• galoisghost@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      There aren’t a limited amount of rights that can only be handed out to be shared amongst people.

      There are just rights and everyone should be entitled to them.

    • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s impossible since the point was a superficial elevation of their own interests.

      Unless you think the point of feminism (for example) is to make men second class citizens. That’s just not a thing. It’s a rhetoric created by assholes to get ignorant people on board with their continued grossness.

      • H4rdStyl3z@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Unless you think the point of feminism (for example) is to make men second class citizens. That’s just not a thing. It’s a rhetoric created by assholes to get ignorant people on board with their continued grossness.

        I think there may be some radicals who genuinely wish for that, but those don’t represent the entire movement and usually only pay lip service to the cause where it aligns with their personal beliefs. They should be ignored.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          9 months ago

          I think there may be some radicals who genuinely wish for that

          Those aren’t radicals; those are reactionary trolls who falsely claim allegiance to the movement in order to discredit it.

        • psud@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          For a while it seemed like that minority owned the term “feminism”

        • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          9 months ago

          I’m not even sure the radicals want that. Anger is an appropriate response to oppression. Vengeance is an extreme form of that but I doubt anyone that isn’t truly damaged would be okay with it.

      • Rooskie91@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        There’s also a psychological phenomenon that occurs in ‘elite classes’ where they think that someone getting more means they get less. They literally cannot fathom someone getting welfare without it affecting them negatively. It’s one of the reasons why poor people still support Republicans.

      • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Unless you think the point of feminism (for example) is to make men second class citizens.

        More people want this, than you think. These “radicals” are not a minority, and they are the ones who have ruined what feminism once stood for – equality. And the most intriguing part is this has only happened within the last decade, thanks to social media amplifying toxic voices (negativity spreads fastest). Feminism wants to recruit men, but openly says men and their rights (equality) are not their responsibility.

        There is a big question mark on equality claims, which frustrates me, because neither needs to suffer.

      • tubaruco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        25
        ·
        9 months ago

        a lot of women who call themselves feminist believe theyre superior to men instead of equal. most of those are very loud about it, so feminism turns into a term that describes that, even if the “real” meaning isn’t that.

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      No shit, the only thing leftists want to pull down are systems of exploitation.

      • Armand1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Meanwhile, the Right want to pull down your trousers to check your “gender”.

      • pingveno@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        At the same time, privileged people will still sometimes feel a loss of something when you’re portioning out a finite resource. So if a particular group is 25% of the population and they were getting 75% of the pie before and now they’re getting 25% of the pie, that’s a loss. It’s a justified loss, but it’s still a loss.

        That said, there are other things like rights that are not finite in any meaningful sense of the word. When someone is feeling a loss because an oppressed group gained rights, it’s usually because they’re an oppressive asshole.

    • Kachilde@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      That IS the point, and rarely do equality or equity initiatives “pull down” anyone.

      But the Haves feel like they’ve earned their position, and that means that if you help a Have Not in any way, you are taking away from their achievement (which in this case is “not being born poor/black/female”)

    • Signtist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      The issue is that people generally view their situation not by how much they have, but how much more they have than others. It’s like a race to these people - who’s winning isn’t based on how close to the goal they are, it’s based on how far ahead of the competitors they are. People who have everything they need often see others getting to that same point as competitors catching up, and, seeing that they are not advancing themselves, they feel that they need to prevent that in order to maintain their lead. It’s meant to be everyone working together, but few see it that way, especially among the current “winners.”

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        The issue is that people generally view their situation not by how much they have, but how much more they have than others.

        Some people are that way, but not “people generally.”

        • Signtist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          I considered putting a “some” in there, but honestly, I feel like it’s sadly the default state, at least in the US. Even fellow politically-left people I meet rarely demand resources for underprivileged people that actually elevate them to their own station. It usually feels like “They deserve more! But still less than me.”

    • Midnitte@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      Making sure the rain forest isn’t destroyed doesn’t mean letting the pinebarrens be converted into a strip mall.

            • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              This is a flawed method of thinking though, there are plenty of factors that go into what you think. If you’re aware of and trying to avoid a negative stereotype, you’re just as likely to fall into the “he doth protest too much” as someone who demonstrates that stereotype.

            • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              It is not a 100% accurate factor. It relies on presumed stereotype “boxes” that people are put in, and who presumed and on what basis.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s well and good, but bringing everyone up needs to be done in consideration of lasting multigenerational harm from what has come previously, and areas where we as a people and nation continue to marginalize, underserve, and sometimes actively harm some segments of our population.

      Folks who think those things should be ignored are not actually interested in bringing everyone up.