Firstly I’m so sorry that your children experienced sexual assault. I wish them both justice and healing.

I typed up a long reply with references that I ended up deleting because it didn’t seem appropriate right now.

I have multiple genuine criticisms of feminism that come from actual feminist scholars about its interaction with the class and power structure, embedding of western imperialistic epistemology in it and others. None of it is because I’m opposed to equity or women’s rights. At the end of the day no philosophy is perfect and the actual practitioners are even less so. That is why it makes sense to talk about it and work on it.

I want to ask are you doing okay friend? It seems like you’re not.

I still have made only a singular point, that someone can prefer the label humanist over feminist despite agreeing with everything feminism might say without being a ‘chud’. You have created strawman after strawman through this conversation, accusing me of conflating man haters with feminists, defending the sexual assault and genocide of Genghis Khan, diagnosing me as being ignorant of what humanism or feminism is, of not caring enough to study either, agreeing with white mansplaining, diagnosing me as having a litany of problems with women and being full of red flags and so on. I’ve tried to engage you from a place of good faith, even after the cruel remark of asking if I were sexually assaulted by women and trying to use that to frame me as a woman hater. You’re fighting something that isn’t there.

I left the original comment because I thought it might make you think that there are real people who don’t fit the categories that have become drivers of the culture war. It pays to listen to each other. Instead it seems like my comments have caused you unnecessary distress and I apologize for that.

I get the general defensiveness because of the prevalence of trolls.

There seems to some confusion. I’m not saying the cartoon is right. Just explaining why someone might prefer the term humanist over feminist even if they were not a ‘chud’. Is that so hard to see?

I’m absolutely not saying that someone like Genghis Khan could be rehabilitated. I’m not unaware of what he did and the contentious rehabilitation following Weatherford’s book and how perspectives have changed with later incorporation of historical narratives from China and Mongolia itself.

Let me be absolutely clear, I do not condone taking someone’s life or cutting off their balls as a way to punish in a justice system. We have Geneva convention now. Again I’m curious why is it anti-feminist to say that didn’t Someone is not okay with inhumane punishment. I definitely do not want my own abusers to walk around free but I’m not advocating for them to be tortured using their reproductive organs or killed off.

I never said that anyone else should make peace or be okay with their abusers. You’re filling in some blanks here. Though at least I thought that an idea of justice that is outside personal revenge, but exists as a societal value to rehabilitate or punish justly without violating human rights would be accepted now.

I’m curious as to why you can authoritatively say I’m not aligned with feminism or that I have a laundry list of issues with women from two short pieces of text without knowing anything about me?

I am not sure why the humanist label is being treated as some kind of anti-feminist thing by you or the author of the cartoon. Is it one of those ‘All lives matter’ vs ‘Black lives matter’ situation in the US cultural context? In my cultural context, humanist is a label that is in the same category as atheist or agnostic without any negative connotations.

In fact it was seen as a superset that included feminist ideals and other intersectionalities such as disabilities, race and religion. Which was again why I said I agree with everything feminism says on paper but would like to use a broader term that covers intersectionalities that aren’t included in feminism but are relevant to me and because of my personal experiences with some well intentioned but misguided people wearing that label.

At the end of the day, what I’m getting from your comments is that people like me should not be participating in these discussions or are not welcome here.

I’m going to be honest with you this comment sounds so condescending and patronizing. I’m not trying to pigeonhole feminism into anything. I’m trying to tell you what my specific experiences were with the disclaimer that it is not representative. I’m not from the US either.

Irrespective of who Genghis Khan is, I’ve never supported death penalty, much less torture. It made me uncomfortable to see how much people were willing to accommodate if it was against people who thought were the other. I’ve had a lot of violence visited on me unfortunately and I’m proud of the fact that even for people who abused me I would choose restorative justice rather than torture. Believe me it took a lot of work to get there.

It seems like you missed my whole point which was that based on what is described on paper I would be a feminist but I identify with a broader label because of my individual bad experience with a minority of people who opted to use the term. You don’t need to explain it to as if I’m an idiot?

Overall comes off as having no empathy for my experience or reality while shoehorning me into what appears to be very limited model of who you think I am? Feels kind of sad.

I gravitate towards humanism instead of feminism even though I align with his the latter would be defined by many people.

In my younger years many feminists groups I ended up participating it, often from working together on protests or other issues under the progressive banner very violently anti-men.

Many actively thought all men were inherently bad and had no place in shared spaces. I remember walking out when one member whom I had worked along with for years and thought of as a close friend spoke of how she had heard a theory of how Genghis Khan was castrated by his wife and died. She thought this was a fitting end for a man and some others chimed in, in agreement. There was a general sense of othering men as an out group responsible for evil, rather than seeing most men and women as suffering under the system.

I don’t think most people are like this, I’m just illustrating why someone might think differently without being a ‘chud’.

It’s kind of funny how Adam Smith saw the need for moral philosophy to constrain greed in the economics of capitalism yet for most modern capitalists, capitalism is their moral philosophy 🤣

Thank you. Honestly that had not really crossed my mind. I’m on the spectrum so I take people literally sometimes. That seems like a very real possibility.

Thank you! I’ll try this out. I’ve been mostly using it while playing around with new things rather than to expand scaffolding on existing stuff.

However what I find frustrating is that it so confidently gives you garbage sometimes. I was trying to configure some stuff in docker that needed a very extensive yaml config. It confidently gave me flags and keys to accomplish what I wanted that looked logical and fit in with rest of the style but simply did not exist.

Thank you! That’s been my experience as well. It just gives you insidious junk that you have to be vigilant to catch. That is so much more stressful for me than having to deal with repetitive stuff.

I can’t fathom how people are claiming it generated whole projects for them.

I’ve found it okay to get a general feel for stuff but I’ve been given insidiously bad code. Functions and data structures that look similar enough to real stuff but are deeply wrong or non+existent.