Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Katerade44 t1_isd3zew wrote

>It is actually possible to support the advancement of all groups at once. To want to see equal representation across all aspects.

That is feminism. It has always boggled my mind that a philosophy seeking to empower all genders is seen as anti-men.

1

FullAhjosu12 t1_isdf5fs wrote

There are some that live in a scarcity mindset and therefore to give something to someone would mean taking stuff away from another. I honestly am not sure how I feel about that sentiment. I like to believe in abundance but sometimes I am not sure. Regardless I believe it is time for the advancement of more groups.

1

Katerade44 t1_isdjafn wrote

This isn't about scarcity. To blame the slight rise in women's social and economic welfare for men, especially minority men, not having equity is just an insane take. That's what this book is trying to claim. This isn't about men v. women. This is about oppressive power structures largely created and propped up by white men being incrementally dismantled while many white men scramble to continue tear down any attempts at equity.

1

wonderfulstoryteller t1_isej6e4 wrote

There’s no blame on women’s progress. Op literally says the author says this was a good thing. Pointing out the fact that women have made huge gains academically and in financial independence, while men have fallen downwards isn’t blaming women lol. As for as power structures, sure, rich white dudes have made it tough for everyone, including and especially black men, which the book covers a great deal and points out they have it worse than any other demographic. But of course this entire sub wants to ignore that and cry about sexism when this book is anti sexism. Fucking unbelievable.

−1

Katerade44 t1_isel3nw wrote

Unbelievable? With the amount of MRA bullshit out there and one fan boy's description of a book. Nah. It's totally believable.

1