This is an inclusive community for all things women. Whether you’re here for make up tips, feminism or just friendly chit chat, we’ve got you covered.
I feel like men can do all of those things, so I don’t see why we are excluding them. Just because it’s a women-centric community doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed. I think we should exclude people who are bigoted instead, or even people who just don’t “get” women’s issues.
Aside: I’m personally irritated that make-up is what’s considered a woman-centric topic. That’s kind of reductive – not everyone is femme.
Picture a well-intentioned man. (I’m not even talking trolls who do this deliberately and strategically.) This well-intentioned man intrudes into a conversation about, say, workplace sexual harrassment experiences. They say something ham-fisted like:
Again, we’re presuming a well-intentioned man here. Not a troll who’s deliberately triggering. Just a well-intentioned man who genuinely believes that it’s fine to do this.
Now five women, say, have been comparing war stories about sexual harassment at work. They each respond with a further example, or a a plausible progression from “hand on shoulder” to real life experience that ended badly or whatnot. Each of these five women brings up a different point or point of view, so this isn’t just repetition.
Now the well-intentioned man responds to each one, asking for more details, or failing to understand and needing explanation, or whatever.
We now have, with only one round of this, a situation where five women in total have spoken: one twice (to report the original story, and then to respond to the man), the rest once each. Six messages from five women in total. And from one man we have six messages.
And this never ends in one round, does it? In no time flat we have a thread that is 80% written by one man and 20% written by five women. One man’s voice is drowning out five women’s voices.
Now multiply this by the number of men (again, here we’re assuming only the well-intentioned!) and the number of threads and you rapidly have a forum for women that is mostly men talking.
That is how you “talk over” a group on Lemmy.
yes, this is a great example! And men IRL who talk over women can have a chilling effect that the man responding to everyone can create - there is a confrontational nature to the interaction that gives it a “talking over” feeling, it’s basically just aggression and not reading the social situation that then leads to women not feeling like participating as much or being vulnerable about how they feel (esp. if they think they will be challenged or criticized for it).
Sometimes it’s just nice to have a break from that confrontational style of interaction and to feel like people are going to be receptive and kind to you. (I would like to think plenty of men feel this way in male spaces, too, btw!)
You’ve very thoroughly explained exactly what I was thinking of! Thank you :-)
Fair enough. Anyway, I am not advocating that well-intentioned men be permitted into the community – just ones that fit in.
That comes with the logistical challenges of …
a) how do you find out which ones will fit in?
b) who defines what “fitting in” means?
c) would the men who are feminist and “fit in” not feel weirded out by being allowed into somewhere that’s meant to be for women to talk amongst themselves? I mean, I would feel like I was invading something private if I were invited into a support group for men.
I presume that any woman who acts like a disrespectful man would be kicked, so that would be the same predicate for (a) and (b).
As for (c), how should I know. Maybe they would feel kinship for some reason, like they’re in touch with their feminine side. Or perhaps they are facing an issue most commonly experienced by women. IDK, I’m not a man. Is this a support group?
Rule 2 is don’t be a dick, so being disrespectful might get someone kicked regardless of their gender. Someone’s gender is not just from being disrespectful, we often just ask the person.