Obviously I can understand why mysoginists are hated upon, As their belief is all women are trash or men are superior etc. But why are incels also generally hated upon? They are lacking in a way that makes them unable to gey in a relationship, but that shouldn’t necessarily mean they are mysoginists, right?

What am I missing here? I haven’t ever had a relationship with a woman, but I don’t hate all women either. I just consider myself unlucky. Does that make me an incel?

  • beardown@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    I know plenty of people who make this same argument for why whites can’t trust blacks. Those people are called racists. People who make the argument you’re making are called sexists.

    • june@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No you don’t. Because there isn’t a preponderance of evidence than black people are less trustworthy than non-POC.

      Just because an argument sounds similar does not make it the same.

      • beardown@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        there isn’t a preponderance of evidence than black people are more less trustworthy than non-POC.

        That is true, but is not a universally held belief. Many strongly feel that black people are inherently dangerous and untrustworthy. Others feel the same about Muslims. Or Chinese. Or Russians. Or Jewish people. Or Gypsies.

        People who feel that way about those groups are called bigots. You feel that way about men which means you are also a bigot. Not a difficult analysis.

          • beardown@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            What do FBI crime stats say about Black Americans?

            Statistics are easily misconstrued, and often are

        • june@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          We aren’t talking belief here. What I am saying is based off of empirical evidence.

          Why are you being so unapologetically obtuse?

          • beardown@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            You can use FBI crime statistics to make “empirical” arguments about black Americans. Yet I think we both recognize that would be fallacious

            • june@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I’m gonna ask you again, why are you being unapologetically obtuse?

              If you want to challenge the data I’m citing, do it rather than refusing to engage in good faith.

              • beardown@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                It isn’t obtuse to state with moral clarity that it is always wrong to treat someone differently on the basis of their sex

                • june@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  When there’s a preponderance of empirical evidence that a certain group of people poses a larger risk to another group of people, it validates the decision to approach them with caution.

                  You’re arguing that women should just ignore the reality that they are likely to be assaulted (remember, 81%) and that the people most likely to assault them are men. It is reasonable and right for women to exercise caution and clarity when engaging with men for that reason. This isn’t hard, it requires a person to be willfully ignorant to disagree with it. Get your feelings out of this matter and look at the reality we live in.

                  • beardown@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    When there’s a preponderance of empirical evidence that a certain group of people poses a larger risk to another group of people, it validates the decision to approach them with caution.

                    Literally Nazi rationale for 1930s Germany. Or White Americans justification for segregation. Or Israeli justification for genocide against Palestinians

                    People are people. Immutable traits have no influence on how anyone should ever be treated

    • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      ^false equivalency. Sexists hate men (or women) on principle. That’s not what this concept is. You’d know that if you paid attention just a little bit