582
Female surgeons sexually assaulted while operating
(www.bbc.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
582 points (97.9% liked)
News
35754 readers
665 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes, but essentially saying "not all men" serves no other purpose than to enable men to continue to ignore and exclude themselves from the problem, making them actively a part of the problem.
Edit: I find it absolutely hysterical that you assholes can't help yourselves but pipe up and continue to expose yourselves to be exactly the kind of men we are talking about (when all it takes it to literally just.. not. You realise you do have the ability to just shut the fuck up, right?). Enjoy whining in to the void, I've already wasted too much time on you clowns.
You also have the ability to shut the fuck up. Seems like most people here would like very much for you to exercise that right immediately.
Would you do the same for different races or religions?
"Yes, but essentially saying "not all muslims" allows muslims to continue to ignore and exclude themselves from the problem, making them actively a part of the problem."
Of course not, those aren't on the list of approved groups to generalise.
Lmfao at you thinking you "got me".. 🤣🤣
If the discussion was about a situation where a power imbalance clearly and obviously benefitted Muslims, then yes (except there isn't a global problem with the power imbalance favouring Muslims on anywhere the same scale as there is for men).
It really isn't difficult once you take your head out of your ass.
Or you can continue to make up as many strawmen and false equivalencies as you like to try and derail the conversation, but all that achieves is you showing your ass as being part of the problem, knowingly now, because you've been provided with information that should make you rethink your bad take, not double down on it.
Strawmen don't exist, this user is asking you about situations that do exist, such as the example about the muslims, which is absolutely a real thing that you absolutely would get flack for saying in real life. So no, to ask you a why it's magically ok for you to say it about men when it's not ok to say about literally any other group, makes it by definition the very opposite of a strawman. Don't use words if you don't understand what they mean.
This also demonstrates that your point about power is wrong. If hate speech is only allowed about one single group, it suggests the opposite of: that group holds all the power.
I suppose not all women are as rude as you. Does that ignore and exclude you from the problem?
What are you going on about?
Nobody in this thread has said “not all men”.
The top comment said “can people just not suck”, then OP responded saying “actually, in this case, only men suck”.
Except you did, insisting on saying "people are terrible" as an answer to "men are terrible" is not only pretending people of other genders are part of the problem when they're not but is
Not that any of this will stop you from continuing to try to derail the conversation instead of just accepting that this is a problem with men, no matter how uncomfortable that is for you to deal with.
But they didn't say that? They said 'men are terrible' is included in the phrase 'people are terrible' because men are people.
Except they did, insisting on saying "people are terrible" instead of "men are terrible" is not only pretending people of other genders are part of the problem when they're not but is
Not that any of this will stop you from continuing to try to derail the conversation instead of just accepting that this is a problem with men, no matter how uncomfortable that is for you to deal with.
Yes, in this case men are absolutely to blame, I am not denying this.
I believe they intended their comment as a general statement not specific to sexual harassment/assault. It felt like a fatalist response, not as an attempt to derail the conversation.
You came in here picking a fight but everyone else is an asshole. Ok there.
If it's not them who caused the problem, why can't they be excluded from the problem? Are you to blame for any other women's problems?