Poll of the Day > Amber Heard royally fucked herself.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PXb_uHOn_Uw

Although I, and many others, believe shes full of shit nothing Ive seen really puts a nail in her coffin. Its all just speculation really UNTIL I saw the clip above. Not only is that bad but you can see her try to be deceptive on the stand. Like, not just innocently ignorant type of deceptive but straight up lying using a technicality. Those of us who have been with a habitual liar will easily recognize her as one after watching the clip.

This level of dishonesty is disrespectful to the courtroom and whatever fans she has watching this charade. Telling you right now, this wont end well for her.

I missed most of it yesterday since my internet went down.

Heard is disgusting, especially the way she looks at the jury every time she answers (or in this case, "dodges" is the better term).

They both seem awful. Heard reminds me a lot of my ex.

That said there are a bunch of dudes acting WAY too gleeful about the whole thing, relishing in how bad she looks up on the stand or being caught in lies.

A lot of it followed by them going on and on about how good it feels to see a woman not get her way in court. Its gross. And it isnt even a remotely interesting trial. Theyre a couple of wealthy assholes fighting over reputation and money.

VampireCoyote posted...

They both seem awful. Heard reminds me a lot of my ex.

That said there are a bunch of dudes acting WAY too gleeful about the whole thing, relishing in how bad she looks up on the stand or being caught in lies.

A lot of it followed by them going on and on about how good it feels to see a woman not get her way in court. Its gross. And it isnt even a remotely interesting trial. Theyre a couple of wealthy assholes fighting over reputation and money.

Nobody ever cares about abuse after all.

VampireCoyote posted...

They both seem awful. Heard reminds me a lot of my ex.

That said there are a bunch of dudes acting WAY too gleeful about the whole thing, relishing in how bad she looks up on the stand or being caught in lies.

A lot of it followed by them going on and on about how good it feels to see a woman not get her way in court. Its gross. And it isnt even a remotely interesting trial. Theyre a couple of wealthy assholes fighting over reputation and money.

Pretty much. The sort of "men's rights" folk that tend to care more about ensuring that women suffer as much as men do instead of making things better for everyone has really latched on to Depp as a champion for male abuse victims and seems to care more about Heard getting her comeuppance than anything else. The reality is that they've both been abusive and they need to just walk away from this like adults.

Revelation34 posted...

Nobody ever cares about abuse after all.

I dont even know what youre trying to convey. If you just want attention then thats ok. Hello, how are you doing Rev?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/7/3/AAFUswAADOMd.jpg

VampireCoyote posted...

They both seem awful. Heard reminds me a lot of my ex.

That said there are a bunch of dudes acting WAY too gleeful about the whole thing, relishing in how bad she looks up on the stand or being caught in lies.

A lot of it followed by them going on and on about how good it feels to see a woman not get her way in court. Its gross. And it isnt even a remotely interesting trial. Theyre a couple of wealthy assholes fighting over reputation and money.

Straight up, I think it's bloody stupid that people care more about this crap than actual people in their lives.

https://i.imgur.com/2CmQQgB.gif

VampireCoyote posted...

I dont even know what youre trying to convey. If you just want attention then thats ok. Hello, how are you doing Rev?

Because apparently anybody who's against her is only against her because they hate women.

adjl posted...

Pretty much. The sort of "men's rights" folk that tend to care more about ensuring that women suffer as much as men do instead of making things better for everyone has really latched on to Depp as a champion for male abuse victims and seems to care more about Heard getting her comeuppance than anything else. The reality is that they've both been abusive and they need to just walk away from this like adults.

Can it be really blamed fully on mens rights folks? Mens rights people tend to be complete monsters, so blaming it all on them is giving them more credit than they really deserve. They both seem like pretty awful people in the relationship but the manner in which the two were treated is very different. It seems like Johnny tried to walk away like an adult but she kept trying to defame him, he deserves to defend himself.

Not all Men's Rights folks are horrible people.
Most of them are just normal every day people who just want equal treatment from the society after getting the short end of the stick so many times in their lives.

I mean shit like equal child custody and equal funding for screening and research for prostate and testicular cancer.

And men's mental health issues that pretty much no one wants to deal with because "all men are strong enough to fix that on their own".

I'm not surprised that a Godless society cares more about this pointless celebrity drama and engage in idolatry, rather than caring for their neighbors.

BEERandWEED posted...

I'm not surprised that a Godless society cares more about this pointless celebrity drama and engage in idolatry, rather than caring for their neighbors.

My neighbors don't deserve to be cared for.

Revelation34 posted...

Because apparently anybody who's against her is only against her because they hate women.

Id not only call that untrue but Id call that a ridiculous thing to assert, so great job at getting yourself into such a huff that you completely misconstrued my post into just the most pleasurable shape to fully offend and titillate your delicate sensibilities

Revelation34 posted...

My neighbors don't deserve to be cared for.

I'm sure they do.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/6/0/AAFnZwAADP08.jpg
If I was her I would fuck myself too

These two pieces of human waste deserve each other.

they should just get remarried and kill each other for real on a reality tv show so The world can laugh at them at least and then never hear about their bullshit again.

both are a prime example of what its like when your ONLY asset is looks/sex appeal.

you fuck crazy you dont marry it.

Conner4REAL posted...

These two pieces of human waste deserve each other.

they should just get remarried and kill each other for real on a reality tv show so The world can laugh at them at least and then never hear about their bullshit again.

both are a prime example of what its like when your ONLY asset is looks/sex appeal.

you fuck crazy you dont marry it.

I'm curious why you have a problem with Depp

Kyuubi4269 posted...

I'm curious why you have a problem with Depp

probably saw a few of his films

LeetCheet posted...

Not all Men's Rights folks are horrible people.
Most of them are just normal every day people who just want equal treatment from the society after getting the short end of the stick so many times in their lives.

I mean shit like equal child custody and equal funding for screening and research for prostate and testicular cancer.

And men's mental health issues that pretty much no one wants to deal with because "all men are strong enough to fix that on their own".

You haven't gotten the short end of the stick because you're a man.

Also, equal child custody is a pretty regular thing so long as one of the parents isn't a documented piece of shit. All of the divorced parents I know share equal custody of their children. Even in the case of my wife and her ex, he's got equal custody despite not having a job for the past 4 years and not holding a full time job for the past decade.

As for men's mental health, the US' culture has changed significantly. Still improvements to be made, but that's true of mental health care in general. I work with men that labor all day and don't ever hear someone shit talking about someone who's in therapy or dealing with their mental health issues.

That's anecdotal obviously, but I think your worries about men's rights are off and you're blind to the fact that men are generally at an advantage over women in many avenues of life. Much more so than any perceived disadvantages we may have to deal with.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

I'm curious why you have a problem with Depp

aside from both of them being B list actors who are overrated?

becasue while both are lieing both probably did most of what they are accusing each other of to a lesser degree.

There are two sides to every story then there is the truth.

let them fight it out for our amusement on tv.

Conner4REAL posted...

becasue while both are lieing both probably did most of what they are accusing each other of to a lesser degree.

And you're basing this on what? Depp has had an absolute wave of overwhelming positive character witnesses, Heard has not. Heard has been proven demonstrably lying, Depp has not.

Conner4REAL posted...

There are two sides to every story then there is the truth.

That doesn't mean the truth sits squarely in the middle.

It seems you don't really have a reason.

VampireCoyote posted...

probably saw a few of his films

Burrrrrn

Yes men are so advantaged...
It's not like it's primarily men who gets sent to war and die in combat or over 70% of all suicides are men.

Why are men killing themselves if they are having such great lives?

LeetCheet posted...

Yes men are so advantaged...
It's not like it's primarily men who gets sent to war and die in combat or over 70% of all suicides are men.

Why are men killing themselves if they are having such great lives?

how many wars have you been sent to?

VampireCoyote posted...

how many wars have you been sent to?

Claims on a group do not translate to individuals of the group, learn statistics.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Claims on a group do not translate to individuals of the group, learn statistics.

how about you? How many wars so far?

So just because I haven't participated in a war that means I should just shut up about other men being straight up forced to fight in a nonsensical war?

I guess women should've shut up about issues women face because some of them haven't experienced those specific hardships.

LeetCheet posted...

So just because I haven't participated in a war that means I should just shut up about other men being straight up forced to fight in a nonsensical war?

I guess women should've shut up about issues women face because some of them haven't experienced those specific hardships.

lmao

Conner4REAL posted...

aside from both of them being B list actors who are overrated?

Lol.

You can identify it as a problem, but citing it as evidence of what a hard life you lead as a man doesn't really work unless you've personally experienced it (or stand an appreciable chance of having to).

LeetCheet posted...

or over 70% of all suicides are men.

Why are men killing themselves if they are having such great lives?

70% of *successful* suicides are men. Attempts are actually roughly three times higher for women than men, they just tend to use less violent (and therefore less reliable) methods.

Why do we seem to care more about suicide attempts than successful suicides?

Aren't those poor souls who just killed themselves worth making headlines for?

And what counts as an "attempt" exactly?
It could mean anything from threatening to commit suicide to someone or just hurting themselves.

I'm sure a majority of men intentionally hurt themselves in various ways anyways that are too subtle for others to pick up like overworking or hurting your fists by punching walls.

The difference is that men usually don't tell others how they feel because they've realized since the school days that most people don't give a shit what happens to them.

Most people dont give a shit about others, period.

Wrong. People (both men and women) care more about women.

If a man and a woman is seen crying, the majority is going to approach the woman and ask her what's wrong and assume it's the man's fault.

Just look at this video how differently people treat homeless people by their sex.

https://youtu.be/wmC4ikxT4v4

The woman gets gifts, money and even uplifting words.

The man gets told he's lazy and to get a job or die.

LeetCheet posted...

Why do we seem to care more about suicide attempts than successful suicides?

How is that what you took away from what I said?

LeetCheet posted...

And what counts as an "attempt" exactly?
It could mean anything from threatening to commit suicide to someone or just hurting themselves.

Threatening to commit suicide and hurting themselves are counted as "suicidal ideation" and "self-harm," respectively. Statistics on the matter don't count those as attempts; "attempts" refers specifically to deliberate actions that the individual believes stand a decent chance of ending their life.

LeetCheet posted...

I'm sure a majority of men intentionally hurt themselves in various ways anyways that are too subtle for others to pick up like overworking or hurting your fists by punching walls.

And now you've gone from "70% of suicides are men so therefore men have it harder than women" to "well I don't actually have statistics but I'm sure they get hurt a bunch of other ways because of poor mental health and people just don't notice." You're not exactly supporting your desired conclusion very well.

LeetCheet posted...

The difference is that men usually don't tell others how they feel because they've realized since the school days that most people don't give a s*** what happens to them.

Yes, toxic masculinity is indeed a problem, in many ways that hurt both men and those around them. Included in that is a conditioned reluctance for men to seek mental health supports, which is bad, but you can just say that. You don't have to misrepresent the mental health situation by suggesting that there's a gender-specific suicide epidemic.

Most saliently, though, you seem to be conflating "men are advantaged" with "no men ever have any problems ever." Those are two very different statements. The former is a statistical claim, the latter an individual one. Individual men having problems does not mean that men don't generally have it easier, on average. Conversely, men generally having it easier on average doesn't mean that individual men can't have legitimate problems, so anyone that dismisses a legitimate problem you have just because you're a man is being an asshole.

LeetCheet posted...

Wrong. People (both men and women) care more about women.

If a man and a woman is seen crying, the majority is going to approach the woman and ask her what's wrong and assume it's the man's fault.

Just look at this video how differently people treat homeless people by their sex.

https://youtu.be/wmC4ikxT4v4

The woman gets gifts, money and even uplifting words.

The man gets told he's lazy and to get a job or die.

I was homeless just a few months ago. Trust me when I tell you that there are plenty of homeless women, nobody gives a fuck about them, and they die left and right behind strip malls just like homeless men.

It doesnt matter who or what you are. This world is largely content to watch us all slowly suffer and die, indiscriminately.

adjl posted...

Yes, toxic masculinity is indeed a problem

Toxic femininity* if anything. Boys find others boys to express themselves with, but they're very much suppressed early on, told they're a danger, to treat others (specifically girls) carefully. This naturally means that these boys aren't completely comfortable with expression to start with, and negative gender stereotypes against boys are pressed on boys as they age, thus have less opportunity to publicly grow. Boys don't start off telling eachother to not express, and it's much more often girls telling boys they can't express discontent as it's treated as being aggressive, even with eachother in public.

If you're going to make egrigious sexist claims, start with something to back it.

adjl posted...

Most saliently, though, you seem to be conflating "men are advantaged" with "no men ever have any problems ever." Those are two very different statements. The former is a statistical claim, the latter an individual one. Individual men having problems does not mean that men don't generally have it easier, on average.

Conversly Individual men being advantaged does not mean that the average man has it easier, what with outliers typically being cut. Unfortunately, people use the group statement to disparage individual men, so it's pretty reasonable to treat it as an attack on the individual.

adjl posted...

Conversely, men generally having it easier on average doesn't mean that individual men can't have legitimate problems, so anyone that dismisses a legitimate problem you have just because you're a man is being an asshole.

That is a lot of people, and they are people who tend to express this sentiment too. This is the current stereotype applied to the use of "toxic masculinity", it's pretty poor optics outside the group.

I am maximum toxicity

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Toxic femininity* if anything. Boys find others boys to express themselves with, but they're very much suppressed early on, told they're a danger, to treat others (specifically girls) carefully. This naturally means that these boys aren't completely comfortable with expression to start with, and negative gender stereotypes against boys are pressed on boys as they age, thus have less opportunity to publicly grow. Boys don't start off telling eachother to not express, and it's much more often girls telling boys they can't express discontent as it's treated as being aggressive, even with eachother in public.

If you're going to make egrigious sexist claims, start with something to back it.

What you described is toxic masculinity:

Masculinity = The set of gender norms and expectations associated with males and their behaviour
Toxic = Harmful or dangerous (in the context of discussing behaviours)

Toxic + Masculinity = A set of gender norms and expectations associated with males and their behaviour that are harmful or dangerous.

It's not a sexist term, it's simply acknowledging that some things that society promotes as "masculine" are unhealthy. That's how adjectives work. Some things that society promotes as "feminine" are also unhealthy, and could similarly be called "toxic femininity," but those tend to be ideals along the lines of women being subservient, docile, and content to relegate themselves to housewifery, which more commonly just get called "misogyny," so you don't see the term that often.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Conversly Individual men being advantaged does not mean that the average man has it easier, what with outliers typically being cut.

Those particular averages don't depend on outliers, though the fact that women are all but categorically excluded from becoming outliers is indeed a symptom of the problem.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

That is a lot of people, and they are people who tend to express this sentiment too.

So call them out for being assholes as is appropriate.

adjl posted...

What you described is toxic masculinity:

Masculinity = The set of gender norms and expectations associated with males and their behaviour
Toxic = Harmful or dangerous (in the context of discussing behaviours)

Toxic + Masculinity = A set of gender norms and expectations associated with males and their behaviour that are harmful or dangerous.

Except it's the creation of the norms and expectations that is toxic, not the person who is masculine, so at the bare minimum that is an extremely inappropriate use of words.

You wouldn't call call rape culture "toxic femininity" when rapists put norms and expectations on women now would you? It's pretty obvious who is the target of that phrasing. It paints the feminine as the problem, which wouldn't be accurate.

adjl posted...

It's not a sexist term, it's simply acknowledging that some things that society promotes as "masculine" are unhealthy. That's how adjectives work. Some things that society promotes as "feminine" are also unhealthy, and could similarly be called "toxic femininity," but those tend to be ideals along the lines of women being subservient, docile, and content to relegate themselves to housewifery, which more commonly just get called "misogyny," so you don't see the term that often.

Interesting that. If it's men it's toxic maleness, if it's women, it's hatred of women. Would it not be more accurate to call toxic masculinity misandry? I believe this disparity of treatment between the genders here is intentional, and is well reflected amongst feminists.

adjl posted...

Those particular averages don't depend on outliers, though the fact that women are all but categorically excluded from becoming outliers is indeed a symptom of the problem.

Indeed they don't, because they aren't quanitfiable terms, nobody has made a claim of what precisely an advantage is or calculated it's frequency in groups. It's a form of pseudo-science, trying to add weight to presumptions without having to back it up.

As soon as actual advantages are brought up, people can argue what they are, so lazy, disingenuous people fall back on to invisible hands like the patriarchy and male privilege. It's unbelievably transparent.

adjl posted...

So call them out for being assholes as is appropriate.

That's the problem, they fall back the same way as you. When someone is a problem it's all men individually, when there's push it's all men as a collective. Duplicitous language is rife with these horribly conflated terms, you can't have an argument with someone who doesn't even stick to a meaning of a term.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Except it's the creation of the norms and expectations that is toxic, not the person who is masculine, so at the bare minimum that is an extremely inappropriate use of words.

When somebody talks about "white cars," do you interpret that to be a suggestion that cars are inherently white, or do you interpret that to mean they're discussing a specific subset of cars that are white?

Why, then, would you interpret "toxic masculinity" to be a suggestion that masculine identities and behaviours are inherently toxic, as opposed to discussing a specific subset of masculine identities and behaviours that are toxic?

Kyuubi4269 posted...

You wouldn't call call rape culture "toxic femininity" when rapists put norms and expectations on women now would you? It's pretty obvious who is the target of that phrasing. It paints the feminine as the problem, which wouldn't be accurate.

You could, but the scope of such issues is so narrow that you're better off referring to them specifically instead of using blanket terms, particularly where any discussion on the subject is generally going to involve more than just what rapists expect of women.

By contrast, many of the ideas that fall under the umbrella of "toxic masculinity" very explicitly identify themselves as being part of a social ideal of masculinity. "Real men shouldn't need therapy" is immediately and unmistakably established as being an ideal for men to ascribe to. It clearly belongs to a broader issue of promoting unhealthy behaviours for the sake of achieving some arbitrary ideal of "masculinity," which means a blanket term that amounts to "promoting unhealthy behaviours for the sake of achieving some arbitrary ideal of masculinity" is completely appropriate.

Really, though, it all falls into the larger problem of gendering basic behavioural standards. Ultimayely, toxic behaviours are toxic no matter what sort of genitalia are attached to them, and good behaviours are similarly good for everyone. Trying to use gender norms to justify bad behaviour or discourage good behaviour is just plain stupid.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Interesting that. If it's men it's toxic maleness, if it's women, it's hatred of women. Would it not be more accurate to call toxic masculinity misandry? I believe this disparity of treatment between the genders here is intentional, and is well reflected amongst feminists.

It's more the specific examples I gave. "Men shouldn't spend time with their kids" would be both misandrist and an example of toxic masculinity. "Men don't need to learn to solve problems non-aggressively," however, is just the latter. Most of what falls under the umbrella of "toxic femininity" is more of a direct attack on women and their place in the world (so "misogyny" is appropriate), whereas quite a lot of toxic masculinity amounts to giving boys and men a free pass to behave badly instead of directly attacking them. That free pass often does harm men in the long run, but that's too indirect to really call it "misandry."

The distinction isn't gendered, it's a matter of the sorts of attitudes and behaviours that make up the respective concepts.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Indeed they don't, because they aren't quanitfiable terms, nobody has made a claim of what precisely an advantage is or calculated it's frequency in groups.

Sure they are. The pay gap is perhaps the most notorious one, particularly the way that it's so consistently handwaved with "women just work in lower-paying fields" and "women just don't try as hard to get promotions or negotiate their salaries" instead of asking why women don't seek promotions and choose to work in lower-paying fields en masse. You cite outliers as being the basis for considering men to be advantaged, but stop there instead of asking why almost all of those outliers are men (and there are absolutely enough outliers for that to be statistically significant).

Past that, we've already covered women being 3 times more likely to attempt suicide in this topic. Women are significantly more likely to be the victims of sexual assault or harassment, particularly in professional contexts. Massive industries have arisen entirely based around manipulating women into feeling so insecure about themselves that they spend money to fix it (an example of toxic femininity, actually. Similar industries exist for men, of course, but not to nearly the same extent and without the same underlying social pressure to listen to them), complete with requiring women to put more effort into researching the products they buy to avoid paying an extra "pink tax." The onus and side effects of birth control are borne almost exclusively by women (condoms are too unreliable and vasectomies too permanent for regular use, and that's pretty much all the options guys have because so many would-be alternatives have been cancelled for causing the same side effects women routinely see from options that are on the market).

These are clear, measurable advantages. Of course, none of this changes the fact that statistical advantages don't mean much when you're looking at individuals. If I'm broke, it doesn't matter that men make more money on average. I'm still going to be broke. The flip side of that, however, is that blaming individual problems on demographic disadvantages only works if there is actually a causal link there. If I'm broke, it's not because men have a particularly harder time making money, so I shouldn't try to turn it into a men's rights issue. That's the gist of what Leet is doing (specifically, he's trying to turn the whole thing into a pity competition instead of being critical of the specific social structures that are causing his problems).

Kyuubi4269 posted...

That's the problem, they fall back the same way as you. When someone is a problem it's all men individually, when there's push it's all men as a collective.

Except I'm rationalizing what you're trying to dismiss as a double standard, which means this is not "as appropriate." Before calling such people out for being assholes, you need to first make sure they're actually making the argument you think they are. You're being offended here by conclusions you've jumped to entirely on your own.

LeetCheet posted...

Yes men are so advantaged...
It's not like it's primarily men who gets sent to war and die in combat or over 70% of all suicides are men.

Why are men killing themselves if they are having such great lives?

Yeah, I saw that Jordan Peterson clip too lmao

Talking about the male suicide stat on its face is misleading. Men have a higher percentage of succeeding at suicide because they use more effective methods more often. Maybe stop being so good at kys and your rate won't be as high?

Leet really leaning into that toxic masculinity oop

Imo suicide is bad and tragic no matter the genitals

VampireCoyote posted...

Imo suicide is bad and tragic no matter the genitals

Right? Why is human suffering a competition? There's enough misery for all us lowly plebs

Jen0125 posted...

Leet really leaning into that toxic masculinity oop

You gotta take the blinders off and see how ignored and maligned hetero white men are it's rough out there for us

adjl posted...

When somebody talks about "white cars," do you interpret that to be a suggestion that cars are inherently white, or do you interpret that to mean they're discussing a specific subset of cars that are white?

If someone was talking about a bad bowl of cereal and and they called it toxic cereal, I'd wonder what the fuck is wrong with them, cereal isn't toxic. If you're talking about cars, and you talk about "toxic cars", I'd assume you were talking about something about cars that is toxic in some context. If you referred to toxic women, I would assume you're talking about women as a whole as toxic without futher context. The adjective you use is key, you can't use something as definitive as colour the same way as something as subjective as toxicity.

adjl posted...

You could, but the scope of such issues is so narrow that you're better off referring to them specifically instead of using blanket terms, particularly where any discussion on the subject is generally going to involve more than just what rapists expect of women.

That paints an interesting image. The idea of rape culture being able to be described as toxic femininity, and yet it's a term that is essentially only used as a retort and claimed to not even exist by some. Very suspicious that there's only one element of toxic femininity that does get referenced, and that reference doesn't needlessly bring in gender.

adjl posted...

By contrast, many of the ideas that fall under the umbrella of "toxic masculinity" very explicitly identify themselves as being part of a social ideal of masculinity. "Real men shouldn't need therapy" is immediately and unmistakably established as being an ideal for men to ascribe to. It clearly belongs to a broader issue of promoting unhealthy behaviours for the sake of achieving some arbitrary ideal of "masculinity," which means a blanket term that amounts to "promoting unhealthy behaviours for the sake of achieving some arbitrary ideal of masculinity" is completely appropriate.

Really, though, it all falls into the larger problem of gendering basic behavioural standards. Ultimayely, toxic behaviours are toxic no matter what sort of genitalia are attached to them, and good behaviours are similarly good for everyone. Trying to use gender norms to justify bad behaviour or discourage good behaviour is just plain stupid.

I'd say it's pretty stupid to bring in gender at all in the term "toxic masculinity" for precisely the same reason, it is gendering behaviours which is completely unnecessary for engaging with the problem. As you say, toxic behaviours are toxic no matter what. So when the intent is call out toxic behaviour, what is the benefit of gendering the language?

adjl posted...

It's more the specific examples I gave. "Men shouldn't spend time with their kids" would be both misandrist and an example of toxic masculinity. "Men don't need to learn to solve problems non-aggressively," however, is just the latter. Most of what falls under the umbrella of "toxic femininity" is more of a direct attack on women and their place in the world (so "misogyny" is appropriate), whereas quite a lot of toxic masculinity amounts to giving boys and men a free pass to behave badly instead of directly attacking them. That free pass often does harm men in the long run, but that's too indirect to really call it "misandry."

The distinction isn't gendered, it's a matter of the sorts of attitudes and behaviours that make up the respective concepts.

I don't see how that isn't also misandrist. Being dismissive or patronising of men isn't not misandry because it's not aggressive, it's equally devaluing of men's autonomy and humanity. Treating women as incompetent or emotionally unstable is very much misogyny, and we rightly call it out as such. I don't see a point where such things can be delineated.

adjl posted...

Sure they are. The pay gap is perhaps the most notorious one, particularly the way that it's so consistently handwaved with "women just work in lower-paying fields" and "women just don't try as hard to get promotions or negotiate their salaries" instead of asking why women don't seek promotions and choose to work in lower-paying fields en masse. You cite outliers as being the basis for considering men to be advantaged, but stop there instead of asking why almost all of those outliers are men (and there are absolutely enough outliers for that to be statistically significant).

Here's the rub; it's not a hand wave in any way, it's directly responding to the claims, and rather than you showing data on why women aren't seeking promotions or choosing to work in lower-paying fields, you handwave the existing research. Just as data was used to refute the pay gap, people are perfectly happy to use the data to debate the whys too, but it's your cause, your activism, it's on you to bring forward evidence to your initial claim. Please do bring data on the whys for men occupying the very top too, I'd love to see that, at least it would be fresh debate. But I'm pretty comfortable in my assumptions why, so I'm not going to be swayed without data.

adjl posted...

Past that, we've already covered women being 3 times more likely to attempt suicide in this topic. Women are significantly more likely to be the victims of sexual assault or harassment, particularly in professional contexts.

Yup, and the neat thing about crime is that it pretty much exclusively occupies the extremes of people. The most poor, the most sociopathic, the most depressed, the least restrained, the least safe. I'd say that willingness to do these things are typically signs of detachment from society, and thus less subject to gender norms.

It may suggest that, what with how testosterone works with sense of justifice, men at the edges who are sexually deprived (read: incels) are more hormonally driven to violate other people's autonomy to achieve their percieved "fairness" and women at the edges, being subject to more cortisol, are more likely to turn to self-harm and shutting down.

I believe these aren't issues that are easily ascribed to either social expectations or pressure. They're also not factors that have any meaning to those still operating within social bounds as people in a more healthy state are much more able to operate in their conscious self. Hormones have a much smaller share of influence in their decisions when in a basic social model, being as we are social animals.