-22
The strategy changed immediately
(lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2026
-22 points (36.9% liked)
memes
22708 readers
1972 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Who initiated the racist lynch murder? Was it a woman?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sometimes
Personally I find the stripping of agency from women to be far more detremental. Obviously women as a whole aren't culpable. It only speaks to your own biases that that was your assumption.
Two grown men according to your article. Encouraged by the Jim Crow-Era social conduct.
Do not try to stir up some misogynist bullshit here. Do not try to relativize racism here. That shit won't fly here.
Edit after your edit: I am not making assumptions. You are. There is nothing in the article that says the woman told her husband and brother-in-law to go kill that boy. It is you constructing such a causality out of thin air.
The violence still came from men. They killed a 14 year old boy. Do you think that's excusable or what?
Of course not. Do you think her intention was a stern talking to?
The idea of painting all men with this brush is plain mysandry btw.
I don't know her motivation. I do not assume. I just know that two men brutally murdered a child for racist motives and you are trying to make that into women being a systemic problem (because that is what the bear discussion is about. Systemic, socially normalised violence). Wrong turn.
Another edit after your edit: nobody says all men were the same though. You are just trying to imply I would.
I don't know how clearly I can conditionalize something beyond saying sometimes.
Something you obviously had no issue omitting from your own statement.
Edit to the edit of my edit: the bear narrative does paint all men with a broad brush. Not that I don't understand it. The implication that women can never be accountable for their actions is exactly how we end up with a patriarchy.
Edit edit edit edit edit: https://eji.org/news/emmett-till-accuser-admits-she-lied/
Read it for yourself.
The Man or Bear scenario a. is not a narrative, it is a thought experiment and b. does not "paint all men with a broad brush". It points out how normalised violence against women is in our society. It does not say "all men are violent against women", that's just what people who did not (often did not want to) understand the construct read into it.
It does not matter much how you conditionalise your statement when you use a metaphor that is about systemic issues you are implying a similar systemic issue. By choosing the bear you imply she did it because of gendered violence, not racist violence.