Mickey7@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 年前Seems like solid advicelemmy.worldimagemessage-square65linkfedilinkarrow-up1655arrow-down175
arrow-up1580arrow-down1imageSeems like solid advicelemmy.worldMickey7@lemmy.world to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 2 年前message-square65linkfedilink
minus-squareAcinonyxlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down24·2 年前if males get disadvantaged, they’re getting closer to the same level as everyone else, thus increasing egality
minus-squaretjsauce@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·2 年前By disadvantaged, do you mean removal of privilege or wanton sexism? Because the latter is the point the others want to clear up. The words you use are good, but the context is bad.
minus-squareMothmanDelorian@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 年前So your solution to ending sexism is more sexism?
minus-squareAcinonyxlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down2·2 年前that’s realistically more achievable than the other way around
if males get disadvantaged, they’re getting closer to the same level as everyone else, thus increasing egality
By disadvantaged, do you mean removal of privilege or wanton sexism? Because the latter is the point the others want to clear up.
The words you use are good, but the context is bad.
So your solution to ending sexism is more sexism?
that’s realistically more achievable than the other way around