An open source package that would replace adobe would be a game changer.

You can consume porn and not be addicted. But if you managed to get addicted to porn, it will be incredible hard to return to a non addictive behavior when it comes to porn consumption. Kind of the whole point of being addicted is that you can’t regulate your behavior on your own anymore.

I read it up and every episode is indeed one take. Nice, I think there is basically only a few one take featured films.

Seems rather poetic then factual statement - what does " whether I wanted it to be or not." in this context even mean?

There is at least one (art house) thriller done in one cut, Victoria, rather impressive for a future length movies that includes several locations and driving in a car.

Once a technology or even an idea is there, you can’t really make it go away - ai is here to stay. The generative LLM are just a small part.

I think there is also another angle of self worth hidden in this meme. Do you think you deserve better?

To achieve stuff you most of the time need to get out of your comfort zone. But it on parents to slowly teach their children to overcome fears. It gets much more difficult when you are grown up.

I don’t think there’s much ground to disagree or misunderstand on my first statement - feminism, by its very name and definition, is a movement of women (fem-) against gendered oppression of women (misogyny, a form of sexism).

Feminism is also a sociological theory to analyses aspects of society. If you feel excluded from feminist movement - due to your experiences, sure. But I don’t feel excluded at all and I don’t understand what is the point of trying to convince me and others that they are.

I strongly prefer a united antisexist front that could tackle the issues from both sides, and find the rest highly unproductive and divisive.

So why are you so divisive yourself?

Exactly. And a very narrow one at that. Feminism is a movement driven by women, and, first and foremost, it takes into account the experiences of women. Trying to solve two-sided gendered issues only from the feminist angle is like taking masculist theory and trying to explain everything stemming from experiences of men.

Except Feminism does not try to explain everything. It’s a lens to view specific aspects of society. Not the only one around. You can use some class theory, or something eternally different or - use different lenses to understand different aspects of society. Nobody is forcing you to just use feminism. Just this place happens to be one that uses that specific lens.

Feminists do critique uneven pay, which I did mention. They do care about financial independence. However, they do not actively combat the issue beyond this point - it’s not a feminist problem when a man is still expected to provide a higher income, even when a woman is able to pay for herself. By essentially omitting this angle, feminists miss out on one of the key pieces behind why men are more likely to get a higher office. This very expectation of needing to spend more drives more men into high-earning careers, and, on the other end, in some cases they are more likely to be promoted exactly because they are commonly seen as main providers, and so it is recognized they need it more.

Nope.

My problem is that feminism here is wrapped in a foil that disguises it for some sort of men’s movement, which might be enticing for some and gets some people engaged into genuinely believing feminism is the ultimate answer to sexism, for men and women. I have witnessed some of the more aggressive overtakings of the Internet spaces by some of the feminists, and believe this is one of the ultimate manifestations of a broken antisexist movement. The result? Men have little to no say in the wider antisexist movement that is now almost unilaterally feminist, and many of those silenced turn to patriarchy instead. Good job.

Nope. It’s a lens used here to view mens issues. You just again make things up and expect people to argue with you.

I’m searching for someone who, like me, still believes in that an antisexist movement should be united. I am feminist in the sense of “women should get all the practical and real rights men have, and should get a say in all spheres of life”, and I am masculist in the sense of “men should get all the practical and real rights women have, and should get a say in all spheres of life”. And I don’t believe either is worth a dime without the other.

Go, make your own community than, since you seem to somehow believe that folks here think that men should not have equal rights as women. It’s funny that you are complaining about feminist talking over communities and than it’s just what you want to do here.

Feminism diversifies female gender roles

You need to explain to me how exactly do diverse female roles work without diverse male roles? If antisexism (what ever that might be) is your cup of tee - sure. I don’t understand why are you upset about men using feminism as a framework to analyses their problems. I think you miss that besides being a movement, feminism is also a sociological lens - through which one can look at society and it might help to understand parts of our current condition.

Try talking about how cool it is to be a househusband, or how knitting is actually good, and try to find an audience. Tell people around that you pursue passion over money, and good luck building a family. Tell anyone about things in which men are genuinely disadvantaged - and then not be claimed as a whiny hypocritical bitch.

That is not my experience, and I’m sorry if it’s yours. But than again you are talking about normalizing pressure from the conservative society that tries to preserve traditional gender roles. That one is not on feminism. And there are men in position of power with platforms and I would argue there are quite diverse male voices, if you inclined to look for them.

As a woman, go full tradwife and you’ll be praised. Talk about the joy of maternity and people will translate it. Go gentle, don’t contest the positions of power, and you’ll get your attention very briefly.

I’m not sure that this is the experience most women make. Seems a bit magnetosphery influenced perception.

It’s not a male vs female thing. It’s about men and women for/against patriarchy, and while women have managed to overcome a significant share of gender stereotypes, men have not, and it’s not that feminism is there to help.

I really don’t get why feminism which tries to diversify gender roles does not help men. It helped me.

It is, yet it’s not quite what this place offers.

But it is. Also again - no-one is stopping you from creating a non feminist male space and see where it goes. I think there was even one around on lemmy - see for your self how it ended. I really don’t understand your problem with dudes talking about mens issues from feminist perspective.

Let me rephrase it - feminism is, in its entirety, about women.

Rephrasing the same point does not make it more true. I already got it that it’s your view and I disagree - I don’t think we will find a common ground on this point, which might stem from different personal experience.

blindly following feminism

Blindly following anything is dumb, kind of general rule. And also feminism does not claim to be solution to all problem. Again it’s a sociological framework (that is evolving) to analyze power dynamics in society, from a rather specific point of view. It’s like expecting game theory to solve all your problems.

But feminists speak little about the fact most of that financial burden still lies on men, or that there is a common expectation for a man to earn more than a woman. For them, it’s commonly a non-issue.

It is a non-issue for feminist that men earn more than women? And that women are still financially reliant on man is not a concern for feminists? I think you just fail to see that a lot of points you are mentioning are directly connected to critique feminism is bringing up. And again - no one is stopping men from bringing up those issues - not like men would lack platforms.

What is beyond me at the end of the day is why people took the movement that is about women, always claims to be about women and historically never been about anyone but women and suddenly pretended it’s about everyone

And you will never get it, since you fundamentally misunderstand feminism.

ltimately, it is not for or about men, it’s about what women want men to be.

And yet, men gather here and talk about their issues - and you are the one having a problem with it. While no-one is stopping you from creating a non feminist male issue community and see where it goes. Or you can check one that was around here and see how it ended.

I am, however, socially pressured to be a provider, and instead do my best to be - exactly - a partner. An equal, not only in joys but in duties as well. And this is surprisingly hard.

Guess who is one of the few groups fighting against societal pressure thru narrow gender roles? But than again if you are searching for non feminist women who want to be equal partners and not a provider - I might have an idea why it’s hard.

Ok, one more time thank you for elaborating. I think I get your point now. But I disagree in your perception of capitalist neoliberals like Clinton as feminist. It’s like corporations pandering to the LGBT.

I’m really sorry, I don’t know why but again it’s kind of difficult for me to get your point.

Isn’t getting rid of traditional roles and being able to chose your own role liberating?

but so should women hear male voices to see what can be changed on their end.

Dude you want to honestly argue that male voices are not present enough in general population? Where do you live?

The optics of feminism are women-focused, it is about women first and foremost and therefore may not be applied to (or rather imposed on?) men unconditionally.

Optics are rather a subjective measurement.

Feminism mostly covers only one side of this - income inequality - but barely tackles the societal issues that lead to the inequality in expenditures and financial expectations put on men.

This is just simply not true. Questioning gender roles is one of core ideas in feminism and questioning male roles is one big aspects conservatives feel very uneasy with when it comes to feminism.

As such, men are squeezed between the rock and a hard place

Who is putting the expectation on men to be the provider? Feminists? Dude come on. Who made it impossible for a family to live on one salary? Feminist?

As a result, even if we eliminate all the glass ceilings that women may face, men will still take higher positions on average because that’s what their conditions dictate.

Yes and questioning traditional gender roles while providing alternatives is big part of feminism.

But naming a place “Men’s Liberation” comes with the expectation that it’s about the males’ issues through the males’ optics, or otherwise it is as liberating as a hostile army.

No it’s your expectation - not a general one. And there is a rather clear description that clarifies the purpose of this group. I can get that you might not be interested in exploring male problems through the lens of feminism - but it’s beyond me why you have a problem with other doing so.

Also from my personal perspective: I was raised rather feminist/egalitarian and I don’t feel pressure to be a provider but rather want to be a partner. Obviously anecdotal - but an example of a solution to a problem you mentioned, offered by feminism.

My overall point here is not that feminism didn’t or doesn’t do what it could to fix the deal for men, too, it might not even be possible, my point is that there’s a female power base that men, especially young and low-class ones, experience as being capable of doing so.

Thank you for rephrasing and clarification. I think I can see your point now. And I would even agree that there is a perception that feminist or liberal leftist ideas are dominating general spaces, since corporations we pandering pretty hard in those direction. But I think if one looks at where the actual power in society lies - it’s clearly not with the liberal left and even less with feminists.

What do you mean by female-dominated and do you assume that every women is a feminist?

If you’re getting laid off chances are a women wrote the reports that the layoff was based on, and a woman is signing off on your severance package. You go to the dole office and – yep, a woman works your case. Chances also aren’t too terrible that, above the layer of the predominantly male C-suite, there’s an heiress to the empire because generational capital accumulation doesn’t discriminate.

So, in a nutshell: Much feminist messaging can easily come across as HR telling a male truck driver “our boss is a man, therefore, you’re fired”.

Whether that power base can actually be, realistically, mobilised, is another topic. I guess academia in principle serves the place for middle management that unions play among workers but it’s a tough cookie no matter which side you look at. Doubly fucked in places like the US where middle management is even more prone to the temporarily embarrassed billionaire fantasy. And somehow I ended up at class analysis. Honestly, wasn’t intentional.

Sorry it might very well be my bad English, but I don’t get your point at all.