• sloonark@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I like the idea behind the community but it is a terrible name. Without reading an explanation, most people would assume it was some toxic, misogynistic group. I only know what it refers to because I bothered reading some of the comments here.

    I’m sure there are much better names, such as Positive Masculinity for example.

    • Virtual Insanity @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You’re right about the assumption… … But the assumptions are also part of the problem.

      Women’s liberation doesn’t get a second glance at is name, so why can’t a men’s liberation discussion group enjoy the same?

    • Candelestine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, you’re right, that was my initial assumption upon immediately seeing the name. It also aroused enough of my curiosity to check further though.

    • spaduf@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Also positive masculinity tends to still be rooted in fairly patriarchal ideas of what it means to be a man in ways that liberation from gender roles specifically is not.

    • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝A
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I like the idea behind the community but it is a terrible name.

      The men’s liberation movement is a concept going back 50+ years. It would be difficult to change that at this point.

      Also r/MensLib is a large, well-known sub with a well-defined remit. If you are going to start something similar on here it would be confusing not to go with a similar name. However, because of its scope, from what I saw, it tended to be a bit alienating to those who didn’t toe the party line.

      So there is room for a community focused on a broader, looser discussion of the topic (although it’d need strict moderating), like:

      I’m sure there are much better names, such as Positive Masculinity for example.

      Healthy Masculinity? It seems to be the more accepted term, although they can be used interchangeably.

  • danhasnolife@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I like the concept of being able to talk openly about mens’ issues. That liberation name is unfortunate; in my opinion, it definitely sounds at least apologetic towards misogyny. What do we have to be liberated from?

    • oshitwaddup@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Consider that patriarchy hurts men too. There’s a lot of pressure to be a certain way in order to “be a man”, no crying or expressing emotions beyond anger or happiness, gotta be tough, that sort of thing. We can and should liberate ourselves from those toxic expectations

      Edit: i’m sure someone else might be able to word it better, that’s just off the top of my head/how i interpret it

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure, but if you have to spend this much time explaining what you mean, it seems counterproductive. And it’s going to attract the toxic personalities and opinions that we’re supposed to be liberating from.

        • spaduf@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Women’s liberation is not some esoteric piece of history. It’s in living memory for a lot of people and was a household term for decades. For those unfamiliar, I think it’s worth asking why that may be.

          • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right, but Women’s Liberation from what? A patriarchal society that oppressed and exploited women. Men’s Liberation is not at all the same. I agree with the mission statement, but women were second class citizens, denied education, denied positions of power, denied basic human rights and civic decency.

            Men don’t require that level of liberation. Casting off societal pressures and expectations, living free of gender-based norms or requirements, and discussing how those pressures affect your life, those are noble pursuits and I’m here for it. I support that. I’m on your side.

            I’m just saying that the comparison doesn’t highlight the things you want to highlight. The implication is that the struggle is the same, that the severity is equivalent, and in the worst case, the roles are reversed. Misogynistic morons will try to co-opt the name to say that men need liberation from women, and that’s just an absurd fantasy held by an alarming number of neckbearded alpha bros. It implies you support the patriarchy. I know you don’t. But I didn’t know that from the community name, I learned that by reading the explanation.

    • charlytune@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The name isn’t new, it comes from the same place as women’s lib, afaik the concept of Mens Lib has been around since the 70s. We all want to be free of harmful and unnecessary gender stereotypes. r/menslib was a great subreddit.

    • skates@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      I had the same question opening this thread so I googled it.

      the interconnected nature of social categorizations such as race, class, and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage.

      • spinnetrouble@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        What this means in this context is considering the viewpoints coming from many different groups–people of different races, religions, disabilities, neurodivergence, etc., so issues that affect men with disabilities, for example, are as important as issues that affect men without disabilities. They don’t get ignored or sidelined in favor of more mainstream conversations.

        • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          It seems like it just ends up killing a group’s momentum though. Instead of finding the common problems that affect everyone in the larger group me, you spend time talking about all the small issues that only effect some people in the group and then nothing gets done about the issues that actually affect a superlative or majority of the group.

          • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nobody is just one thing. Intersectionality is about finding common ground where everyone feels like an island. Discussing the small stuff doesn’t prevent anyone from talking about the big stuff.

            Case in point, being a man with a part time, invisible disability, there is a cultural expectation that I will lift heavy things, engage in sports, or give up my seat to a woman or elder. And I do these things, sometimes with great physical pain, because it’s easier than explaining to people why everything hurts without sounding like a whiny malcontent.

            My experience is not universal, but many men can relate to the societal pressures to conform to what a “man” is supposed to be. Sharing my experience might help another person recognize their own biases and expectations, and to empathize with people who might exist in another space.

            • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              That is a good way to go about intersectionality, but this other comment from another Lemmy user is how I’ve always seen it go:

              As someone with a learning disability, a history of trauma, neurodivergence, and is part of a racial minority, I really don’t give a fuck if the majority are kept quiet for five minutes lol

          • spinnetrouble@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            As someone with a learning disability, a history of trauma, neurodivergence, and is part of a racial minority, I really don’t give a fuck if the majority are kept quiet for five minutes lol

            • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s the problem. You want to keep the majority quiet instead of finding common ground that will help everyone in the greater group.

              • spinnetrouble@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Seems weird to me that you think helping marginalized people wouldn’t help everybody. That’s the whole point, finding solutions to problems that work for everyone, not just those in the middle of the bell curve.

                • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Helping everyone helps everyone. Helping just some people helps just some people. And it divides your group inter ever smaller segments, diminishing your power.

  • can@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    I didn’t participate in the sub much but I did appreciate having a that view come in my feed here and there. And without having to invade a women’s space.