this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2026
525 points (95.8% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
40416 readers
4092 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Many men's assumptions about men are similarly a problem when applied to me, for the same reasons of framing the binary and existing gender stereotypes, while sometimes useful, is often over applied and overly made real by shared affirmation.
To answer your question, I'm not implying intent by the author, rather just stating that the way it has been framed, consciously or otherwise, is relating a very general experience as if you should expect it to be gendered. We can decide to construct it like that, or we can make the framing more salient and fix a lot of the inevitable downstream issues of attempting to communicate when people are making expected differences more salient and real that shared (even if slightly different). Experiences that we can collectively identify and change.
Again, if atheists could have kept focus on countering groups like the heritage foundation, rather than defending against weird assumptions about their general group that they are being inappropriate related to, or if the lessons learned from academic feminism can be applied by other groups rather than being devolved into nonsensical associations with SJWs and weird claims like "trying to make circumcision illegal in the USA means you hate women because FGM is a more important issue". Further devolves into "being an atheist or supporting causes that help men means you hate women and want to destroy advances in women's rights."
Which I think we can all agree is stupid, and not representative of any serious work being done by academic feminists.
Would be an easy voice to stir up division, and make defensive arguments built around bad framing problems and associations more salient than the actual issues these groups should be making salient. Such as the heritage foundation and other extremely important obstacles that we should all be finding ways to cooperate against.
I assume that noting one party excludes the other because I see it like "we have blue cups and red cups. Be careful the blue cups are hot." And then "oww i burnt my hands on the red cups, they are also hot!"
Followed by "i didn't say the red cups couldn't be hot, only that blue ones were."
I think someone chiming in on the original statement with "all the cups are hot, just generally be careful." shouldn't be a contentious addition.
Hopefully that comparison makes my framing problem more clear.
People acting in bad faith will misinterpret even well-specified statements if they think it will benefit their stance - we shouldn't assume that being more specific in our language will allow us to win debates against people who have already decided that their own opinions are correct, and won't listen to anyone saying otherwise. Those discussions will always devolve into the nonsensical associations you described. Instead, we need to be as specific as possible about what we know, while simultaneously leaving our statements open when there is information left to be gathered and added in, and we need to teach those who interact with us in good faith that that is the reason for leaving things unspecified.
To use your example, we have red cups and blue cups. Nobody knows anything about them, but then my friends and I all grab several blue cups and find that they're all hot. We say "careful, the blue cups are hot" not because anyone should assume the red cups aren't, but because we don't currently know anything about the red cups. You can infer that the red cups are hot because they're alongside the hot blue cups, or you can infer that the red cups aren't hot because they're a different color, both of which would be informed, potentially correct assumptions, but until someone touches a red cup, nobody knows one way or another. That is the point of using a combination of specificity and ambiguity - it allows people to quickly understand what you know, as well as what you don't currently know, and allows space for new information to be added as we work together to figure out the truth of the situation.
Bad actors will misinterpret statements regardless of their specificity, but our behavior is not focused on them; our behavior is intended to work well together with the good actors. Tailoring your statements to address people who have decided to be antagonistic doesn't work, because people will always find ways to be antagonistic. Instead, tailor your statements so that people who have decided to listen with the intent to work together to come to an understanding will be able to do so most effectively.