this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
229 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10178 readers
145 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
Gaywallet@beehaw.org
JuBe@beehaw.org
JCPhoenix@beehaw.org
kalanggam@beehaw.org
circularfish@beehaw.org
knokelmaat@beehaw.org
remington@beehaw.org
229
4B in the US anyone? (beehaw.org)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by Quexotic@beehaw.org to c/politics@beehaw.org
135 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I feel like this is probably pretty effective. I feel like it should be a thing.

E: see also https://beehaw.org/post/16953380 E2: https://19thnews.org/2024/11/4b-movement-south-korea-social-media-trump-presidency/

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 14 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Ciswomen were having sex?

Then wait, why are there so many incels?

Joking aside, there actually have been times when I've been at a social event and I'm gonna fuck a guy because why not... but he starts going off on incel bullshit and how far right he is because "Women aren't women" anymore, and I'm like... "Yeah I gotta go.." while thinking "Can't believe he talked his way OUT of a sure thing."

So I fully understand why there are so many incels.

[–] tangentism@beehaw.org 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

"Can't believe he talked his way OUT of a sure thing."

People are great at stealing defeat from the jaws of victory!

[–] Quexotic@beehaw.org 2 points 6 days ago

Kind of the theme of the week, no?

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Wouldn't this just create even more conservatives if they are the only ones having children? Seems counterintuitive.

[–] sanzky@beehaw.org 1 points 6 days ago

it’s also a quite terf movement. It basically mirrors MGTOW. I don’t think people should follow them.

[–] Zementid@feddit.nl 4 points 6 days ago

I'm fine with no sex if those Nazi men can't have any too!

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

i highly doubt women will just stop having sex. its as dumb as asking men to stop jerking off. just never gonna happen

[–] Take_your_zync@eviltoast.org 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

When the choice is a man thinking of you as property to control or a vibrator/custom sized dildo, idk why you think it's even a contest.

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

your comment makes it sound like women are incapable of having sex with men simply because they enjoy sex with men

it would be like me turning down a handjob because ive been doing it myself for years

[–] Zementid@feddit.nl 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Reducing it to the core,... yes a few hate fucks could still occur. But a relationship with a misogynist is only possible with psychological disorders on the women's side. (Mostly Self loathing, no self esteem != woke women who have self esteem).

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Read Lysistrata and good luck to you.

When the system becomes too odious, non-participation is one way of dealing with it.

[–] Quexotic@beehaw.org 2 points 6 days ago

I read the cliffs notes. I'll look into it. Thanks!

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 3 points 6 days ago

Because political lesbianism has been so terribly effective at anything last time around? Short of breeding massive amounts of transphobia, of course.

How about this instead.

[–] xor@infosec.pub 48 points 1 week ago (12 children)

so, because punishing all women is bad, it’s a good idea to punish all men?
here’s an alternative: don’t fuck republicans… they’re the ones trying to control women.

[–] AwakenedAce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

They're not obligated to date men though, if they want to participate in 4B then I don't see what's wrong with that. They are allowed to assert their bodily autonomy, it's a form of protest against how they are treated

[–] xor@infosec.pub 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

go ahead and pretend like i’m saying women are obligated to do something or not….
i’m not saying anything like that, but go ahead and argue with imaginary people

[–] AwakenedAce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Okay cool. So if we agree that individuals are not obligated to date men, then it follows that choosing not to do so is not a punishment towards men. A punishment requires a penalty or deprivation, and since dating is not a requirement, there can be no deprivation occurring.

This movement was not created to punish some men who feel entitled to a relationship, it's (primarily) to advocate for their rights and against the expectations they are subject to.

It has been pointed out to me that it might constitute a punishment for a subset of entitled men so this is not entirely accurate. That said, I would still say it is unjustified to frame this as a punishment of all men, especially considering that subset of entitled men likely constitutes of the very people in favor of removing rights from women.

[–] papertowels@lemmy.one 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

A punishment requires a penalty or deprivation, and since dating is not a requirement, there can be no deprivation occurring.

Fwiw, a common example of a punishment removing something that is desired but not required is temporarily taking away X from a rowdy kid, be it phone, snacks, etc, which does poke a hole in that assertion.

[–] AwakenedAce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Thank you, I hadn't thought about that, you're right.

Would you say then that that form of punishment only affects someone who believes they are entitled to something they typically get? (I can't see how it would affect someone that doesn't get something, and I don't see how it would affect someone that doesn't feel entitled to it)

Then, in opposition of what I said, I do agree it would punish a subset of entitled men. I will add an edit to what I said if I've understood this correctly.

[–] papertowels@lemmy.one 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Yes, I'd agree that for it to be a punishment entitlement would need to be involved - for example nobody feels punished that they didn't win the lotto by buying one ticket.

Entitlement can take the form of the status quo, whether or not that's justified is not a conversation I have enough critical thinking for.

I think what I haven't seen cleared up in this thread is there are actually two reasons for 4b floating around - one is to try and bring about societal change by crashing the birth rate, but the other is simply out of safety and self-preservation of women. If we focus on the latter, it makes sense that women in more dangerous societies will choose 4b more often than those where they feel safer.

The conclusion I come to is that 4b will be more common in states that do not value the bodily autonomy/safety of women, which I'd say largely points to conservative states.

In a way, if safety and bodily autonomy is the reason for choosing 4b, it will self-regulate to not "punish" or affect those who generally vote to pass policies treating women properly.

I think there was some nuance that was lost in the call for "all" women to participate in 4b

[–] AwakenedAce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Thanks for the clarification, I'd rather not get something wrong because of a misunderstanding.

I definitely agree with you, it seems logical that the 4B movement would become more popular in the areas where there are bigger threats to the autonomy and safety of women, self-preservation (and solidarity for that matter) is an extremely important factor.

That said, I do understand why there is a call for "all" women to participate. Having more women participating across a country seems like it would increase resistance of some members of the national/federal government to stripping away more rights away from women. It's quite a complicated subject.

[–] papertowels@lemmy.one 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Agreed on all counts. Thanks for the conversation and differing perspectives. I hope you have a good weekend!

[–] AwakenedAce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 6 days ago

Thank you as well, have a good weekend!

[–] xor@infosec.pub 1 points 6 days ago

entirely incorrect

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 59 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (15 children)

It's not punishing anyone as much as asserting our bodily autonomy, but go off. Targeting Republicans means no pressure is applied to anyone else to change society. Not every woman will participate in the strike. The effects of it have to be wide reaching.

It's a widespread denial of the institutions behind gender relationships. Saying that the system is dangerous for women and refusing to participate in it.

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 41 points 1 week ago (15 children)

I feel like this is probably pretty effective. I feel like it should be a thing.

It isn't. They will simply import women from other countries. And this election alone proves the fact that all women are not a monolithic group. You're not going to get a majority to follow this trend.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] SimplyTadpole@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 1 week ago

Given how reactionary the average Gen Z guys are, this is less of a protest and more of a self-preservation tactic.

[–] GammaGames@beehaw.org 35 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Because young men will have a much easier time getting laid when abortion is restricted nationwide and contraceptives are harder to get 🙄 talk about shooting yourself in the dick

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 35 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Jokes on you, they're just going to go full Roman Empire and take twink concubines, apparently.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 33 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I started this in 2016 in the lead up to the election. Got sterilized in 2022 after the Dobbs decision leaked. Too many guys are secret misogynists at best, and pro rape/anti-abortion at worst. The lectures I had to do to convince my ex that rape is rape, whether you fight off the perp or not.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Banzai51@midwest.social 30 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The problem, if you look at the data, is lots of women voted for Trump too.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 30 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Given that the new agenda is to end birth control, no-fault divorce and spousal rape laws, a lot of women are about to have no say past the first one. Don't get married, and if you're in a bad marriage try to get out ASAP.

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 29 points 1 week ago

Me, a lesbian: Aktivsm

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, and men who support women's right. Need to support this as well.

Seriously, look at recent events in Texas. Having sex with women while republicans are in power. It is a potential death sentence for those women.

Unless you can groove beyond doubt, one off you is infertile. And honestly, given the way some republicans are. Only trust your own eyes on the microscope when checking. Because forcing doctors to lie to women is far from beyond some of these people.

Honestly, leaving the US for a more liberal nation is the only safe option the way things are looking.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›