meme, showing you as the naive you are”

        • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafeEnglish
          12·
          6 days ago

          Yes, posting a message on the internet while violating nobody’s personal space or rights is exactly the same as that picture. You did it! You won the internet! You can go away now.

          Go away

          Now

          • JCPhoenix@beehaw.orgMEnglish
            5·
            6 days ago

            FYI, you’re on Beehaw. Please be(e) nice. I know it’s crazy times right now, I get it, but we do want folks to still abide by our rules and such here. Thanks.

            • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafeEnglish
              8·
              6 days ago

              While it took several minutes to find your rules, your “spirit of the rules” document specifically identifies what I did as positive: regardless of the other user fake following the rules the spirit of their post was extremely negative and portrayed the other commenter in a false rude light, which I immediately called him out on and asked him to leave. This is a paradox of intolerance situation and you seem to be on the side of intolerance which I’m not a fan of since your bee nice philosophy appears to be explicitly against it.

        • papertowels@lemmy.one
          7·
          6 days ago

          Cute (I actually laughed, haha), but the assumption that meme makes is that it’s clear the gal doesn’t want to participate in the conversation due to body language.

          There’s none of that when you’re commenting in a public politics community. You’re not posting in a community for 4b, for example. Additionally, you’re the one that made the initial comment.

          By attempting to talk over and belittle others who respond you’re acting like the guy in the meme.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            1·
            6 days ago

            that meme makes is that it’s clear the gal doesn’t want to participate in the conversation due to body language.

            Not trying to argue against the meme, how it’s used and understood etc, but: You can’t interpret body language from a still image, you need at least like two or three movements, you need to see how someone reacts to their own movements so to speak. She might just as well be going “woah, cool”, slight backward surprise movement, and the two are the most wholesome couple you’ve ever met. Or she actually really wants to get out of there. That’s the point: The still image itself is too little information to make the distinction.

  • InevitableList@beehaw.org
    19·
    7 days ago

    It’s interesting that the response to men going their own way (MGTOW) is indifference or at most pity whilst WGTOW are met with hostility.

    • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      16·
      6 days ago

      Mgtow was not met with indifference. They’ve been consistently criticized since the movement first started, and they quickly evolved into a cabal of Nazi-adjacent freaks. Fuck those guys.

      There may be some good that could come from a men’s movement for self actualization and improvement, but mgtow sure as shit wasn’t that

    • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
      14·
      7 days ago

      MGTOW should be indifferent, but they kinda got hijacked into another red pill BS place. Their lives revolve around hate for women and not actually going your own way and finding what makes you content.

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    4·
    5 days ago

    Wouldn’t this just create even more conservatives if they are the only ones having children? Seems counterintuitive.

    • sanzky@beehaw.org
      1·
      5 days ago

      it’s also a quite terf movement. It basically mirrors MGTOW. I don’t think people should follow them.

  • Allero@lemmy.today
    7·
    6 days ago

    So, creating a massive headache for government ~15-20 years into the future?

    Or what is the point?

  • BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee
    4·
    6 days ago

    i highly doubt women will just stop having sex. its as dumb as asking men to stop jerking off. just never gonna happen

    • Take_your_zync@eviltoast.orgEnglish
      12·
      6 days ago

      When the choice is a man thinking of you as property to control or a vibrator/custom sized dildo, idk why you think it’s even a contest.

      • BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee
        4·
        6 days ago

        your comment makes it sound like women are incapable of having sex with men simply because they enjoy sex with men

        it would be like me turning down a handjob because ive been doing it myself for years

        • Zement@feddit.nl
          5·
          6 days ago

          Reducing it to the core,… yes a few hate fucks could still occur. But a relationship with a misogynist is only possible with psychological disorders on the women’s side. (Mostly Self loathing, no self esteem != woke women who have self esteem).

  • futatorius@lemm.ee
    4·
    6 days ago

    Read Lysistrata and good luck to you.

    When the system becomes too odious, non-participation is one way of dealing with it.

  • Alienmonkey@lemm.ee
    3·
    6 days ago

    The no marriage part is interesting, the rest carries more unintended collateral.

    As a movement, removing the institutional component would affect the wider group, and their wallets.

    • futatorius@lemm.ee
      4·
      6 days ago

      Nobody should be forced into relationships and customs that don’t suit them. It’s up to them to decide if the downsides are excessive or a price worth paying.

  • xor@infosec.pub
    48·
    7 days ago

    so, because punishing all women is bad, it’s a good idea to punish all men?
    here’s an alternative: don’t fuck republicans… they’re the ones trying to control women.

    • Vivian (they/them)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      5·
      5 days ago

      They’re not obligated to date men though, if they want to participate in 4B then I don’t see what’s wrong with that. They are allowed to assert their bodily autonomy, it’s a form of protest against how they are treated

      • xor@infosec.pub
        2·
        6 days ago

        go ahead and pretend like i’m saying women are obligated to do something or not….
        i’m not saying anything like that, but go ahead and argue with imaginary people

        • Vivian (they/them)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          4·
          5 days ago

          Okay cool. So if we agree that individuals are not obligated to date men, then it follows that choosing not to do so is not a punishment towards men. A punishment requires a penalty or deprivation, and since dating is not a requirement, there can be no deprivation occurring.

          This movement was not created to punish some men who feel entitled to a relationship, it’s (primarily) to advocate for their rights and against the expectations they are subject to.

          It has been pointed out to me that it might constitute a punishment for a subset of entitled men so this is not entirely accurate. That said, I would still say it is unjustified to frame this as a punishment of all men, especially considering that subset of entitled men likely constitutes of the very people in favor of removing rights from women.

          • papertowels@lemmy.one
            4·
            5 days ago

            A punishment requires a penalty or deprivation, and since dating is not a requirement, there can be no deprivation occurring.

            Fwiw, a common example of a punishment removing something that is desired but not required is temporarily taking away X from a rowdy kid, be it phone, snacks, etc, which does poke a hole in that assertion.

            • Vivian (they/them)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              4·
              5 days ago

              Thank you, I hadn’t thought about that, you’re right.

              Would you say then that that form of punishment only affects someone who believes they are entitled to something they typically get? (I can’t see how it would affect someone that doesn’t get something, and I don’t see how it would affect someone that doesn’t feel entitled to it)

              Then, in opposition of what I said, I do agree it would punish a subset of entitled men. I will add an edit to what I said if I’ve understood this correctly.

              • papertowels@lemmy.one
                4·
                5 days ago

                Yes, I’d agree that for it to be a punishment entitlement would need to be involved - for example nobody feels punished that they didn’t win the lotto by buying one ticket.

                Entitlement can take the form of the status quo, whether or not that’s justified is not a conversation I have enough critical thinking for.

                I think what I haven’t seen cleared up in this thread is there are actually two reasons for 4b floating around - one is to try and bring about societal change by crashing the birth rate, but the other is simply out of safety and self-preservation of women. If we focus on the latter, it makes sense that women in more dangerous societies will choose 4b more often than those where they feel safer.

                The conclusion I come to is that 4b will be more common in states that do not value the bodily autonomy/safety of women, which I’d say largely points to conservative states.

                In a way, if safety and bodily autonomy is the reason for choosing 4b, it will self-regulate to not “punish” or affect those who generally vote to pass policies treating women properly.

                I think there was some nuance that was lost in the call for “all” women to participate in 4b

                • Vivian (they/them)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  4·
                  5 days ago

                  Thanks for the clarification, I’d rather not get something wrong because of a misunderstanding.

                  I definitely agree with you, it seems logical that the 4B movement would become more popular in the areas where there are bigger threats to the autonomy and safety of women, self-preservation (and solidarity for that matter) is an extremely important factor.

                  That said, I do understand why there is a call for “all” women to participate. Having more women participating across a country seems like it would increase resistance of some members of the national/federal government to stripping away more rights away from women. It’s quite a complicated subject.

    • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      59·
      7 days ago

      It’s not punishing anyone as much as asserting our bodily autonomy, but go off. Targeting Republicans means no pressure is applied to anyone else to change society. Not every woman will participate in the strike. The effects of it have to be wide reaching.

      It’s a widespread denial of the institutions behind gender relationships. Saying that the system is dangerous for women and refusing to participate in it.

      • xor@infosec.pub
        15·
        7 days ago

        but go off.

        oh look, zero chance that you’re actually trying to have a conversation… yaaay internet.

        Not every woman will participate in the strike.

        almost none will, but if they did, it’s not going to be republican women….

        • Gamma@beehaw.orgEnglish
          20·
          6 days ago

          They could’ve been telling you to go off because the not all men argument is unnecessary and pedantic. Obviously it’s not all men, but it’s enough of them that nobody should have to specify only the misogynists, racists, rapists, etc.

          It has always been bizarre to me that good people lump themselves in with them. You don’t have to be defensive! You can understand nuance!

          • xor@infosec.pub
            3·
            6 days ago

            the post i’m replying to says “ no __ with men”… 4 times… it’s silly to pretend that means only bad men….

            there’s no nuance in that list….

            blanket blaming MEN for everything is just as stupid as men acting like “all women are ___”.

            i thought the whole trans and non-binary thing would’ve taught people that’s it’s not a genetic problem with men, but a cultural problem with toxic masculinity….

            btw, women voted…. they could’ve all voted for feminist issues and anti-gop but they didn’t…. men AND women fucked this up for women AND men… we’re aaaaaaalllll fucked because of this stupid republicult, not because of a chromosome…

            but, go ahead and waste your time with stupid projects, women love doing that!
            (not all women, obviously… you understand nuance!)

            • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              10·
              6 days ago

              First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Klu Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

              Take a moment, a deep breath, some fresh clean air, and think about why you’re putting so much energy into saying… I dunno, all of the things that you’re saying.

              If this 4B thing were about liberating women from a literal slavery, if they falsly identified you as one of those nasty republicans, if they really did mean absolutely no men whatsoever: is it worth all of this anger you’re feeling? Is your quabble with them over your own love life more important than their fight for freedom? Do you not agree that they should be free?

              • xor@infosec.pub
                1·
                6 days ago

                “deep breath” “all this anger you’re feeling” “quabble”
                “do you not agree that they should be free”.
                …
                lol, pure trolling… not bad technique but a little over the top… you should try to actually get me angry before trying to act like i’m inferior for having emotions and not being a psychopath like you….
                but, you do you….

                • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  10·
                  6 days ago

                  If you’re not upset by the 4B women, what are you doing, then?

                  Do you mean to tell me you’re in here arguing about something you don’t even believe in?

                  It’s not a trick, man. Trump makes me angry. Dissidents to good-natured protest make me angry. Anti-intellectualism actually makes me really angry—I’m not shy about that.

            • futatorius@lemm.ee
              3·
              6 days ago

              It’s not just the men, it’s the social rituals and expectations that accompany marriage, dating, sex, etc. People internalize those unwritten rules, even when they intellectually know it’s bullshit. It’s the path of least resistance.

              Anyway, it’s their choice: some men, all men, whatever. From your (or my) point of view as a man, some women just won’t want to get with you, and they’re not obligated to explain why. That’s autonomy, and whining about it doesn’t change the fact that they don’t have to tell you their reasons. It’s ultimately none of your business. They can opt in if and when they choose, and if they choose not to, get over it.

    • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
      16·
      7 days ago

      I give it about 6 months of this strategy before conservative men will be paid to pretend to be leftists in order to impregnate women, so I understand the “don’t fuck any man” strategy.