this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2026
551 points (96.0% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

40446 readers
3881 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Asetru@feddit.org 33 points 5 days ago (9 children)

Why would this apply only to girls?

[–] plutopos@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

Why not? Girls and boys face different social dynamics

[–] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 14 points 4 days ago (2 children)

OP: I like waffles.

YOU: oh so you hate pancakes?

OP: No man. WTF are you talking about? Those are 2 different things.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 38 points 5 days ago (16 children)

Because that's their lived experience. You want to post about guys, go ahead.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] did_you_find_violets@lemmy.world 38 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

cause traditionally/stereotypically feminine things are seen as stupid, useless, and cringe while masculine ones are seen as serious, deep, and respectable.

trans people also show that being a man is seen as an "upgrade" while being a woman a "downgrade" (trans men don't get a fraction of the hate trans women do). same thing with tomboys-femboys.

plus, a man and woman could do the exact same thing (being assertive for example) & the perception will be different (woman - bitch, man - boss).

[–] Asetru@feddit.org 18 points 5 days ago (9 children)

If you think boys aren't ridiculed (for literally anything) you've never been to school.

So, boys, might as well do what you want.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Peanutbjelly@sopuli.xyz 11 points 5 days ago (2 children)

so why exclude men who are made fun of for feminine expression?

there are definitely socialized negative biases that specifically women deal with, but being exclusionary doesn't actually help the cause, it just narrows the audience that is allowed to relate to the cause.

and it applies in gender neutral situations, like drawing literally anything in jr.high/highschool would grant the name ____fucker, no matter the benign nature of the variable being drawn.

it's a good little rule that doesn't need to devolve into a cultural battle about which group gets to identify with it more.

i constantly talk about the atheist/mra vs feminist war which just put everyone on the defensive, destroying active efforts in fighting groups like the heritage foundation, who are now doing unimaginable systemic harm to women through destruction of academic spaces and scientific efforts around women's health largely propped up by religious fundamentalist efforts.

sometimes you have to be like "there's something specific about this group which we don't want being lost in the current conversation," but also sometimes it's good to be less rigid about which generalized group is allowed to identify with or benefit from progressive ideals.

[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 18 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (6 children)

Making a post about women doesn't - and shouldn't - mean you're excluding men. I feel like excluding should only be defined as an active attempt to prevent people from associating with the post, rather then a failure to include men and enbies and every other gender in existence in the body of the post.

I feel like leftist spaces have gotten a bit too expectant that everything relevant to an individual must be explicitly stated to be as such, rather than encouraging people to simply find relevancy even in things that are not explicitly made for them. I'm a guy, and when I read this I felt a connection with it - I didn't even think about how it only mentioned women, as if that should mean it can't apply to me.

I would rather instill a mindset in all people that would allow for situations where, for example, a man can find relevancy in a post about women, rather then try to get all people to only share content that specifically addresses who all is intended to be able to relate to it. A woman saying things are hard for women isn't making any comments about whether or not it's hard for men, just like a black guy saying black lives matter isn't making any comments about whether or not all lives matter.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 days ago (16 children)

Making a post about women doesn't - and shouldn't - mean you're excluding men. I feel like excluding should only be defined as an active attempt to prevent people from associating with the post

Does this apply to making posts about men? Because if so (meaning, the rule applies universally without making exclusions for certain demographics), then I'm inclined to agree.

Experience shows however that posts (or any media) about men usually get attacked for ostensibly excluding women, even without explicitly doing so.

I would rather instill a mindset in all people that would allow for situations where, for example, a man can find relevancy in a post about women, rather then try to get all people to only share content that specifically addresses who all is intended to be able to relate to it.

This is almost hilarious. I mean, on the surface I agree. But again, if we flip the situation then we can see how comical it is. Can women find relevancy in a post about men without commenting by saying it isn't gendered, or even that it applies to women more than it does to men? The same thing applies to race. Can POCs find relevancy in a post about white people (even just implicitly), without claiming it's excluding other races?

The fact is if a white guy wants to create any form of media, be it writing a novel or making an indie film or whathaveyou, he has to be very careful to explicitly include other genders and races, because anything less will get nailed as being exclusionary.

But when a post is explicitly exclusive to one gender, as long as if that gender happens to be women, then suddenly "Oh it's fine, men can just find relevancy in it even if it doesn't (explicitly or implicitly) include them. It doesn't have to be gendered even though it's clearly and deliberately gendered."

Like, the mental hoops people will jump through to justify double standards as long as men are the ones being disadvantaged by them. That is not egalitarianism.

[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 6 points 3 days ago

Bud, what? Women constantly have to find relevancy in posts about men. It's been the default for nearly every culture since the beginning of human history. The only double standard is the universal double standard that people like you couldn't see this whole time, and is only just slightly starting to close.

Any post you see without a woman complaining that it's fallen on them to once again find relevancy in a post that isn't about them is an example of them utilizing their own lived experience, rather than being outlined as the intended audience by the poster. So, yes, they're following the mentality I described for most posts.

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] did_you_find_violets@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (4 children)

fem guys already relate to content targeted toward women since their lived experience is closer to that than to the typical man, so no exclusion.

men often do this. post is about something women related -> "but what about the men?". we don't have a duty or obligation to include men in every single conversation. men can also create their own content/conversations, and they should. hijacking/inserting themselves just reeks of insecurity and misogyny.

edit and just to be clear: anyone who finds this post relatable is more than valid and welcome, regardless of gender. it’s just the act of explicitly turning it into a “won’t somebody please think of the men?” thing that really grinds my gears.

[–] Asetru@feddit.org 3 points 5 days ago (4 children)

fem guys already relate to content targeted toward women since their lived experience is closer to that than to the typical man, so no exclusion.

Shit like this makes my blood boil... "oh, you're struggling with acceptance and your identity? Well, people ridicule you for not adhering to what boys should be, but the best we can do is offer you stuff targeted at girls because, you know, you're essentially a girl anyway". Fuck that. And then telling me about misogyny. Ridiculous.

we don't have a duty or obligation to include men in every single conversation.

This isn't a female safe space. Posting something here that deliberately leaves out half the population and then complaining that people bring up the stupid line you're drawing between boys and girls where none is necessary is laughable.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 15 points 5 days ago

They never said "the best we can do is offer you stuff targeted at girls because, you know, you're essentially a girl anyway", you did. If you think there should be more stuff for certain men, you're free to make it. If not all men relate to that content, I hope they are more capable of nuance than you seem to be. The idea that relating to the experience of another group somehow takes away from your actual identity is not how someone who has a normal relationship with their identity would work.

I date women as a woman and sometimes men will be talking specifically to other men about dating women and I will find what they say relatable. It does not make me question my gender or sexuality. I just think "wow! So true!" and move on with my day.

It's ok to have a similar experience or understanding of the world as someone else, even if they are not talking directly to or about your personal experience.

They are not drawing a line. You're welcome to comment what you like, but this is straight "so you hate waffles?" level of reasoning.

[–] Decoy321@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

This isn’t a female safe space.

Yes, it fucking is. It's a safe space for everyone. That's literally rule #1 in this place. Feel free to take a week off from here to learn how to be respectful.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

This isn’t a female safe space? Holy shit, way to tell on yourself.

It’s not just men here and this community isn’t a male safe space either. It’s a shitposting community and you couldn’t handle a woman making a post about a woman’s perspective.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 days ago (8 children)

Is it a safe space or is it not a safe space? Because you seem to be claiming both in one comment.

Don't gender it, it's either a yes or a no. Is it a safe space for all genders, or not a safe space for any gender?

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] teslekova@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Quite right. I would also say there is definitely a stigma to men who do not present as fem doing the occasional fem thing, and it is more of a stigma than when a woman who generally presents fem doing the occasional male thing.

Way less, in my experience, than ever before, but definitely still there. You get less open mockery and more silent confusion these days.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

Yeah a girl without makeup in a hoodie and sweaters wouldn't really raise eyebrows as much as a guy in a dress and makeup, I would bet money on that. Perhaps not as much nowadays but I'm sure it still very much exists.

Especially if you live in rural areas instead of a large city. Probably people living in L.A. etc. can reasonably disagree with this, but in general.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] athatet@lemmy.zip 23 points 4 days ago

No one said that it did.

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 22 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (2 children)

It doesn’t say that it only applies to girls its a screencap of part of conversation from people we have little context about.

And “sir”

Shit like this makes my blood boil... "Trauma-dump”… Posting something here that deliberately leaves out half the population …

This is a shitpost community.

[–] Donkter@lemmy.world 10 points 5 days ago (11 children)

Yes, but why are we making fun of a guy for doing what he loves (posting "but what about men?" In a post talking about women)?

(This is a joke btw.)

[–] dudinax@programming.dev 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If we don't make fun of him for litterally everything he does he'll never realize he has license to do what he wants

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

So it's trauma-dumping when a man does it, but when a woman does it it's just "a part of a conversation" or "women talking about their experiences"?

I think that double-standard is precisely what this conversation is about.

We talk about how it's an issue that men aren't allowed to talk about their problems or their feelings, but that's clearly just an abstract idea to some people because when men actually do try to talk about those things, it's always the same reaction.

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 days ago

Not at all…

It just appears rather obvious from that text that Asetru their anger against op came from a very specific personal injustice done to them. Channeling it in such way where you direct anger at a demographic is toxic, regardless of gender.

I do disagree a lot with how op responded, they where over reacting in a similar way, i didn’t call them out because the longer this ordeal went on the more people seemed to prove that they have a real point to be frustrated about it.

You did prove the same thing. My comment isn’t gender specific, i don’t know what Astetru identifies as (thats part why i put the sir is in quotes) any gender can argue in favour of any gender. That is not that unusual.

And yet you perceived it as directed at one gender and came in with a “but what about the other gender”

I really didn’t want to believe that this “always happens” but the evidence here says it either is or this is targeted trolling against op.

[–] Zwiebel@feddit.org 14 points 5 days ago

Girls was meant in a gender neutral way obv

[–] teslekova@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 days ago

It doesn't, and they did not say it did.

[–] WhoIzDisIz@lemmy.today 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Akshullee, they didn't say it did - just that girls get "made fun of over everything." I don't have the correct parts to validate that, however.