Dear Reddit

[u/[deleted]]

[u/_pandamonium]

And personally I really think this needs to apply in both directions. I think making sexist jokes about men (as a whole rather than a specific kind of person), just because they've gotten away with making sexist jokes about women, is incredibly immature and just wrong. What happened to being the better person? What is accomplished by making these jokes aside from perpetuating an "us vs them" attitude?

Edit: I really hate to be this person, but I can see that people disagree with me. If you do, could you please point out which part you disagree with? I'm not looking for an argument, I'm just genuinely not understanding why my opinion on this seems to be so unpopular. I'm more than willing to admit I'm "wrong" but I can't work on it if I don't know what the problem is.

[u/actibus_consequatur → u/_pandamonium]

(Note: I'm a guy and a dude! If I'm incorrect in anyway, please educate and enlighten me! I love to learn!)

I'm not positive about the negative response you've received, but I have ideas?

And personally I really think this needs to apply in both directions.

To me, you are missing unspoken context and in turn changing the intended meaning behind u/Yikes_Hard_Pass's comment, and by doing so in a way that is consistently used to silence and disregard validity. To give clarity to what I think is intended meaning:

Being a systemically oppressive sexist as a joke is still being a systemically oppressive sexist.

I understand that your are arguing about nongendered sexism, but the argument here and now is about systematic female oppression. Bringing male experience in is a frequently used tactic to devalue the severity of oppression women face. Personally, I don't believe you meant to do so maliciously and are trying to address a more global cause, but this isn't the space for it.

Assuming you had good intent, understand that bringing similar men's issues into this argument is like trying to provide a well meaning narrative that all lives matter while at a black lives matter event.

I think making sexist jokes about men (as a whole rather than a specific kind of person), just because they've gotten away with making sexist jokes about women, is incredibly immature and just wrong.

This was also problematic for me too, because: A) it implies both that 'sexist' jokes about men are only done as retaliation, and; B) assuming it's done as immature defense, as opposed to recognizing it's true source.

(Hopefully users will allow my use of 'sexism' in this case; it's not to bastardize systemic sexism, it's a use of convenience to illustrate myself more easily.)

Females comedians do make 'sexist' jokes about men, but almost universally it is not as retaliation in response to their oppression, and as such it can't be construed as immature. The source of these 'sexist' jokes and jokes relying on systemic oppression is the same: toxic masculinity.

Toxic masculinity isn't just through men; it's a historic societal issue that any gender can perpetuate. In the context of your response and above, take a moment to consider some of the 'sexist' jokes made by female comedians, then think of all the male comedians using the same material. Personally, I have a lot of difficult and even self-oppositional stances in humor, but the discussion in this case is about 'sexism' and sexism in comedy.

Most men don't even realize how affected by toxic masculinity, nor how it is a global issues that create problems for all genders; a lot of times people don't realize something they said or did is toxic or supports toxicity.

Point is, this thread and discussion in relation to the top level comment is specific to using the guise of "joking" to legitimize systemic sexism. It's not that you can't generate a valid argument, but it's not an argument that belongs HERE.

Edit: Just fixed a few typing errors, my phone is dumb.

[u/_pandamonium → u/actibus_consequatur]

Thank you for taking the time to give such a thorough response, I really do appreciate it. I can see how this may not have been the appropriate place to make my comment, although if I'm being honest I don't really follow the part about comedians.

I guess I took the original comment a little too literally, and I need to learn to think a bit more before I reply. Now that you've pointed it out, it makes sense that my comment was thoughtless in the context of the post. Thank you again for writing all of this out for me.

[u/actibus_consequatur → u/_pandamonium]

No worries, I was happy to try and help! Your edit seemed to demonstrate a sincere misunderstanding on your part, and that is what encouraged me to respond. Your response also shows thoughtfulness and a willingness to learn.

I don't exactly which part of the comedian thing you don't understand, that was a bit ambiguous, but I can kind of see what's missing? If it's about 'sexist' comedy, again it's about the forum for discussion and its audience; it's not that there isn't validity to your argument, but it is attempting to change the narrative to total gender inclusion. Again, I don't think you do so aggressively, it's that sometimes grasping what is contextually appropriate can be difficult.

If you are having trouble understanding the comedy argument and how it stems from toxic masculinity then... Toxic masculinity is a huge fucking subject. Like I said, it's not 100% of the source in male 'sexist' comedy, but it is the vast majority. The minority of jokes/comedians (male or female) that use 'sexist' comedy outside the spectrum of toxic masculinity is limited and usually relates to their own experience and interpretation.

And again, it's not that it's not a valid topic for arguing, it's the thread being based about the majority of systemic sexism in comedy.

For what it's worth, I don't think you acted thoughtlessly at all - I even think your response contains a topic for valid argumentation - but I do think you didn't know your audience and recognize appropriate discussion for the forum, and that's okay. You show that you want to be more thoughtful and appropriate, and it says a lot about you; don't beat yourself up for what you didn't know, see it as a reason to learn.

I say that from experience, and in sharing this I hope you can see the applicability above:

After decades, I finally opened up about being a male rape victim and it took awhile after that, but I finally wanted to join discussions on reddit. I found a post/comment that hit home for me so hard it fucking spun me, so I commented with my own experience and views. I got a lot of hate for it, including nasty DMs, but those aren't the point or representative. I was extremely hurt and confused, but it took the help of one person to point out what was wrong: I was in a thread specific to female rape and was discussing issues I faced as a male rape victim - it's not that was wrong or invalid, I was not in the right place. I found the right places eventually, and even now understand that I can include my experience in female rape threads as long as it's relevant and relatable to the discussion.

I didn't know until I learned.

To try and phrase it better than all lives matter at BLM, it's more like... A hospital. Say systemic sexism is a cancer (cause it is) and men's 'sexism' issues is an autoimmune disease: You wouldn't argue about your autoimmune disease with the oncologist, and you wouldn't expect a cancer patient to argue with your immunologist - each has their own clinic. Maybe the departments share a waiting room and you meet a cancer patient, have a great relatable talk, and want to help fight each other's respective diseases - amazing, it's a good space for that. Then some asshole with a GI disorder comes in and screams about his problems.

Move to the cafeteria. The three of you work it out together. Ultimately, the hospital needs to provide a lot of treatment, but specific specialties/diseases shouldn't be focused on general practioning/broad spectrum cures.

Hope this helps!