What's going on Canada?
🍁 Meta
🗺️ Provinces / Territories
🏙️ Cities / Local Communities
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
🏒 Sports
Hockey
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
💻 Schools / Universities
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales
🗣️ Politics
🍁 Social / Culture
Rules
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
“I wish it was more of a surprise than it is.”
This subtitle is bleak and accurate. Every single study on extremism in the US shows that white supremacists and "sovereign citizen" fanatics are killing an order of magnitude more people than all other groups (including religion!) combined. Canada is bound to observe similar symptoms.
i really wish things like gender studies had not been drowned in a sea of hate from both ends.
if you so much as defend the 'wrong group', you are already hated by both sides for being the purist evil.
you can't be egalitarian and thoughtful without being someone's enemy, and that hatred has been spurred on because anger and frustration lead to website clicks. some companies and media sites were created purely to stir up heated dialogue and get more people fighting on what should be obvious things.
it's funny, since i was a child i've been very thoroughly in the mindset of "don't judge, harm, or treat people differently for the body they were born into, which consenting human adults they share their intimacy with, or what they choose to do with their own body, as long as others aren't being harmed."
things get grey around "public decency," but anything generally applicable should be generally agreeable. for me, no public nudity is an example, but some communities would disagree with this, so you could get into debates about nuance.
that's not what happens though. if you say "hey, these people shouldn't be judged or abused or neglected for being born with/as ____" you will be the enemy to whomever considers "people born with/as ____" the enemy.
if you don't advocate for and defend the hatred, abuse, and ill treatment of said group, then you are pure evil to these people.
yes, this means the group you personally think is evil for whatever reason. they didn't choose the skin or society they were born into, and you have no honest understanding of how those traits or qualities have affected that person personally in their life.
people suck. i don't like dealing with people anymore.
i really wish things like gender studies had not been drowned in a sea of hate from both ends.
I feel like gender studies in particular doesn't get much trouble from the left.
depends on what you're trying to address and where. i feel a large disconnect in experience is to blame for how it usually goes. have you ever seen a "conversation" about men's rights?
i'll first state that i consider myself fully and wholly "on the left." also that this is in the context of responding to the statement of "I feel like gender studies in particular doesn’t get much trouble from the left."
i could make a similar and probably much more aggressively fueled argument about the actions of the "right." as far as "creating trouble" goes.
i will also state that the larger dialogue around the issue is a shitshow that allows no nuance. why i made my earlier comment.
i will state that i don't align when "on the left" is supposed to mean "100% A-OK with inflammatory bigoted speech when it's directed at the 'bad ones' because it's only bad when they do it."
i have enough anecdotal experiences that would encourage me to emphasize this being an actual issue, even if you think it isn't. i know it affected me, and i'm sure many others have been affected in similar ways. given the diversity of people, some would react more aggressively experiencing the things that i have, and then being insulted, shut down, and insinuated as evil regardless of my actual actions or thoughts.
i think situations like op's article are brought on by that kind of experience, mixed with toxic media making up additional reasons to be angry or hate x/y group. assuming that even 10% of any populace has some dummies or assholes in it, we can expect some of them to find each-other and take it to another level of reactive hate and violence, which is where i assume people like op's example come from. these things are not helped when the topic can't even be approached without intensely aggressive feedback.
not everyone responds in violence. in my old province there was a guy who tried having a shelter for men in need. there were no others in the country at the time for men, despite the hundreds for women. he killed himself after years of public harassment and abuse, and feeling completely hopeless in just trying to help others in need. i myself have been sent graphic images about male mutilation purely for taking an egalitarian neutral stance when it comes to generally helping people, male specific problems included. doesn't matter how nuanced my opinions were.
if you never saw how toxic tumblr became before it died off, you are lucky not to see the worst of it. the bad actors on the left can definitely make themselves known. some just become terrible people. i've had a manager out of nowhere tell me she wouldn't have hired me if she was there from the start because she doesn't hire boys. i've had a coworker tell me about their plans to falsely accuse someone they knew of rape because she didn't like him.
terrible people are everywhere on every side. if you are convinced your side has no bad actors, no bigotry or evil, you are deluding yourself. again, i consider myself far left on the political spectrum, and i'm hated by both sides because i don't outright dismiss anything that isn't 100% alongside the popular narrative, even if the popular narrative directly denies my existence and experiences.
so i'm left quite hopeless and despondent.
have you ever seen a “conversation” about men’s rights?
Yes, many. Like more parental leave for fathers. Never seen a legitimate discussion attract hate from progressive circles, though, if that's what you meant to bring up, unless you're talking about fringe communities of weirdos on Tumblr. Also never seen any hate from the left about gender studies. Or any studies in general, really, except for pseudoscience atrocities like phrenology.
terrible people are everywhere on every side. if you are convinced your side has no bad actors, no bigotry or evil, you are deluding yourself.
That's obviously true and at the same time a misleading framing. Yes, every big group of humans includes at least one shitbag. Some groups are clearly more concentrated on that, though.
i’m hated by both sides because i don’t outright dismiss anything that isn’t 100% alongside the popular narrative
Are you really, though? By the whole left? Or even by a measurable chunk of it? And are you positively sure it's because you "don't outright dismiss anything outside the popular narrative"? Because I'm also not aligned on everything and yet I get along fine with all social movements.
like i said, i could easily frame a more aggressive criticism of people on the right. but i don't think it's misleading to state that this perspective is necessary. it is why i specified at the start that it may depend heavily on the specific community. there are billions of people forming their own groups floating around rather large and poorly defined concepts.
my personal experience has been one of violent and aggressive vitriol any time i've even suggested that attention go towards men. even the slightest nuance to a conversation being shut down with extreme of insulting claims. online and offline, i've been told directly that i shouldn't even be allowed to speak or have an opinion on anything related to gender or gender related issues, because of the body i was born into.
i don't think it's unreasonable to say that my overwhelming experience over the years has not shown contrary to the things i've stated here. if it isn't relevant in your life, perhaps i just had many unfortunate situations. i cannot ignore them, or the fact that they are generally excused almost every time they are brought up, usually with the reasoning that it's ok because of the direction of the action.
again, i know i'm not the only person with this experience, as i mentioned that one man killed himself because of the very thing i'm attempting to state. i don't think a critical view at the bad actors in our own spectrum of politics should be faux pas. i also don't think i should need ten miles of red tape around any mention of an issue that affects men or boys because i'm worried of being affiliated with people and opinions that i hate.
again, if that's not your experience, then that is fortunate for the area and people your experience revolves around.
i think my experience, even if it were the only one of its kind, should be enough to excuse saying "maybe just make sure you aren't doing the thing the people you criticize do, while using the same excuses they do."
because it is a thing that exists and has affected me personally, as well as people i've known and loved while growing up. a history of having my reality denied has made it difficult for me to not be adamant about it.
i think my experience, even if it were the only one of its kind, should be enough to excuse saying “maybe just make sure you aren’t doing the thing the people you criticize do, while using the same excuses they do.”
That invitation for introspection is a homeopathic dose of the picture you're drawing, though.
You literally started this discussion with a sentence that puts zero nuance into the claim that both sides bring hate to gender studies discussions. Intentionally or not, you're framing both sides as spewing comparable amounts of hate. We know that one side is a fire-hose aimed directly at our faces, so I think the criticism that you get is not because people fundamentally disagree with you that "the left can be intolerant" but because that's tone deaf in this context.
Let's step back and remember: this is yet another news article about extremist bigots attacking people, and here you are investing most of your energy in this thread to argue that the left can be intolerant. Technically valid, sure. But do you not see the message it sends?
the point was that i think my statement provided should be reasonable in use regardless of frequency of its relevance to your perception of what is the norm. i state this generally due to my opinions being shut down for not being another person's personal experience.
as i've stated, my perspective has been potently reinforced over the course of the whole of my life, regardless of whether your personal experience matches. i think arguing past that is equally arguing from personal experience on any side, but arguing that i cannot make my concerns known or relevant is unreasonable to me.
i also personally believe the denial and ignorance of this topic is responsible for the growing of environments that inevitably leads to bad actors being more encouraged and aggressive in their actions and opinions. that "fire hose" is a lot larger than it should be, because there is denial that ANY bad actors exist within the space on the other side. i've also personally been aggrieved by the 'water pouring' from the "left." to remove myself from that analogy, and make a blatant statement. the experiences that i've had on the side of the political spectrum that i consider myself to be on has allowed itself to become inclusive of very harmful and evil actors that have affected me personally, as well as others i personally know. i've also seen bad actors (or ignorant moderates) on the other side of the spectrum be enflamed or more radical by this.
both the social issues that are ignored due to this issue, as well as the pushback from any aggrieved parties are extremely relevant to the topic of this thread.
i'm tired of being dismissed as if my opinion is wrong or irrelevant just because certain people hate the concept it might be relevant to, and don't want it taking the "energy" away from the "important issues." i consider that statement as intentionally attempting to dismiss a relevant point purely to avoid possibly acknowledging the topic it is built around, even at the cost of making things worse for everyone involved.
that's fine if you disagree on the importance of the issues i'm presenting, but i believe they are important and disagree with you that they aren't.
but i believe they are important and disagree with you that they aren’t.
I'm not disagreeing that your grievances are real or important. I did not say it takes energy away from important issues either. I acknowledged multiple times that everything you said is logically sound.
I just wish you'll take note of this exchange as one more data point evidencing that maybe it's not your beliefs that might attract negative responses.
EDIT: I think this is a good moment to short-circuit our conversation, as I feel we've just repeated ourselves at least once. As a final word, I also invite you to meditate on why your positioning has attracted pushback while oneofthemladygoats articulated something you resonate with and at the same time managed to have a different perspective on this "both sides" picture. Surely there's something to learn from them if not from our discussion.
i mean, my whole concern wouldn't be a concern if responses were like oneofthemladygoats even half of the time the issue was broached. this is the legitimate most accepting or positive response i've had to my concerns that i've ever experienced. online or in person.
i would say i've not stated any opinions that should even be controversial. asking purely for the recognition of bad actors and the harm they might bring, rather than refusal to address or accept anything that can imply that bad actors even can exist around the community.
my issue has never been people disagreeing with my points on the topic, but the adamant refusal to even recognize that certain situations exist, and likely contribute to the personal experience of people who end up feeling hopeless or angry. i think this feeds into situations like op's article when it occurs to less reasonable or more violent individuals. maybe if someone recognized their issues and tried to understand their perspective, they could have been derailed from whatever echo-chamber they may have been trapped in. this would also help combat the intentionally polarizing articles made to ensure cohesion is never found, because anger gets more clicks. remembering that experience and personal truths exist on different societal and cultural scales. we're interacting from a very messy starting point.
perhaps we are just going in circles, but i hope to see more positive change in the future. i do think dialogue in some corners have become less aggressive, and this thread has been a good example. if some of the more emotionally unstable people have the ability to communicate their grievances and understand the perspectives they are unaligned with, maybe we can avoid more of these trends. recognizing and stopping the support for bad actors in the community might just help.
i'll meditate on this, but i implore the same in your direction.
Cheers to more understanding and less aggression in all spaces. I'm sorry for coming across as dismissive, I guess everyone has their things to be adamant about. In the social spaces I'm most often, my guard is up against people who weaponize the imperfection of social movements.
i get that. i think there's a highly abstracted, or high-dimensional complication to discussing social issues (or anything else) which has never been properly addressed. people are bad at visualizing the scale of variation of experiences and interpretations that exist. even communicating basic information is difficult, with vastly varying interpretation of words/phrases, to differences in local social ecosystems/experienced environments. it is enough to make properly conveying or interpreting information increasingly difficult with the scale and diversity of environments that exist. now that we're all connected, it's a lot all at once.
i often end up overly defensive as well due to a history of rather aggressive dismissal or denial of some notable traumas in my life. to the degree of being harassed and insulted in a way i think most would have difficulty not internalizing. my main issue is that people generally suck at communicating and understanding each-other, and the fact that we can't even communicate about that without being polarized and shut down.
i think fixing that would end better for everyone, regardless of personal history.
aha, this comment makes your position a bit more clear for me. reading your initial response had me feeling a bit kerfuffled because, for me and for the progressive people I know, the line is pretty clear as to what's acceptable and what's not- it comes down to whether someone is making an attempt to dehumanize others or defend those actions in others. there's SO much effort being made to paint the position of "the left" as anything and everything else, but it really does boil down to standing for the humanity and dignity of others. when our poorest, weakest, most vulnerable members of society can thrive, we all thrive. it's important to recognize beliefs that are trying to masquerade as that when they're really something else altogether.
in other words, I think it's important to really get at what a belief is about. I wouldn't call that automatic pushback against men's rights and supporting men progressive or left wing, tbh. you're so right that there is a ton of automatic pushback on the part of a lot of people because they assume men's rights = the typical MRA misogyny. misandry is woven into so much of that response and people don't necessarily consider how they're hurting others in an extremely similar way when they embrace that narrative. the conversation around how to support men does get so toxic so quickly for a few reasons, yet it's not the zero-sum game many people treat it as. the reality is, men can be subject to things like domestic violence and rape too, and they deserve support just like anyone else in those situations. at a fundamental level, supporting men in these situations isn't the threat to women and others that a ton of people treat it as in their knee-jerk reaction to the topic. these hard topics deserve discussion and consideration too, but often the reactions we're talking about, that pushback, doesn't come from a place of offering respect and dignity. and that's not very "left wing", so to speak.
I think because I'm queer, pan specifically, there's a sort of odd sort of advantage in this regard in being exposed to situations where calling out regressive beliefs that masquerade as progressive happens a bit more frequently. there are pleeeenty of examples of this in queer spaces- misogyny from gay men, misandry from gay and bi women (honestly, in my experience the latter has been MORE problematic in that regard, but I'm keenly aware that's my own experience and maybe not that of others), TERF & LBG-but-not-the-T groups, and bi erasure are all queer examples of this that are encountered, sadly, not infrequently. Pride is meant to be a radical celebration of people living their life to the fullest as their true self, and it's so often not, instead bogged down by division, othering, and sometimes downright hatred. There are unfortunately a lot of people out there who treat their own queerness as a zero-sum game where breaking the mould and being different is seen as a threat to their own existence because that's just how their belief system works. People don't necessarily want to think of themselves as regressive in their beliefs, but when they're pushing a narrative of misinformation or hate, it's so, so important to recognize and call out that bullshit for exactly what it is- it's not left-wing, it's not progressive, it's a defense of a status quo that harms others.
Outside of queer spaces, you might not get as much exposure to digging at problematic viewpoints like that, to the pushback that happens to that reaction you're talking about. It's easy to fall into the trap of thinking "both sides" when you have these anecdotes of harm, but when you really dig into the beliefs, it's really not both sides, at all. It's important to call out regressive beliefs for what they are, it's important to identify a hateful belief as such, and it takes so much courage to do that when those voices are screaming at you and over you from different directions. I hope you know, this queer gal sees you and what you're advocating for when it comes to supporting men who face harm, and supports you in that.
also a pan individual : D
i agree with everything i've read here. very well put. i especially agree about the bad actors being antithetical to left wing and to being progressive as a concept. i hope to see them criticized as such more in the future.
Wow, I have to say I haven't encountered anything like that personally. Plenty of "men don't have feelings" stuff, sure (like so much), but not what you're describing. I'm sorry that happened to you.
I'm not so sure that's what gender studies is, though.
i don't think it's well defined, so it often depends on the whims of the people in charge of the specific instance, and whatever their personal intent is. i do hope many have much more inclusive and open environments than what my experiences lead me to believe. i just hope people figure out how to properly communicate on the subject before more escalations happen.
also think there should be more active research and work done about trends like media groups being created specifically to rile people up and polarize them, because rage material is good for the algorithm. it tends to flare up anger on both sides, and reduce constructive dialogue, as well as increasing extreme acts by the bad actors.
i really wish things like gender studies had not been drowned in a sea of hate from both ends.
What hate are people on the Left/progressive giving gender studies?
One myth says the left will arrest you, eat your babies, and socialism, if you dont use the proper pronoun.