▲ 71 ▼ The 'Husband Stitch' Leaves Women in Pain and Without Answers [2018] (www.vice.com) submitted 4 weeks ago by Wren@lemmy.today to c/feminism@lemmy.world 44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] Sir_Premiumhengst@lemmy.world -12 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Should men have rights? Discuss. permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wren@lemmy.today [S] 11 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) You're on the wrong post, bud. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sir_Premiumhengst@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Politely but firmly disagree. “Should men have rights? Discuss.” was pretty clearly dark sarcasm, not a serious proposal to take anyone’s rights away. It was questioning the entitlement of the men who requested, performed, or normalized something that harmed women for supposed male benefit. As Ruth Bader Ginsburg answered when asked when there would be enough women on the Supreme Court: “When there are nine.” People found that shocking, even though nine men had long been treated as perfectly normal. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wren@lemmy.today [S] 8 points 4 weeks ago I think you should understand that tone doesn't come across well over text, and one should really read the room before posting on such a sensitive topic. By any interpretation, it wasn't the time or place. It takes a hell of an ego put that "joke" on par with RBG's statement. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Wren@lemmy.today [S] 11 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) You're on the wrong post, bud. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sir_Premiumhengst@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Politely but firmly disagree. “Should men have rights? Discuss.” was pretty clearly dark sarcasm, not a serious proposal to take anyone’s rights away. It was questioning the entitlement of the men who requested, performed, or normalized something that harmed women for supposed male benefit. As Ruth Bader Ginsburg answered when asked when there would be enough women on the Supreme Court: “When there are nine.” People found that shocking, even though nine men had long been treated as perfectly normal. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wren@lemmy.today [S] 8 points 4 weeks ago I think you should understand that tone doesn't come across well over text, and one should really read the room before posting on such a sensitive topic. By any interpretation, it wasn't the time or place. It takes a hell of an ego put that "joke" on par with RBG's statement. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sir_Premiumhengst@lemmy.world 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 child) Politely but firmly disagree. “Should men have rights? Discuss.” was pretty clearly dark sarcasm, not a serious proposal to take anyone’s rights away. It was questioning the entitlement of the men who requested, performed, or normalized something that harmed women for supposed male benefit. As Ruth Bader Ginsburg answered when asked when there would be enough women on the Supreme Court: “When there are nine.” People found that shocking, even though nine men had long been treated as perfectly normal. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ apologies permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Wren@lemmy.today [S] 8 points 4 weeks ago I think you should understand that tone doesn't come across well over text, and one should really read the room before posting on such a sensitive topic. By any interpretation, it wasn't the time or place. It takes a hell of an ego put that "joke" on par with RBG's statement. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Wren@lemmy.today [S] 8 points 4 weeks ago I think you should understand that tone doesn't come across well over text, and one should really read the room before posting on such a sensitive topic. By any interpretation, it wasn't the time or place. It takes a hell of an ego put that "joke" on par with RBG's statement. permalink fedilink source parent