The highest rate of domestic violence is in lesbian relationships. The lowest is in gay relationships.
Because gay relationships largely don't exist lol.
There's no reason to get your man-thong in a bunch over anything your "partner" is doing if you're not actually committing to staying with him for any significant portion of time.
You cannot quickly debunk marxist ideas, and this is a feature rather than a failing. Marxist ideas are nebulous, unfalsifiable, and emotionally satisfying; you can't pin them down, you can't disprove them, and you're working against "feelings" the whole way.
Take the example of toxic masculinity.
You cannot define it without also defining masculinity and deciding what qualifies as "toxic". Both of those concepts are massively complex and not a little subjective.
You cannot disprove the existence or prevalence of toxic masculinity. What would evidence of the non-existentence of toxic masculinity even look like? If it is impossible to falsify the hypothesis, then you are dealing with a kafkatrap where any attempt to discredit the concept proves the concept i.e. circular logic.
The concept of toxic masculinity satisfies the emotional motivations of leftism/feminism. If your worldview demands an oppressor, then you will embrace any idea that provides one for you. Separating your desire from your understanding isn't easy, and any hostile behavior will only trigger further emotional reasoning.
Whether these sorts of ideas were deliberately designed to function this way or were merely products of evolutionary selection within the far left spheres of academia, I cannot say. Truth be told, it doesn't matter. This is how their "arguments" work, and you cannot defeat those ideas without systematically tearing their logic all the way down to the studs.
Elaborating on my previous post: if you want to effectively challenge the idea of toxic masculinity, you need to challenge it on the three aforementioned fronts:
Definitions. Ask for fixed definitions of masculinity and toxic masculinity, and have her explain to you what qualifies something as toxic. Ask who decides these definitions, and why those people? What are their certifications, and how are those certificationa legitimate? Point out where the provided definitions are absurdly broad or reductive.
Falsifiability. Remind her that a valid hypothesis must be falsifiable. If there exists no possibility of evidence that disproves the hypothesis, then it is not valid. Ask her what evidence would convince her that toxic masculinity is not the cause of a given problem. Is there an alternative explanation? Does she refuse to entertain it? Why?
Emotional reasoning. Subtly explore the notion that ideas like toxic masculinity are created by people with motivations other than raw intellectual curiosity. Suggest the possibility that an ideology couched in oppression is an ideology that requires an oppressor to function, and that adherence to such an ideology might cause people to latch on to questionable oppressor narratives because they flatter biases or fulfill desires. Basically, start questioning the sincerity of those who push these ideas.
There isn't much use trying to "debunk" something like that. If somebody ardently believes that it's a serious problem, they will not listen to much reason contrary to that. You won't change anybody's mind with a burst of logic if their only foundation is emotional.
I would say just show them what you believe in, and let them cut you out. The only time I would really suggest cutting people out of your life is if they're legitimately psychotic or consistently abusive. If somebody's just stupid that can be overcome.
Personally, I'd ask why toxic masculinity seems to increase in line with the percentage of children raised by single mothers, from what reporting I've seen on it.
That way your debater is forced to either concede that "toxic masculinity" is in fact getting better, try and assert that there are not in fact more children being raised by single mothers or go for the truly feminist defence of asserting that facts no longer apply to this feminist discussion.
If you're in Europe you can ask "If you hate toxic masculinity why do you support the importation of Muslims who violently enforce the exact traits of toxic masculinity?"
They will promptly call you a raicst for saying the word 'Muslim' and run away from you. You can then, in good mind, cut them out of your life.
Call her a stupid cunt and tell her that the idea of toxic masculinity turns her on and she's scared to admit it to herself, even though on lonely nights she dreams of being pinned down and taken by her knight in shining armor who just so happens to be a tall, muscular white man.
It'll really piss her the fuck off but she'll have no response other than angry noises.
A woman cannot understand masculinity and its complexities because that's not something they are given the instincts to grasp. The same way I will never understand their absurd emotional states regarding children.
Once it has gotten into their mind that being a man is inherently toxic, you cannot undo that idea. They need their entire perspective on life changed to see a whole different side of things.
Or you could be that manly man and lay the pipe so good she is filled with cognitive dissonance and picks the dick over her politics.
Dude, just don't bother. I'm sorry, but she will never rethink her position. It takes humility to question your own beliefs deeply ingrained by the education system and liberal pop culture. For a lot of people, humility is not in their lexicon. You could point to statistics, patterns, or even common sense observations, and she will use statistics that say "ACKTUALLY" from studies that are flawed at best or disingenuous at worse upon thorough review.
Many good and serious responses in this thread. I'll offer a childish strategy, which tragically may work against a child-brained friend.
Eye for an eye. Push toxic femininity on her. Do it just like she does toxic masculinity. Create an emotional, unfalsifiable bludgeon and beat her with it. Put her in a position where she's trying to debunk your bullshit. Everything you can, throw it back in her face gender-swapped. If she starts citing sources of news and journalists, cite fucking 4chan back at her and demand she prove it has less authoritative legitimacy than whatever hack she cited.
As petty as this sounds, it's actually a simple emotional argument. Be prepared for any possible response and have an emotional counterattack ready for her emotional counterattack. Yes, this has a decent chance of ruining the relationship.
The best households for children are two parent (male/female) households.
The highest rate of domestic violence is in lesbian relationships. The lowest is in gay relationships.
If masculinity is so toxic, why have women been trying to be men for the last 60 years? And why do feminists keep insisting they're just like men.
Because gay relationships largely don't exist lol.
There's no reason to get your man-thong in a bunch over anything your "partner" is doing if you're not actually committing to staying with him for any significant portion of time.
You cannot quickly debunk marxist ideas, and this is a feature rather than a failing. Marxist ideas are nebulous, unfalsifiable, and emotionally satisfying; you can't pin them down, you can't disprove them, and you're working against "feelings" the whole way. Take the example of toxic masculinity.
Elaborating on my previous post: if you want to effectively challenge the idea of toxic masculinity, you need to challenge it on the three aforementioned fronts:
Definitions. Ask for fixed definitions of masculinity and toxic masculinity, and have her explain to you what qualifies something as toxic. Ask who decides these definitions, and why those people? What are their certifications, and how are those certificationa legitimate? Point out where the provided definitions are absurdly broad or reductive.
Falsifiability. Remind her that a valid hypothesis must be falsifiable. If there exists no possibility of evidence that disproves the hypothesis, then it is not valid. Ask her what evidence would convince her that toxic masculinity is not the cause of a given problem. Is there an alternative explanation? Does she refuse to entertain it? Why?
Emotional reasoning. Subtly explore the notion that ideas like toxic masculinity are created by people with motivations other than raw intellectual curiosity. Suggest the possibility that an ideology couched in oppression is an ideology that requires an oppressor to function, and that adherence to such an ideology might cause people to latch on to questionable oppressor narratives because they flatter biases or fulfill desires. Basically, start questioning the sincerity of those who push these ideas.
Very well put, great work :)
There isn't much use trying to "debunk" something like that. If somebody ardently believes that it's a serious problem, they will not listen to much reason contrary to that. You won't change anybody's mind with a burst of logic if their only foundation is emotional.
I would say just show them what you believe in, and let them cut you out. The only time I would really suggest cutting people out of your life is if they're legitimately psychotic or consistently abusive. If somebody's just stupid that can be overcome.
I wouldn't bother, they've already shown that they're indoctrinated and nothing you say to them is going to change that.
Personally, I'd ask why toxic masculinity seems to increase in line with the percentage of children raised by single mothers, from what reporting I've seen on it.
That way your debater is forced to either concede that "toxic masculinity" is in fact getting better, try and assert that there are not in fact more children being raised by single mothers or go for the truly feminist defence of asserting that facts no longer apply to this feminist discussion.
If you're in Europe you can ask "If you hate toxic masculinity why do you support the importation of Muslims who violently enforce the exact traits of toxic masculinity?" They will promptly call you a raicst for saying the word 'Muslim' and run away from you. You can then, in good mind, cut them out of your life.
The "Islam is right about woman" campaign is probably one of the internet's greatest operations.
Call her a stupid cunt and tell her that the idea of toxic masculinity turns her on and she's scared to admit it to herself, even though on lonely nights she dreams of being pinned down and taken by her knight in shining armor who just so happens to be a tall, muscular white man.
It'll really piss her the fuck off but she'll have no response other than angry noises.
A woman cannot understand masculinity and its complexities because that's not something they are given the instincts to grasp. The same way I will never understand their absurd emotional states regarding children.
Once it has gotten into their mind that being a man is inherently toxic, you cannot undo that idea. They need their entire perspective on life changed to see a whole different side of things.
Or you could be that manly man and lay the pipe so good she is filled with cognitive dissonance and picks the dick over her politics.
Who benefits most from divorce.
Dude, just don't bother. I'm sorry, but she will never rethink her position. It takes humility to question your own beliefs deeply ingrained by the education system and liberal pop culture. For a lot of people, humility is not in their lexicon. You could point to statistics, patterns, or even common sense observations, and she will use statistics that say "ACKTUALLY" from studies that are flawed at best or disingenuous at worse upon thorough review.
it was created out of thin air by a woman.
Say that you don't believe in their religion, and won't use their religious terminology.
Many good and serious responses in this thread. I'll offer a childish strategy, which tragically may work against a child-brained friend.
Eye for an eye. Push toxic femininity on her. Do it just like she does toxic masculinity. Create an emotional, unfalsifiable bludgeon and beat her with it. Put her in a position where she's trying to debunk your bullshit. Everything you can, throw it back in her face gender-swapped. If she starts citing sources of news and journalists, cite fucking 4chan back at her and demand she prove it has less authoritative legitimacy than whatever hack she cited.
As petty as this sounds, it's actually a simple emotional argument. Be prepared for any possible response and have an emotional counterattack ready for her emotional counterattack. Yes, this has a decent chance of ruining the relationship.
You can't reason women out of a position they've felt themselves into.