epic ratio rule

OOP was downvoted for a non-sequitur on top of a strawman.

When their original argument was refuted they posted what OP posted above as if it was a relevant comeback.

OP is a malignant poster leaving out context.

Oh, and since the exact people your post is about simply can't help themselves and are already pouring in to mansplain and make excuses for themselves, the obligatory:

"Not all men, but definitely this fucking guy," moment

Seeing the state if discourse in the B4 movement threads makes it so obvious that the present community on lemmy is wildly sexist and misogynistic. Like how egotistical and selfish do you have to be to see a movement that is a rational response to women having their bodily autonomy taken away from them in real time, and interpret that situation in a way where you perceive it as a threat to your personal chances of getting laid?

You could be seeing this movement and choosing to recognize that it is coming from a place of justified fear, anger, and suffering of women all over the country, and decide, "This situation is wrong, we need to fight this." It's not hard. Just be an ally.

Ugh.

I just wish misogynistic comments/voice logs could be taped to abusers' foreheads.

There are plenty of comments in that thread that express the same sentiment and have plenty of upvotes. The problem was that commenter came hot out the gate aggressive and putting words in people's mouths.

I didn't see anyone in that thread claiming that women were obligated to have sex with anyone, just a couple people saying they thought it was a tactical mistake for women to withhold sex from people they want to have sex with.

The commenter this was in reply to was definitely more wrong than right, but other comments explained why way better and were up upvoted for it.

How is that getting downvoted? What community is that? Dumb as fuck.

So are bears back on the menu?

IMO the context does absolutely make up for it. It's a reply to:

Wait so the idea is do not sleep with any men? Even men who support your views and rights? This just seems like it would radicalize more incels or generate more sexism. Like the average person who did everything they could is going to go on a date and be told “I’m not have sex until the government is fixed” which would make me say “ok, well, hit me up in 4 years.”

The reply got downvoted because it virtually doesn't address the argument. I read the parent comment as "this course will only inflame society's opinions on women". I agree that this doesn't mean SA would be warranted.

Putting the Nazi in Grammar Nazi?

i straight up blocked lemmy.world after the “strange man or a bear” thing blew up, and i realized LITERALLY THE ONLY PEOPLE arguing in favor of the man were all coincidentally on that instance.

honestly very incel-y

wtf

There are too many people on the Internet (and likely also generally the world) who don't know how successful sex strikes have historically been, and it shows.

An interesting variation on this I've heard that I think illustrates why it's so inflammatory (and thus my issue with it even if I agree fully with what it's saying) is changing it to whether you'd feel more comfortable with a Christian or Muslim at night in the woods.

Like I used to be racist against Russians because I'm Russian originally and I've tons of lived experience around Russians and I would sooner pick just about any other nationality before Russians to be around, I'm justified in this just as I'm justified in feeling that way about men, but at the same time, it's no less inflammatory to say.

It's all just ragebait. That's why unlike many nuanced feminist arguments or discussions about male violence you've actually heard of it and see it on the internet, it generates engagement. Doesn't excuse the harassment, but it explains it. Is it really so productive to get worked up all the time?