• Z3k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    I always read this type of statement as man = species.

    I know this particular thinking is falling out of fashion but it’s not totally dead yet

    • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Thing is, statements like the one in the post are just as ignorant as the claimed “enemy”.

      You know what else takes 28 days? A moon cycle. We have absolutely no context, what this means. A period tracker bone is a perfectly valid hypothesis, but without any proof or context nothing more than this. It could have been used for moon phases, sheep counting, trade, or simply for testing stone knives.

      • bouh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Seeing the reactions in this thread, it does seem that a lot of men are indeed enemies of women. Why would it be so hot otherwise to discuss this?

        • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          And this reaction of yours is a prime example of jumping to conclusions based on political views.

          You can argue, that this bone was used for 400 different things. Without context, arguing that it’s definitely something about menstruation is just pseudo-feminist circle jerking. They just choose this interpretation because it fits their views and goals. That’s unscientific.

          What you’re doing here is also not much better. Instead of actually engaging with the argument I brought, you just assume, that everyone who disagrees with a pseudo-feminist interpretation of a bone, must be the enemy. That is not exactly scientific.

          • bouh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            you talked about enemity first, remember? you have this view of a fight, and that anyone who dare say that a woman did something and not a man, is fighting men.

            You have a very defensive position. Which means you feal attacked. You say it directly when you talk about “enemy”.

            You are the problem my friend. Your first comment is aa problem. And the support it receives is concerning and scary.

            • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Nope, I just pointed out, that an absolute statement like the one above is not valid. And the “enemy” I brought up, was used as a description of the position shown by the proponents of the menstruation bone absolutism.

              And labeling me as a “problem”, without even an attempt at telling me where I might be wrong is pretty, well, bold?

              Think about it, I write, that absolutism is not good, and your first response is “you are evil because you dare question whatever I happen to believe in”.

              You don’t help feminism like that. And that’s pretty sad.

              • WldFyre@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Professor: Maybe it was a woman? Just consider it with an open mind.

                You: This gender absolutism is the enemy™!

  • HollowNaught@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m confused by this quote - no sane person would assume a male did something just because we say man did it. In this instance, man would simply be referencing humanity

    The want to define whether a male or female did it without any evidence is simply sexist

  • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    “man” as in human kind.

    I agree the linguistics here are unfortunate, but here we are, and that word, in that context, is normally gender neutral.

    Also, 28 day calendar probably means it’s the moon.

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    A woman’s cycle varies between 15 and 45 days, averaging 28.1 days, but with a standard deviation of 3.95 days. That’s a hell of a lot of variability from one woman to the next. And the same variability can be experienced by a large minority of women from one period to the next, and among nearly all women across the course of their fertile years.

    On the other hand, the moon’s cycle (as seen from Earth) takes 27 days, 7 hours, and 43 minutes to pass through all of its phases. And it does so like clockwork, century after century.

    Of the two, I am finding the second to have a much stronger likelihood of being the reasoning behind the notches.

    Strange how gender-bigotry style historical revisionism and gender exceptionalism seems to get a wholly uncritical and credulous pass when it’s not done by a man.

    • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      While I agree with you that the teacher in this post is wrong about what this is, I don’t think labeling “gender bigotry” indiscriminately as something both sexes do under one umbrella is accomplishing anything but minimizing the struggle women have endured for basically all of human existence up until the last few decades.

      Personally, I wouldn’t fault this woman for thinking what she does if she’s willing to accept a broader explanation later, given that women have literally been sold as property up until a couple hundred years ago.

      Women have the right to at least posit the ways they as a group have been held down, and that includes accepting their indignation and allowing them grace for when they’re wrong, because without those things they won’t actually learn the truth.

      Further than that, I think it’s necessary for women learning now to have the same realization this one did that women throughout all of history save for this recent tiny sliver have been oppressed. Even if it’s built on an incidentally faulty premise, that doesn’t mean the realization itself is wrong.

      Covering up the discourse by labeling the process of realization as “gender bigotry” is itself an attempt at erasure, and very much puts you on the side of the oppressors, just because you think it’s distasteful to have this realization yourself.

      I’m sure gender bigotry exists in the direction of women towards men. This ain’t it.

      • reric88🧩@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        The gender-bigotry comes from the “what man needs to mark 28 days?” There’s snark behind the comment, and it’s unnecessary. That said, a woman could be just as likely as a man to mark moon phases. But saying “man” doesn’t mean “male” when talking about us as a species from my understanding. Seems like a broader term to use which includes the entirety of the homo-whatevers.

        I’m just some guy here and am not educated in this stuff, though!

    • SqueakyBeaver@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I doubt the teacher really believed this, and they were likely striving to just open their students’ minds to the idea that most innovations are probably assumed to be made by men

      • rekabis@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why not use a real and confirmed example, then? Because they do exist.

        Making a story up - such that it can be actively undermined - certainly does the job poorly at best, and actively hurts the objective at worst.

  • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I mean the lunar cycle is roughly 29 days with the argument that it’s 28 if you don’t count the new moon.

    I realize this is a neat thought idea but it I think best demonstrates how easy it is to jump to conclusions.

  • GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I am sure the comments on this meme community post in a niche social media site will not be filled with butthurt men’s rights activists.

    • Sotuanduso@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      You could have at least used the term “misogynist” so as to not imply that men’s rights are a bad thing.

      • TurtleJoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Hey, we found one!

        Not seriously, “men’s rights activists” are a specific group of people that only exist to complain about and hate women. They don’t care about men’s rights, they are anti-feminists.

        If you genuinely didn’t know this, then I’d love to know what Internet rock You’ve been hiding under. If you’re trying to concern troll, fuck off, MRAs are fucking scum.

        -signed, a man.

        • Sotuanduso@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’ve definitely heard of misogynists, and of misogynists disguising themselves as legitimate men’s advocates, but I’d never heard of “men’s rights activists” as a specific group of misogynists before this.

          Without this explanation, had someone said “men’s rights activists are misogynists,” I would have thought they were a misandrist, because it sounds like a general descriptor and not a specific group.

          So what do you call it when someone who’s not a misogynist advocates for equal treatment in the areas where men get the short end of the stick?