deaf_fish

To live is to be cringe. Just don’t be a fascist.

Ehhh, the left is a big board idea. I wouldn’t worry about it too much. It’s a favorite trick of the fascist to pretend to be on the left.

Politics are dumb but very important.

Everybody has different ears and their brains process sound differently. What might not seem very bad and chill to you can be extremely disturbing to somebody else and vice versa. It’s no one’s fault, life just sucks sometimes. Be considerate within reason.

Yeah! We need to make it really clear that we don’t care about the really big greenhouse gas producers, or the people that are a thousand times more wealthy and more problematic than Tailor Swift.

We just want to sound like we care by targeting someone who is comparatively not doing that much damage.

It’s all for the lulls after all.

I’m on a similar train. Once I get over myself, I’m going vegan.

Yes, but the difference is with politics things are more transparent and we have a choice. We can vote. With CEOs, we don’t get a choice and no one really knows what goes on up there.

It’s not that CEOs just happened to be evil. It’s a material conditions problem. Anyone who becomes a CEO has tremendous pressure to become evil. You could even argue that the steps you would have to take to become a CEO are morally problematic. So the pressure to become evil starts early. As soon as you enter the job market.

I still think a good chunk of the code will be visible. You can have all the code up to the point where you call the proprietary function. Obviously you won’t get to see what’s inside that function but you can guess. Also, a lot of proprietary libraries have that functionality really well documented.

A broken clock is right twice a day?

the context that lead to the statement being made in the first place.

But I don’t think that context is necessary to agree/disagree with the statement. What context could men’s feelings be more important that women’s safety?

i provided one in the above statement which was a very literal interpretation of that statement, which quite literally interprets the fact that your feelings sometimes provide negative influence to your perceived safety. To use a specific example here, you may have a fear of heights, which leads to you feeling “unsafe” at heights, even though it’s a psychological adaptation that you have causing it. Although in that case it’s pretty well understood to be a psychological adaptation of something, so that’s not a common thing.

Sorry, I was expecting something worded like “I feel less safe up high because I am afraid of heights so how can feelings be less important than safety”, so I didn’t catch your example.

Yeah, I think that someone could interpret it like that. But I feel like you could pretty easily explain that feeling safe and being actually safe are not the same things. Someone who is confused can easily be caught up and someone who is being malicious would have a hard time not looking silly. I feel like this level of confusion would have a pretty low occurrence count. So I feel like this specific confusion would be a reasonable risk.

If you say a statement and someone goes “yeah no i don’t get that”

My issue with this is that depends on the people joining the conversation. Also depends on how malicious they are. Like if someone didn’t know what “safety” meant. You can solve this by copy-pasting the dictionary definition of “safety”, but then then the next person who joins might not understand the concept of feelings, or not understand some of the words in the definition of “safety”. This is a never ending task.

I think a better way is to target a specific audience. You will lose people outside of that target, but that is unavoidable and will happen with any strategy. Hopefully some of them ask questions or for clarifications, so your message can spread to those groups. I think it is important to be as inclusive as you can be. But most people on here (including me) are doing this in their spare time. So it’s not like we have much flexibility to improve things.

That all being said, I think this meme was well targeted and effective. Did we solve the problem, no, that was never possible to begin with. But we did provide nice discussion about it. We let the extremists show off how silly they were. We let confused people ask questions and get answers. We gave the general public a good showing so they can decide what is right and wrong.

bringing it down to something like “safety is more important than feelings” is so inherently vague

In my mind this is as vague as the original post when it comes to the truth of the statement. The only difference is adding genders which doesn’t affect the meaning of the statement.

Thank you for explaining that.

i’ll make a mockery of it by misinterpreting the ever living shit out of it because i think it’s funny.

Hilarious, I do like a good trolling.

missing obvious context

Like what context specifically?

Which can lead to really funny misinterpretations of this statement specifically

Can you give me some specific examples? It would help me understand.

But hey look at that, i might be wrong and misunderstanding

Which is fine. English is a very imperfect language (most languages are, but that is the best we have). Most of the people are wrong most of the time, including me.

What is your threshold for vagueness here? You would need to have a programming language to remove vagueness down to 0% and encoding this meme perfectly would be 20 pages of code if not more.

I agree with most of what you’re saying.

You keep coming back to the vauge thing and I don’t understand how it’s vague.

If I didn’t know any current events, I would still agree with the statement. I might be curious as to why the statement needed to be made but that is something I could figure out later.

I mean, it also could be intentional. Some people really do hate women. So the first thing they did after the man/bear thought experiment was to say “Oh look women all think all men are rapists/bad. There is some kind of gender war going on here”. A lot of people I have talked to have chilled out after I ask “Who said that all men are rapists? No one is saying that.” They realize they might not have understood the original issue or have been mislead.

That’s what I like about this meme. The statement is fundamentally true. It is a sub-set of “Feelings are less important than safety”. Anyone who upset about it is either someone who is uninformed or mislead. Orrr someone who wants their to be drama, someone who wants women to be afraid or be victims and/or wants men to be hopeless and upset. If you are just uninformed a quick question can resolve the issue. If it is intentional, a discussion should ensue that make their ideas look a foolish or wacky.

where is this signal coming from?

A very large amount of people who think the result of the man/bear thought experiment means that all men are bad/rapists. I have been arguing with quite a few.

So, I am confused. I thought we disagreed on more. But I think we agree on most things. Am I missing something?

For those autists out there. The /s is pretty heavily implied. And we love you.

No one has called all men rapists. The meme doesn’t imply it. The women answering the man/bear thought experiment are not implying that.

Where is this coming from?

I appreciate your reply.

they’re not physically safer though, that’s the problem.

I think this kind of misses the point. Women have given us their feelings on the man/bear topic. Which are implicitly valid as all feelings are (from men or women). Telling them that they have done an incorrect assessment of the situation is invalidating their feelings. This of course adds weight against the man category especially how a large group of people got personally offended by a data point. The interesting piece of information here is that women feel less safe with a man than a bear. Not that their feelings are rooted in reality, because they don’t have to be.

The signal the women are getting is that yeah, their feeling don’t matter. If their feelings don’t matter, what else doesn’t matter? Are they going to get “um, actually-ed” when they try to set personal boundaries. Can you see that if a lot of men don’t respect women’s feeling and personal boundaries that it can turn into a physical saftey issue?

To answer your paragraph about what is likely to happen or if the assessment is correct. I don’t care. It’s a roll of the dice. The bear will kill the woman sometime and the man will kill the woman sometimes and other times nothing will happen. I am not a bear scientist nor a sociologist, I don’t have the numbers in front of me. The question of what actually would happen is uninteresting to me as it is a hypothetical. We don’t need to accurately prepare for the man/woman/bare/woods situation, it’s not likely to happen.

I did a quick (probably bad) google and I got this: “1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed, 2.8% attempted).”. from https://www.rainn.org/statistics/scope-problem.

yeah, so then by this logic, women shouldn’t be choosing to be with a bear,

What women are saying, is based on all the information shown to them and what they have gathered on their own. Given a choice between a random man and a random bear. They would chose to be lost in the woods with a bear. They feel physically and emotionally safer with the bear. Is their assessment accurate/correct, who knows?

Does this mean all men are rapists? No, no one has said that.

it doesn’t matter whether they are more/less physically safe around the man over the bear,

I disagree, why would physical saftey not be important? A bear could be happy just leaving them alone and eating berries. A man might decide to do something physically unwanted/dangerous to them.

My point here is that you need to communicate clearly, because otherwise you could be saying literally anything.

I agree, I wish the people who are raging at me and down-voting me would be nice, and tell me what interpretation they have of the statement. Instead I am getting vague feelings posting with no arguments. Thank you for diving into this with me.

i agree, but in this case, the irony here is that we aren’t supposed to care about the feelings of men generically

No one in this conversation has said that. The feelings of men are important. The feelings of women are important. The saftey of men is more important that the feelings of women.The safety of women are more important than the feelings of men. Saying one does not contradict the other.

the point here was that these statements weren’t related at all

I agree, I thought this was a hypothetical, sorry I was wrong.

Men’s feelings can have an effect on the saftey of women. Imagine if the majority of men felt like they were owed sex even if women didn’t want it. These feelings will cause most women to be physically unsafe.

There is no way to argue against a statement like “Women’s safety is more important than men’s feelings”

Yes there is. Show how the statement causes harm. If it is too ambiguous, make it concrete by interpreting it.

“Men’s feelings” and “women’s safety” don’t negate each other,

For the most part you are right (most feelings are not problematic), but there are situations where Men’s feelings do affect women’s safety.

For example. If a Man feels like he deserves sex even if a woman is not interested in having that sex. Another example is if the average man feels like they rightfully control or are better than women. Then that makes that society less safe for women.

But yeah, if a man feel sad because his favorite driver loss the race, that doesn’t harm women. To me, these kinds of feelings were never the issue.

Why don’t you hold the actions of rapists and abusers against rapists and abusers, instead of innocent men who’ve done nothing but try to live their lives and respect the people around them?

I am confused about you got here. Is this post calling you a rapist? I have yet to judge you on anything. I am just trying to understand why this post is getting you so upset. If it turns out this post is upsetting to you because you are a rapist that thinks that women shouldn’t have safety, then your reactions would make sense to me. As of now, I am still confused.