Obviously I can understand why mysoginists are hated upon, As their belief is all women are trash or men are superior etc. But why are incels also generally hated upon? They are lacking in a way that makes them unable to gey in a relationship, but that shouldn’t necessarily mean they are mysoginists, right?

What am I missing here? I haven’t ever had a relationship with a woman, but I don’t hate all women either. I just consider myself unlucky. Does that make me an incel?

  • june@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    No you don’t. Because there isn’t a preponderance of evidence than black people are less trustworthy than non-POC.

    Just because an argument sounds similar does not make it the same.

    • beardown
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      there isn’t a preponderance of evidence than black people are more less trustworthy than non-POC.

      That is true, but is not a universally held belief. Many strongly feel that black people are inherently dangerous and untrustworthy. Others feel the same about Muslims. Or Chinese. Or Russians. Or Jewish people. Or Gypsies.

      People who feel that way about those groups are called bigots. You feel that way about men which means you are also a bigot. Not a difficult analysis.

        • beardown
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          What do FBI crime stats say about Black Americans?

          Statistics are easily misconstrued, and often are

      • june@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        We aren’t talking belief here. What I am saying is based off of empirical evidence.

        Why are you being so unapologetically obtuse?

        • beardown
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          You can use FBI crime statistics to make “empirical” arguments about black Americans. Yet I think we both recognize that would be fallacious

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

            I’m gonna ask you again, why are you being unapologetically obtuse?

            If you want to challenge the data I’m citing, do it rather than refusing to engage in good faith.

            • beardown
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              It isn’t obtuse to state with moral clarity that it is always wrong to treat someone differently on the basis of their sex

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

                When there’s a preponderance of empirical evidence that a certain group of people poses a larger risk to another group of people, it validates the decision to approach them with caution.

                You’re arguing that women should just ignore the reality that they are likely to be assaulted (remember, 81%) and that the people most likely to assault them are men. It is reasonable and right for women to exercise caution and clarity when engaging with men for that reason. This isn’t hard, it requires a person to be willfully ignorant to disagree with it. Get your feelings out of this matter and look at the reality we live in.

                • beardown
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  When there’s a preponderance of empirical evidence that a certain group of people poses a larger risk to another group of people, it validates the decision to approach them with caution.

                  Literally Nazi rationale for 1930s Germany. Or White Americans justification for segregation. Or Israeli justification for genocide against Palestinians

                  People are people. Immutable traits have no influence on how anyone should ever be treated

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

                    In every case you cite there was not a preponderance of empirical data. It was fabricated.

                    Are you arguing that the data I’m citing is fabricated?