[potsandpans]

Men disproportionately commit violent crimes, and women are the victims a lot of the time.

Culturally, the response has been to celebrate reactive perceptions, like women proudly declaring that they'd prefer to encounter a bear in the woods over a man. Or just generally dismissing or subverting the desire to be masculine.

This imbalance enables women to be socially transgressive (even criminally so) with impunity. That discussion is shot down with pithy remarks like, "well, men kill women."

I'm not really too concerned with any of this, I'm just pointing out that it does to some degree culturally exist. In some ways, it makes sense.

These threads are always filled with two sides talking past one another around this general power imbalance.

I do think this kind of surface level divisiveness is what has fueled some of the counter-reaction reactionary movements we're dealing with today.

A lot of what is disappointing to you is imo a more personal reaction to other problems that are happening.

For example, the loneliness epidemic. Culturally, immediate solutions to immediate problems can be at odds with other problems that we have limited understanding of.

I'm rambling. There is something that I want to tease out, but it's difficult to articulate.

Something like, the discourse around this has to change if we want things to actually improve. It probably includes (uncomfortably) acknowledging that we need to have healthy and positive outlets for masculinity. My sense is that it can't be good to continue down this technologically empowered segregation path, that companies will be more than willing to enable if it improves their bottom line.

[mmooss]

I think it's much simpler: People who have power can blithely ignore the problems of others and then say those people are 'overreacting'. Also the powerful react very strongly to any threat to the status quo that gives them power; it is an outrage to them.

In the West it happens with males, white people, religious groups, political groups, and much more.

> enables women to be socially transgressive

That usually means, transgressing the status quo. Women (and men) are free people who can do whatever they want, unless they actually injure someone else. Exercising their freedom isn't transgression, it's the norm.

> even criminally so

What does that refer to?

[potsandpans]

We can't have an honest conversation from the basis of, "people can do whatever they want as long as they don't hurt people."

Because it's just not the world we live in. I don't care to enumerate this here.

But I agree with you that part of the problem is politics of power. I just happen to think there is more nuance.

Criminality, there are a handful of stats we could looks at. For example gendered differences in sentencing.

> When examining all sentences imposed, females received sentences 29.2 percent shorter than males. Females of all races were 39.6 percent more likely to receive a probation sentence than males. When examining only sentences of incarceration, females received lengths of incarceration 11.3 percent shorter than males.

https://www.ussc.gov/research/research-reports/2023-demograp...

But instead of arguing about stats, in general -- and this goes back to the social transgression bit. In the real world, women can do things to men that men can't do to women. This is largely due to the politics of power. Im not particularly preoccupied by it, but I do acknowledge that it exists.

Your response is _precisely_ what I'm calling out: two people talking past one another. I do not feel that youve interpreted anything I've said with grace. Instead it's more along the lines of, "yeah yeah yeah, but it's really about power"

Maybe. Hacker news is probably disproportionately powerful white males. I try not to assume bad intent with these things.

I'm merely pointing out that culturally, we will only get worst by trying to shame "normal" people (men) into feeling ways. In fact, I think the "cultural moment" as they say is indicative on how much that has failed.

[mmooss]

> Because it's just not the world we live in. I don't care to enumerate this here.

Whether or not you enumerate it is irrelevant. Individual liberty is the foundation of the modern world. Of course there are exceptions, complications and imperfections, but the principle and the widespread practice are very clear and well established.

(Edit: Also, if we are talking about right and wrong rather than legal principles, liberty is what's 'right' to me (and most others). Everyone should have the same liberty, not merely the powerful.)

> sentencing

> shame

Victimhood is irresponsible (and a tactic used almost universally by the powerful to change the subject). The overwhelming amount of actual harm done between genders is men harming women, and it has been for as long as anyone can remember. That is the responsibility of men generally and the problem that needs solving. In some societies, they do address it.

If that makes you feel ashamed, that's your problem. When someone points out a problem to me, I feel responsible for solving it and get to work. 'I'm ashamed' is an obvious excuse.

> politics of power

The same behavior has very different outcomes because of differences in power between powerful and vulnerable parties: Bad behavior itself isn't dangerous, bad behavior + power is the problem.

If in a white suburb a black person says to a white person, 'we don't want your kind here', it's a bit crazy, but it's not especially dangerous. If a white person says that to a black person, that is real danger because white people have power, including government, law enforcement and the courts.

Similarly, imagining healthy, normal-sized adults, if a woman says to a man, 'I'm going to kick your ass', it's a bit threatening but not too serious. If a man says that to a women, it's very serious, dangerous to her, and he probably should be arrested.