One could understand “men are trash” as having the meaning “every single man is trash”, which would be in line with racism as you say. Or one could understand it as “the group overall is trash”, meaning any individual member isn’t necessarily trash.
The latter meaning is in some senses a matter of data - men are extremely overrepresented in e.g. violent crimes.
Which, again, doesn’t much about the individual man.
Because of the current cultural context, yes. Even when you add “overall.” But I’d be completely open to you elucidating that you are referring to some non-racist point.
If there’s been a history of people stating this about a group meaning every single member, then you need to assume that’s what they mean. I don’t think that’s the case with men.
Not saying one meaning must be assumed over the other, you’ll have to depend on cultural context to understand the deeper meaning.
Compare for example “men can’t give birth” vs. “men love sports”. The former clearly intends to say “all men”, the latter intends “the group overall”.
The expression “cheetahs run fast” is true, even if a slow cheetah, for example a wounded cheetah, is still a cheetah. The insistence on saying “not all men” every time someone says “men are trash” is just a new demonstration of the problem.
Maybe. But an analogy can be rightly used or wrongly used. Racism use this analogy to speak about genetics, biology, to spead hatred; feminism use this analogy to make changes in men and manhood, and spread respect. The difference is essential.
And we are talking about men from nearly 100 years ago. I think a lot of progress has been made.
My point is thats besides the point. Generalizing the negative nature of a group of people is what the nazis did, what the imperial japanese did, what racists do, what rapists do, what homopbobes and transphobes do. You can call out misogyny without aligning your behavior with these horrible people, who’s behaving like this is exactly what brought about this kind of mistreatment in the first place
And I am once again saying that this argument doesn’t do that. You just conditioned to jump to this misinterpretation as a defense, and people who conditioned you to do so did that for not amazing purposes.
quips@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
No entire group of people is trash. This is the same thinking behind misogyny and racism.
Soulg@ani.social 2 months ago
Really crazy to see people continuing to defend statements like this in 2026
SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 2 months ago
One could understand “men are trash” as having the meaning “every single man is trash”, which would be in line with racism as you say. Or one could understand it as “the group overall is trash”, meaning any individual member isn’t necessarily trash.
The latter meaning is in some senses a matter of data - men are extremely overrepresented in e.g. violent crimes.
Which, again, doesn’t much about the individual man.
quips@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
So would you say “Black people overall are trash” is a racist statement?
SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Because of the current cultural context, yes. Even when you add “overall.” But I’d be completely open to you elucidating that you are referring to some non-racist point.
If there’s been a history of people stating this about a group meaning every single member, then you need to assume that’s what they mean. I don’t think that’s the case with men.
Not saying one meaning must be assumed over the other, you’ll have to depend on cultural context to understand the deeper meaning.
Compare for example “men can’t give birth” vs. “men love sports”. The former clearly intends to say “all men”, the latter intends “the group overall”.
SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 2 months ago
As I’m clearly in the wrong according to downvotes, could you elaborate on what I’m missing?
zloubida@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
The expression “cheetahs run fast” is true, even if a slow cheetah, for example a wounded cheetah, is still a cheetah. The insistence on saying “not all men” every time someone says “men are trash” is just a new demonstration of the problem.
(I’m a cis man myself, BTW.)
Hubi@feddit.org 2 months ago
I’ve seen the same analogy used to justify racism.
zloubida@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
Maybe. But an analogy can be rightly used or wrongly used. Racism use this analogy to speak about genetics, biology, to spead hatred; feminism use this analogy to make changes in men and manhood, and spread respect. The difference is essential.
musicjunkie@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Congrats on being the first male femcel I’ve seen on the internet
zloubida@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
I’m a married man with daughters. I want a better world for them.
GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world 2 months ago
What percentage of a group needs to be considered trash in order for the whole group to be considered trash?
Nalivai@lemmy.world 2 months ago
If you read that from this meme, you might need to go back to school to learn some literacy a bit more.
quips@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
And we are talking about men from nearly 100 years ago. I think a lot of progress has been made.
My point is thats besides the point. Generalizing the negative nature of a group of people is what the nazis did, what the imperial japanese did, what racists do, what rapists do, what homopbobes and transphobes do. You can call out misogyny without aligning your behavior with these horrible people, who’s behaving like this is exactly what brought about this kind of mistreatment in the first place
Nalivai@lemmy.world 2 months ago
And I am once again saying that this argument doesn’t do that. You just conditioned to jump to this misinterpretation as a defense, and people who conditioned you to do so did that for not amazing purposes.