• Steeve@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Deep Thoughts With The Deep.

    I do love how the stupid comment is refuted by a purposely stupid comment that perfectly refutes the first stupid comment in the same realm of stupidity. This is gonna blow some idiots mind.

      • Steeve@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Because turning addition into an analogy about gender it’s meaningless and stupid, but we’ve got this weird obsession with turning shit into metaphors and pretending that it proves something.

        • brcl@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          It literally proves that two separate things can be equal. It’s an eloquent and poignant way of saying “you’re wrong.” And they are wrong, because the only argument was they’re not equal because they’re different.

          If they wanted to talk about hormones and muscle mass and other physical things, then yes, your point is valid. But they made a very stupid argument and were proven wrong.

          • Steeve@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is absolutely no situation where reducing a conversation on gender to basic algebra isn’t stupid, but like I said, the initial comment is stupid and deserves a stupid response. It was a good response, but I think we can all admit the conversation itself was stupid and meaningless.

            • PM_ME_STEAM_KEYS@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              There is absolutely no situation where reducing a conversation on gender to basic algebra isn’t stupid

              Except this one. If you’re going to be so fundamentally wrong that you can be refuted by elementary arithmetic, why should anyone bother putting any more thought into it than that? No, you can’t reduce gender relations to a basic math question, but you can reduce thst guy’s take without missing anything important.

              • Steeve@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think you should go read my comments again, because we’re saying the same thing here.

            • 520@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              There is absolutely no situation where reducing a conversation on gender to basic algebra isn’t stupid

              If they were doing so in totality (ie: all conversations on gender being compared to basic algebra) then I’d agree with you. However the response is so targeted, in it’s content and in the context of going after a specific respondent who was saying that things that are different cannot be equal, that I don’t think they fall into this trap.

  • MalarchoBidenism [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh, you believe in universal human rights? Have you considered that everyone has their own favorite color, and therefore we can never be equal?

    spoiler

    smuglord

      • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was so fricken stressed five years ago when I got divorced because of all the noise. A year later I had full custody and I didn’t have to do anything other than be present for them and be willing to take on the full burden of their care, school, doctors, housing, meals, clothes, etc. Their mom eventually moved a long distance away a couple years later so they don’t get to see her much which kind of sucks but I wonder how many whiny ass fathers actually walk the walk vs flapping their jaw.

  • wipasoda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Well to a certain degree I guess. They’re never going to be as equal as numbers can. What is even meant by men and women being “equal”? Equality of opportunity?

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Why do you ask?

      It’s been my experience that people who value equality don’t care about the nitty gritty of what it means, because it’s a value. An ideal. And if you hold equality as an ideal, that means it’s always something to work towards. Inqualities are triaged, but they’re all something that we should overcome in the name of fairness and egalitarianism.

      Someone always brings up “equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome” when they want to disrupt and derail people who value equality by getting them to wrestle in the mud about how much equality is too much. And, to be frank, it feels like you’re trying to throw the “equality of outcome” wrench into the gears here, and I don’t believe that is ever done in good faith.

      What’s the problem with equality of outcome? What does it even mean? Where does the objection come from?

      Simply put, it comes from resentment. It comes from the idea that “I worked hard, so I deserve a better quality of life than someone I choose to believe worked less hard!” And that’s just a long way of saying “I believe I am more deserving than someone else”.

      But why? Often this comes from people who already have a certain level of comfort in life believing that they hold more right to that comfort, safety, and happiness than someone else. Too often in this sphere, it comes from people who liked tech and did well in technical subjects in school believing that that entitles them to a higher quality of life than someone who wasn’t interested in or had no special aptitude for those subjects. But shouldn’t one of the freedoms that comes from equality being the freedom to find joy in what you want? Why should I be rewarded more lucrative Ly than you for enjoying something different?

      And if I don’t enjoy it, should it really make sense for me to suffer at something I don’t enjoy for the sake of wealth? Maybe the equality of outcome is really the equal ability to experience joy, and comfort, and security no matter what we enjoy and how we invest our time? If the world has the resources to allow it, then why should one person be punished for chasing their joy while another is rewarded?

      The answer usually boils down to “I made better decisions, so I should be rewarded!” which is just another way of saying “people who make mistakes should be punished!”

      And that seems like bullshit. What kind of world is that? Where people aren’t safe to make mistakes (and this is ignoring the idea that someone’s passion can be considered a mistake)? Where they’re punished for trying something different? Or for not jumping on a trend? Where safety and comfort are used as crudgles to force people to do things that make them miserable?

      Because that’s really what “what do you mean by equality?” is really saying.

        • bermuda@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The topic is different but it’s written in a very similar style to the monologue speech from atlas shrugged

      • wipasoda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        you do have a point in the sense that if we live in a utopia, I think there is good reason to think that it shouldn’t matter what choices people make, they all get the same ‘reward’/financial outcome/etc.

        You said:

        If the world has the resources to allow it, then why should one person be punished for chasing their joy while another is rewarded?

        Yes okay, but what if there are limited resources? Or a world that needs improvement? Isn’t it then better to incentivize people to work hard to make our world of limited resources a world of abundance? If yes, then it means to give those a higher reward at the expense of those who made “other choices”.

        Are we now living in a world of limited resources / that needs improvement? If yes, then it would probably be justified to take from those who made “other choices”

    • Chariotwheel@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      And in the first place, aren’t we all different?

      Nobody is just man or woman and nothing else. We all have a huge number of traits that all together make us individuals. From the physical like size, hair and so on to the mental, what we enjoy, what interests us and so on.

      King Charles, the Rock and me are men. Solely on gender we are the same. But people would be quick to point out all the differences.

    • Are_Euclidding_Me [e/em/eir]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What is event meant by man and women being “equal”?

      That we’re all human beings who deserve to not have our gender determine what we can and cannot do? I think that’s pretty obvious. In practice, of course, we’re not there yet. Misogyny is rampant and insidious. But the goal in my mind is for gender to just legitimately not matter at all, outside of, like, romantic and sexual relationships.

      • wipasoda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        so if you need help lifting something heavy, do you ask a man or a woman? If you only see a group of strangers.

          • wipasoda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            why don’t you give the idea some serious thought instead of weaseling your way out? To guide you more: Your only options are between a man and a woman who look equally muscular and you don’t have a lot of time to ask around. It’s noisy and you can only ask either one at a time, who do you ask? I’m OBVIOUSLY talking about those scenarios (even if rare…) where the relevant bit comes into play

            • SomeoneElseMod@feddit.ukOPM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              18
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              If they appear to be as strong as each other, I’m asking the woman. I’m a woman - I’m more likely to be harmed by a strange man than I am a woman. It’s the safer option for me.

              But regardless, you’re being insulting and argumentative. Not only is it completely uncalled for, it’s against the rules of this community. This is your warning, if you break the rules again you will be banned. You can find the community rules and lemmy’s code of conduct in the sidebar.

              • Thordros [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Okay, but, what if it’s a life or death lifting scenario, where they need to lift a gunman who is going to shoot your children? You have to save either your son, or your two daughters who are half as valuable. The fffffemale lifter is also wearing airpods and cannot hear you.

                WHAT DO YOU DO??

              • wipasoda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I’m a woman. I’m more likely to be harmed by a strange man than I am a woman. It’s the safer option for me.

                Fair. But still, even if they look just as muscular, men are still generally stronger. Or at least if you if you couldn’t judge it clearly because they have clothes on. Say you are solely interested in the one who is stronger, then you would still only choose the man, not the woman. Even if this scenario is niche, it’s still possible and this precisely points out the crux of the problem. So in this scenario, can this be called unequality or morally wrong or whatever we started off?

                EDIT: So arguments are prohibited in this sub? I just read that. What the hell.

                • SomeoneElseMod@feddit.ukOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  “EDIT: So arguments are prohibited in this sub? I just read that. What the hell.”

                  Yup, arguing is actually against lemmy’s code of conduct if you read it. I’ve implemented it fairly strictly here because this is one of the few light-hearted non-meme communities on lemmy so far and I want it to be relaxed, friendly and welcoming place. After Reddit, it is so refreshing to have a space free of name calling, aggressiveness and brigading.

                  There’s a stickied post explaining how this community is moderated and asking for feedback and input on how this community should be run. You’re welcome to leave your (polite) suggestion there, or volunteer to help moderate. Alternatively you can make your own community or join another if your prefer a more feisty atmosphere. I believe there’s another !confidentlyincorrect@lemmy.world but it’s dead. It’s not personal - the communities I’ve created are positive, enjoyable spaces, free of arguments. Or at least they are in theory. Modding is hard.

                  EDIT; sorry, I’m confusing my communities. murderedbywords and confidently_incorrect have the same rules. I’m don’t think I’ve made a stickied post here yet but I will shortly.

        • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d ask whoever looks strongest if I had to pick one, or the group in general for volunteers if I were in the real world. I’ve met some women who could shoulder press me if they wanted to. If you were looking for someone to help you move a couch, I could try, but you’d be better off asking those women.

    • Durotar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s a legit question. People are willing to say stupidest shit to feel socially acceptable.

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      the best part of this dumb comment is that the only way it’s right is if you fail at basic arithmetic that single-digit-age children could correct you on

      it’s a perfect metaphor for sexists and transphobes