ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 มิ.ย. 2023
- This was important to clarify, and I hope doing so has helped.
---------------------------------------------------
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I reside and work on Anishinaabe territory.
*Please Donate (if you're able!)* :
www.irsss.ca/
landback.org/
raventrust.com/
---------------------------------------------------
TRANS SUPPORT AND RESOURCES
blacktrans.org/
translifeline.org/
---------------------------------------------------
SOCIALS AND SUPPORT
Instagram: finntasticmr.fox
Patreon: / swolesomemrfox
One-time donations: ko-fi.com/swolesome
Tumblr: www.tumblr.com/finntasticmrfox
Thank you Finn for listening, love you friend 💜
Thank you for talking with me! Love you too 💙💙💙
Im trans and I was talking to a friend of mine about patriarchy, they made a "sort of joke" that I had joined the oppressors. I told them that since I don't pass I actually still get misogyny everyday. The way I explained it was "it doesn't matter how I identify. For practical purposes, I am what the cops would see."
Ugh, I'm sorry. Having to explain that kind of thing is exhausting; even for people who do pass, it's so much more complicated than that (not everyone is stealth, medical contexts, being outed by old documents, etc.) so those "jokes" really don't sit right with me. Framing men as an entire group as "oppressors" misses the mark in so many ways, imo.
"I am what the cops would see" is a good way of putting it.
@@FinntasticMrFox not all the men are oppressors, and we're all oppressed by the patriarchy, and anyone can uphold that oppression, like when a woman calls a man a "little bitch," but i can see her point, because i birthed my own damn oppressors
@@FinntasticMrFox come on, you know, you had to be treated the way they treat afab people once. you know the way those of us who don't have it as bad, make excuses. oh, that confederate flag on his wall just means he likes rock music. that rape scene on the inside cover of gnr appetite for destruction is a statement about consumerism. sexism doesn't effect me, it's a lie. there is no afab perosn or woman in the world who hasn't been touched by sexism. stop closing your eyes, because it effcts all genders
@@FinntasticMrFoxhey, just for curiosity, why are jokes like that inappropriate? I had trans men friends lashing out at me for similar comments or jokes about “hating men, men are awful” or misandry. I’m a trans woman, to me and my girl friends, it was very casual unserious rants making lemonade out of our experiences, but to my trans masc friends my jokes felt very hurtful. I don’t understand and I am trying to know.
@@zhuoweiyan1871 I am not Finn, but please ask yourself: Would you like to be stereotyped based on your gender? I definitely would not and I do not know a single person who does.
You continuously impress me with your talent for compassion.
Even the most well intentioned videos I’ve seen on the topic of male privilege feel as if the underlying message to men is “you are wrong” “you are at fault” “you’re hurt isn’t valid.”
I’ve never felt comfortable with that, especially when I see men in my life who I care deeply about suffer under patriarchy.
You are the first person I’ve seen successfully confront those unintended messages with honesty and compassion for everyone involved. ❤
FD Signifier is a great TH-camr who has also talked quite a lot about how patriarchy affects men, especially black boys growing up
@@xWood4000 I like FD Signifiers videos a lot, but I am very clearly not his intended audience and that’s fine, it’s great actually.
it's wrong to teach our boys it's not okay to feel. that's also the patriarchy, and it effects us all
tyvm for making this video. as a woman the part about female privilege did make me very uncomfortable, and reminded me of situations where my own emotions were downplayed rather than respected. so I appreciate your willingness to listen.
It’s called accountability really your very comment proves the female privilege that your feelings matter over everything and they really don’t your not special and your emotions should be down played just like every man’s is and the fact you think that makes you oppressed proves the privilege is real
The real swole was the accountability and reflection we found along the way.
You’re one of the few social issue video essayists I have time for. You come across as a genuinely empathetic person and are capable of looking at these issues through multiple lenses. Once again I’m tempted to comment with my perspective. I’ll watch it back a couple of times, attempt to collect my thoughts and probably give up in the end but if this is the only time I ever comment then I’d like to use it to signal my appreciation of your work.
man, you're missing so much
Taught Arial Acrobatics to children...
Currently trying to tackle the mental gymnastics of grown-ass men.
Right? How are they so damn fragile due to acting so tough all the time? If they want tough, they should try my ballet class! Except that they'd never be able to keep up with the women, cis or trans, or my enby ass. Or the occasional drop in from a couple of gay male pros who want to train with our instructor, who danced with the Bolshoi in the 70's. He's helping me learn to jump like a 5' Baryshnikov!
I guarantee that even the strongest gym bro wouldn't make it through barre work. And I'd love to see them even try pointe! 🤣
@@neuralmute I suppose I could count as one of the "gay men" you mentioned, and maybe U do have a different perspective or eye for this kind of stuff, since I'd love to train in capoeira if I had reliable transportation to the next city over where the classes in my area are, but I'd be willing to take that bet. Granted, I do have a cheeky streak in me where I can absolutely be driven by pure spite. I can turn up to something and even if I do get humbled, Ill still show up next week and continue on as if I didn't because I can do what you just accused me of not being able to do and I'm gonna damn well shove it in your face when I do, how dare you suggest I couldn't.
Not ballet, but I was admittedly looking at some pole dancing classes in my area awhile back, maybe I should chase that up again.
@@neuralmutehard stuff breaks easier then soft stuff. The ability to bend before breaking, you know.
And some women…(conservatives, TERFs…)
That makes so much sense that pro’s don’t necessarily equal privilege. In my experience being a black person assigned female at birth, presenting blackness and femininity may come with some pro’s, but being in this body comes with a lowered status in the white patriarchy.
"...risk both interpersonal and structural disadvantages. For men, it follows from our actions. For women, it precedes theirs." I knew this but never heard it put this way. Really succinct, and I'm def adding it to my lexicon 😃
I swear I'm not trying to be one of those smug, "just asking questions" in bad faith concerntrolling jerks here, but I do want to parse my thoughts on this topic a little better if discourse is welcome here (to which obviously you don't owe me a reply, this is understood.), but if the patriarchal script is so omnipresent that women and queer folk perpetuate it too, how is it that our struggles follows only from our (mens) actions specifically? Is there never a point where this has gone on so long that everyone born into patriarchy are just victims of the system unless we all change, with no new person born today having a meaningful hand in the shit system made long before us that we're just vicimized to live in by proxy of being born into it?
@@gregvs.theworld451 Well, I'd respond that there actually are quite a lot of people deliberately perpetuating it - far-right grifters, people high in social/status hierarchies, that kind of thing. For example, the kind of people who rant about trans people know very well that they themselves are privileged and work _very_ hard to stay that way. The problem is that those demagogues use their platforms to aim hatred and bigotry at those who _point out_ the problems rather than the ones _causing_ them.
@@snorpenbass4196 That's a fair point, for sure some people choose to maintain the current shitty social order, some consciously, willingly, and maliciously. I'd argue they still didn't "start" this system or get the ball rolling on it, but I'll give they make an active push to keep it rolling if they can help it (and we hope they can't). Still, I get stuck on a lot of the rhetoric leveled at men saying "you (men) dug this hole and it your job to get out.", to which, putting aside for a moment that I do recognize men can unconsciously uphold patriarchy, I tend to get annoyed by this simplistic statement because from where I'm standing, I'm wondering what I did to start anything and, while I do agree I can be the change I want to see in the world and I do take up that cause, I wonder how it's in any way my responsibility and a male coded person to do so since I was just born and the shit was already like this, nobody consulted with me about this, and I'd venture there may be a lot of other guys who feel the same, even if they wouldn't know how to articulate such, whenever the "you did this men, now fix it." oversimplification comes up.
@@gregvs.theworld451 I feel like this sort of mindset just ignores the many, MANY things men/masc people tend to do both consciously and unconsciously.
Obviously you (nor anyone alive today) didnt 'start' this shitty system. Nobody sane is actually saying this (at least not that I've seen). The problem is more that many men, even when they are expressly told about how their specific actions are harming women/femmes, refuse to listen, much less attempt to change.
Here's some practical examples:
Many men treat women as objects, whether it be in terms of judging what they wear, or expecting to be able to touch/grasp/sexualize women, expecting women to 'smile' when asked, or to look a certain way (body type, hair, etc), or just trying to get sex when dating beyond anything else.
Many men see women as 'less logical' or even 'less intelligent', as evidenced by how some men ridicule women about being 'emotional' or 'PMSing' or 'bitchy' ... or on the other hand dont believe/trust women with 'guy stuff' like cars, sales, tech, etc.
Many men don't assist or value things that women typically do; everything from childcare to household care to teaching, nursing, and so on. As well as jobs like secretary, assistants, librarian, and so on.
All of these are actions that men actively (or passively) do. Yes, a good amount of them are taught/learned when you're young growing up in a patriarchal system, but many of them are not completely hidden or hard to realize is unfair and patriarchal. Yet, many men when faced with this realization either still feign ignorance, or actively even fight against it.
All of these are actions that we as men can and should fix within ourselves and our friends/children/families however we can.
You may not be able to destroy patriarchy yourself of course, but the more of us that recognizes our privileges and how our actions keep the system going, then the more likely we all can stop it together.
@@gregvs.theworld451 I think it starts with realizing we all were dealt a crummy hand and were taught a lot of things that ultimately harm each other. Listening to people such as Swolesome and other people sharing their knowledge and experiences with us allows us the chance to know better. And because we know better, we can do better. Understanding that Patriarchy isn't your fault is the first step to give yourself the compassion you deserve because it isn't your fault. It's not your fault.
Allow yourself to get some distance away from this concept. It's not your fault. This was established and around years before even many of your ancestors existed. You were born into this. It was forced upon you. It is not your fault. Now that you understand that, you can see, "Okay, I didn't start this. This didn't happen overnight. It's not going to end overnight, either, but I can make a difference now that I see that I (and many others) know for a fact that we can do better." Because we can't do it alone. The reason people blame men and say they need to fix it is because men "benefit" the most from it (which we've established is not really what it's cracked up to be) and because it comes from a place of pain. They have been hurt by men. I can understand how frustrating that can be because it almost feels like they are unfairly blaming you for something another man did. Part of helping out is extending compassion to them as well (and yourself) by remembering not to take it personally in those instances because you know you are making an effort to do better. It specifically is important that men like yourself join the fight because no habit, behavior, or system can survive when the very people it is designed to cater to the most reject it. It will crumble. However, as long as enough people "benefit" from patriarchy, it will continue to persist and cause harm.
Feel free to inquire for more clarification. It is late for me and it feels like my thoughts are not entirely coherent at the moment but I hope this comes across clearly.
Pointing out that the refusal of women's agency is a central component of misogyny was really key to your analysis here. It's not that women are permitted to be vulnerable because they have "female privilege", rather they are afforded that type of expression because it is seen as "bad" and "other" and "womanly".
i was just thinking of this today. tears are all they'd leave to us if they could, while they try to take our agency. we're only allowed crying, as a substitute for action. screw that!
As a middle schooler, I thought men didn't have hormones and only women did. So when the female puberty kicked in, you can imagine it didn't help when my mom said "It's just hormones."
No mom, it's gender dysphoria and you're making it worse
I hope you are safe and joyful brother
funny how men say women are unreasonable bc hormones. lol, no hormone in existence is more corrosive to cognitive function than testosterone, but we all have it to some degree
also, it would've been nice if someone gave me puberty blockers when i sprouted a set of ds at 11
still hate 'em, that's all i'm asking to not have 'em. i don't need the rest. i turn 47 today, so i almost have the facial hair of an 11 yo boy
My main problem with all of this is not concepts, or even conclusions, but the insistence on vocabulary that is not just not properly evocative of the underlying ideas but ultimately contradicts them on a "first impression, no I won't get a Ph.D just to understand your terminology" kind of way. We have toxic X but there can't be toxic Y, and there's good Y but there can't be good X: The terminology essentialises X as bad and Y as good. As a concrete example you often see people, men, women, also very much self-identifying feminists, not recognising that a female therapist telling a male client that he should stop whining is toxic masculinity -- because anywhere but in feminist academia, "masculinity" is something that men do, not a vague societal force wafting through everyone's brain influencing everyone's actions.
If feminism wants to get serious about "patriarchy hurts everyone, feminism helps everyone" then one of the first courses of action should be to drop that kind of gendered language, and make a clear break with the political lesbians, TERFs etc. which conveniently (ab)use that kind of terminology to express straight misandry, just to then hide behind the more modern interpretations as a fig leaf.
...just my two cents as an Anarchist: Language, too, is a power structure and by defining things in certain ways tremendous amounts of power can be wielded, often under anyone's radar as we humans by and large are, quoth Wittgenstein, bewitched by language. It's not like that would be news to feminist discourse, what I'm missing is feminism applying those very insights to itself.
Oh my god this.
My entire issue with this video is that it's playing semantics. "Yes men have emotional literacy issues, but because that's not a societal structural..."
We would get so much more done if we stopped using the term "Toxic Masculinity" and instead focused on fostering Prosocial Masculinity or god forbid "Empower men" to be more emotional. It took hours of research to understand enough social construct of gender theory to understand exactly what Toxic Masculinity meant hours to understand what exactly the impact of consent laws was going to be. It's ridiculous how much research I have to do just to get won over on each singular issue when it's literally horrible branding and communication.
But really I think it's this way because of politics. If we started calling Emotional Intelligence and close platonic friendships a privilege of women the political feminists would explode. I would not be surprised in the slightest if the reason it's "Toxic Masculinity" and "Male Privilege" and never "Toxic Femininity" and "Female Privilege" is entirely because the feminist academics doing the research are biased or pressured towards defining the terms such that it works out that way. But at the same time it's the influencers and people who are specifically choosing to weaponize highly technical academic language for whatever reason. I am continuously surprised the word Patriarchy is still used to the extent it is, like we make new words all the time like "Neurodivergent" to be less polarizing and offensive yet take every opportunity to use the most polarizing language possible for men.
There is a rapidly growing political force of angry men unhappy with their life and the left is just like "Such Toxic Masculinity, have you tried fixing it yourself."
@@obosuckI feel like activists too often want to do or say what feels good, and not what is actually helpful for fighting oppression and violence in the grand scheme of things. I agree that the “men suck” narrative and negative terms associated with masculinity isn’t as helpful as finding ways to support them. I have been guilty of this before, and I slowly realized that I was just releasing my anger - which is valid anger - but if I really want change then unfortunately I have to move past that and figure out how to truly help the very people who are out there becoming violent incels. Using alienating language because it feels good isn’t going to prevent them from shooting people in a public venue when they mentally break, so what are we really doing here?
I had missed the whole goof but it is good to get caught up. As a non-male viewer I still learned from this video and think it seemed well thought out and phrased. Love the teamwork between creators to help clarify what messaging is being sent and repair misunderstandings
Very helpful and nuanced, Finn. I will always appreciate your willingness to have tough conversations gently but without babying anyone. Your discussion of this topic is inspiring me to pick up a camera and make a video explaining oppositional sexism. I think this concept can really clarify how both men and women are hurt by the patriarchy while men are still ultimately favored by it. It is also something I should have mentioned in my comment on your previous video, since it explains exactly why it is so unfortunate to be visibly blurring the distinction between man and woman. The framework of oppositional sexism explains why despite success being male-coded and despite it being vastly more acceptable for women to do masculine things than for men to do feminine things, women are still punished for crossing too far into masculinity. It also adds an additional layer to the reasons for why men feel pressure not to act “like women” - not only is it bad to be a woman, it is also bad for anyone to step too far out of their designated man or woman box within this framework.
I really do wish I could just snap my fingers and have everyone understand oppositional sexism, because it is at the root of so much harm and suffering. If you do make this video, please send it my way. 💙
The phrase I hear the most shutting down guys crying is ‘man up, don’t be a baby’.
"Contextual benefits", OKAY, yes, I can see that. Absolutely. Thank you for this video & explaining 🌸
Of course, friend. 💙
As internally consistent as all this is I find it not particularly useful to actual discourse. To most people it feels like a rhetorical whip to end every conversation with "yes but I have it worse," which ultimately just reinforces the minimisation of male suffering under patriarchy. It's rather hyper-academic and depersonalising for some people and not others. Given that it is ultimately also a socially constructed deconstructive counternarrative, of which there are many valid possible ones, I don't see why the one that will be successful needs to be the one that makes people who have done no harm feel bad just because one wishes to definitively assume a particular point of view. Again not saying this is wrong, but that this is an ultimately needlessly divisive debate on semantics that 99% of people will never argue in good faith.
This is a very fair criticism. Getting through to people is something I think about a lot, because it often feels like there's agreement at the core, but two completely different languages are being spoken. I was hoping this would clear up some language misconceptions and help bridge the gap a little, but it's one piece of a larger puzzle. There needs to be far more at play in getting everyone to understand each other (and, hopefully, work together once they do.)
As someone who has been kinda doing a lot of catching up on various of these topics (grew up in a deeply regressive province and struggles with school compounded) this helps a tonne with explaining the distinction around systemic privilege and e more contextual situations, and I just wanted to say thank you, so much, for the work you do.
Thank you, Finn, for taking the time and making the effort to explain this subject in greater detail. I may not be part of your intended audience but I deeply appreciate your thoughtful and earnest approach to addressing people as human beings.
The two most important people in my life are my nephews, aged 7 and 10. I want to know how to talk to them (and support them) as they continue to grow and evolve and while I am deeply fortunate to know them as well as I do, there are also experiences they're going to have that are outside my own. This helps. You are doing so much good here.
Shoutout to Aranock as well! I love the fellowship that exists between so many brilliant, passionate, and generous content creators on TH-cam. It's truly special. ❤
I remember when i watched your last video and you describing "female privilege" I came to the conclusion that i must be living under different social attitudes that aren't common where I live.
Even though i am a cisgender woman where "defying gender roles" is something to strive for but it was through the women should be held to the same standards as men neo liberal mindset. So through my teen years when I encountered a lack of respect I thought the way to remedy this was to act more like a man so id would be treated as such, it's not like i was bad at preforming masculinity. I often gained a reputation for being scary and my friends look towards me for protection physical or otherwise but I also repressed my emotions into anger, I couldn't converse without layers of irony or cry and other forms of showing weakness/vulnerability,
I know many so girls who were ashamed to cry who wanted to be nothing like those girls who we perceived to cry for attention, to not cry was not a sign for masculinity for us but some marker for maturity.
Eventually i went to therapy and all those misconceptions about emotion and respect and shame were torn down. I wish that every one who has been duped by the ideals of patriarchy, male, female or nonbinary to go through what i did. to be happier
“People who share your identity could go either way as whether they stand in solidarity with you or sit at the root of how you are harmed”
This!! So this. This is why men’s liberation and positive male spaces are SO difficult to achieve. How healthy initiatives like the original incel forum get corrupted… it’s quite the uphill battle.
that essentializing of women as emotional also happens to kids and teenagers. Their anger and distance and expression of emotion are dismissed as "having hormones". This allows adults to dismiss children's wellbeing and needs. Its like you are not an adult man, your emotions are used to take power away from you.
people like to say that creators are absolutely incredible for doing the bare minimum, but my dude, you've gone above and beyond and I absolutely love this video. I'm 100% showing this to my brothers, they need to hear this
This is why we love cornbreadtube. The intersectional left of youtube, where creators are capable of self reflection and personal self critique.
But true, Finn has gone above and beyond with this, two videos in a row JUST correcting himself. Absolutely top tier engagement with the discussion.
In my experience, "Patriarchy does not mean men" is a great way to get shouted down by your lesbian separatist family members. But that's an interpersonal problem, not a systemic one. And the vast majority of women I talk to seem to be appreciative of me putting in the effort and thinking about these things.
Beautiful stuff! Coming from this afab masc-leaning enby, you've got it all nailed. And that was a gorgeous end note - smash the patriarchy indeed!
I found you because I listen to Sarah's recommendations. The kindness of this community is double edged for my mental self care. I have deeply felt issues stemming from trauma. Untreated for decades. Then finally treated for about 3 years by an amazing therapist. So, at near 62 yrs old, I have the baggage of decades of untreated cptsd and adult ASD. Not to mention the sometimes isolationism depression and anxiety cause me.
Why preface with all that? Well, I think it's my fear of rejection. That I'm white and male and that my mind instinctively fears what I share about my vulnerability, my fear of men and women, my isolation and much more are too uncomfortable to engage with me.
Fear drives much of my thinking, though given time to articulate, to say these, I wonder if what I write resonates in a way that doesn't repel others?
It amazes me that attachment failure from birth, then decades abandonment anxiety are who I am. I see me, my failure, my vulnerability and desire to express all honestly. Then I know the grip in my body, as it reacts to intense sadness.
A nonbinary, white male, who understands the privilege this can be in society. Though, can't share much of anything that privilege brought. And I can convey the deep despair in thoughts that rise too often.
What is all this then, this post? I ramble. My mind has that. Seems I've lost what any of this means, to a point, a meaning?
I don't feel repulsed at all bud, thanks for sharing.
Expressing our feelings and what we grapple with often *is* the point, and I'm glad you feel safe doing so here. 💙
I didn't catch the issue with your original video, but now that you've pointed it out, I'm glad you made this video. I'm someone who shouldn't need these reminders, but they clarified so much about how I need to reframe how I tall about this stuff going forward, as an educator. Thank you for doing the hard, scary work of sharing your learning process with us! It's the best way to help us all learn with you! 🙏
I used to be the type of guy that'd pay lip service to the existence of the patriarchy by highlighting all the clear privileges I gained after medically transitioning. And I can still talk to that, of course. But with time I've grown resentful of how it seems like trans mens' entire political identity is a prop for affirming the existence of the patriarchy. Like advocacy for trans men is somehow immoral or unimportant unless it's shared with others.
So, structurally and institutionally from a binary perspective on gender, I think you're right about the social hierarchy / patriarchy being to blame. But the political identity of trans men as an example of how the villanization of men is a structural oppression and puts trans men at a disadvantage for advocating for ourselves/building community. Which implies that folks who aren't men in LGBT spaces have that advantage = privilege.
I think there's important discussions to be had on how we limit the damage of aggressive pushback against men and masculinity (which isn't undeserved) from us as we attempted to dismantle patriarchy. Specifically trans men because we're a very vulnerable target for this. Its concerning to me that men's issues, like how so many trans men leave the community, are dismissed as a secondary problem. Perhaps if more prioritization was placed on proving men better support systems in the system (i.e. youth outreach for boys, a lot of whom are starved for attention, investment in improving boys education outcomes which are clearly getting worse, etc) this would HELP dismantle the patriarchy.
I'm a intersex trans femme person and absolutely agree with everything here. I want to add an example that manosphere type men often misattribute to misandry or female privilege and that's the disproportionate amount of child genital cutting that's inflicted on amab people.
It's absolutely patriarchy that perpetuates it, but questioning it is taboo enough that it's not mentioned by the left in topics like this video. I think those men would be less likely to dismiss this video if that was included in the examples.
The problem is that it's tied to religion and given the antisemitic shit THAT'S tied to, I can't blame the left for being allergic to mentioning that lest it attract dogshit-right assweasels.
The irony of them using that argument is it's actually a perfect example of men with power hurting other people. The whole routine practice in the USA (as it's not really seen elsewhere outside of religious reasons) goes back to Harvey Kellogg trying to police the bodies of anyone born with a penis. He was able to do this because he was a rich, white man, and while his actions hurt many people, there were countless cis men directly harmed. I wish they would understand this.
@@neoqwertythat doesn’t justify dismissing the subject matter or pretending like it doesn’t exist. religion doesn’t and can’t ethically justify removing functional parts of another person’s body. I mean if you don’t have sexual autonomy or the right to your own genitals, what do you have?
You continue to make incredibly well-done videos. Great work!
This is gonna sound hella petty but when I first saw your previous video, though I agreed with most of it, this section was a bit of a thorn in my side. And thing is, you are a creator I know and trust so I wanted to leave a proper good faith comment addressing it and just move on. But I watched the video at the end of an extremely long day and I just couldn't muster the energy to make an articulate nuanced comment so I told just myself that I would come back to the video at a later time to do that. But then my petty self, despite agreeing with 99% of the video, just could not "like" the video before closing it! XD And like, I wanted to! It's a GREAT video! It was just this one thing making me internally grumble a little! So I promised myself that when I got back to make that comment, then I would feel better and just like the video in peace! One minute into this one, I immediately went to that video and liked it!! XD I don't know why I'm telling you this honestly! I'm just kinda laughing at myself here and thought maybe a stranger on the internet should know how stupid my brain can be sometimes!! XD
Thank you for the addendum and have a great day! You too Aranock, you absolute legend!
That's okay! It's how we roll. And we tend to be more lenient when we feel *heard*, I mean there's a reason when you're trained for conflict resolution one of the first things you get taught is how to make everyone feel heard and listened to *specifically* so they'll be willing to listen.
So this isn't so much stupid, as it's a feature not a bug! S'part of our egalitarian-optimizing spaghetti code we got handed down from our ancient hunter-gatherer ancestors who decided "don't be an a-hole" was a whole civilization build to invest into.
You're very lucky that you've got the self-awareness to see and describe this little microcosm of how human cooperation naturally deals with disagreements in a calm way, it's cool AF to read it as a budding social sciences nerd and see a bunch of theories of how human society worked in anthropology reflected in your thought processes!
@@neoqwerty OH. O_O. THAT IS REALLY COOL! Well! I'm happy that I randomly overshared in this instance cuz I got to learn something new in return! Thanks for sharing your insight. ^_^ This was really interesting to read. Will probably be sending me down a rabbit hole the minute I have some free time :D
Nah, not petty at all, it makes a lot of sense. 😂
Not one of the fellas, but i still loved it..
Looking back, i think to choose the word privilege to describe unearned, unfair advantage, AND spared harm or disantvantage at the same time was probably not ideal from a PR viewpoint...
I sorta think the word privilege just ends up being confusing. cause we really are talking about two separate things. "female privilege" is more like a performance reward for doing your role according to the way the system is set up. everyone gets some form of this for fitting into the role they are forced into but its a pretty crappy carrot compared to the stick you get for not complying. even males get some of this type of "privilege" separate from the default hierarchical status of just existing as a dude. so we have the thing that you gotta do work to get ("female privilege" and other compliance rewards for acting your role) and the thing you mostly dont have to do work to get (just being a dude that passes). i think thats why trans folk have a lot to add to the discussion here cause they can do work to get the reward for the thing that normally doesnt require work to get. i do think it would be fair to say a white woman may get some amount of privilege compared to a non white woman, but thats racial privilege not gender, and its actually attenuated by her gender compared to that of a white man vs a non white man. so some of the things some people call "female privilege" may be misattributed to gender as opposed to some other hierarchy.
Holy crap mate I am truly blown away by your eloquence. I have been trying to express these ideas for very long time but have been unable to find the words
I love your calming presence and dedication to nuanced discussion 💖
While in the past I used to do it too, I now find it weird how people get defensive over "but what about group X doing such and so" because. In my view, I've come to see this as people just not being willow to address things that potentially involve themselves. I think this is most likely trauma stemming from school and home environments, where wrongs or social faux pas meant isolation and punishment from your immediate community. Which we then learn to expect any time anything potentially negative about is brought up about ourselves.
I think you’re spot on here.
Always appreciate your videos. Food for thought!
You should definitely do a conversation video... you make excellent points and they can land stronger with a proper debate. I find so often the biggest issue is people think there is a right and wrong side, rather than a massive web of misunderstanding and communication thats driving all of these issues.
It is definitely something I'd be happy to do, though I'm not sure how I feel about a debate framing. I guess if it's informal, there's not really a clear line between a conversation in which there's disagreement, and a debate.
@Swolesome fair point. I think it's about a different perspective than "opinion". And about sharing experience and showing where the overlaps occur. I have definitely had an identical experience in the realm of "female" and "male" privileges and how the oppression of both all stems from the same root cause, and that the answer really does lie in unraveling this web our species built on the fallability of the evolving human mind.
I would also love to hear your thoughts on how Homophobia, and Transbophia and wether they potentially stem from sexism and that the idea of a man in anyway lowering himself to the standard of a woman is truly the root issue.
@@chancellorkingsmyth4747 there's definitely an element of homophobia that comes from masculinity and sexism... Calling men who aren't masculine "gay" for instance. However, these two phobias also have their own roots in the binary between what's see as "normal" and "abnormal". This normal is usually based on imperial, Capitalist, ableist, sexist and religious contexts, and some things are normal one time but deviant another time.
@@that_viewerguy A lot of transphobia is just repackaged homophobia (for trans women) and misogyny (for trans men), in the patterns I've found. With extra ableism (take a shot each time someone says it's a delusion, because clearly only someone who is mentally ill wouldn't want to follow an arbitrarily invented gender standard that shifts every century whose entire purpose is behavior control of the masses).
Basically transphobes think trans women are just gay men in dresses and act based on that, so you get the old canards of "gay men are MAPs" and "gay men are degenerate perverts" on top of the "garden variety" manhood-gatekeeping that hits men when they do manliness "wrong". And then it's repackaged with a shoddily glued-on "trans women" sticker over the original "gay men" text.
And they think trans men are women "pretending to be men", so you get infantilizing (because women aren't intelligent and self-aware enough to be able to make their own decisions and know what they're thinking, they need a man to tell them that), an accidental acknowledgement of systemic misogyny (why would a woman pretend to be a man, surely it's to gain power that women don't normally have and to bypass the limits imposed on women!), and this toxic slurry of misogyny and manhood-gatekeeping (the second you don't _perfectly_ match patriarchal masculinity, you get hit with the misogyny even harder than a cis woman would for daring to "pretend" and "trick" your way into priviledge).
And in this case they don't even glue on a sticker, they just write "(trans men)" as smalltext annotations over it, because they don't even pretend to consider trans men as not being women.
For non-binary people it's basically a russian roulette composed of whichever binary trans category they look like they fit into, plus the ever-popular "you're just doing it for the attention/clout" and cries of being "transtrender" if they're very ambiguous and/or confusing in their presentation. (Also note that if you don't pass and are binary trans, you will ALSO get hit with those.)
I have to say, I feel like I'm not following this line of reasoning. Maybe I'm just holding onto that coloquial meaning too much, but this feels all... arbitrary. Like, the core belief is being chosen based on which one negatively affects women.
If you have a society that splits it's people into two main groups and assigns beliefs to them, then any negative or positive idea about one will be reversed for the other. But surely both are still structural beliefs? So like, men are more likely to be promoted because they're seen as more suited to the work place, and by extension women are seen as less suited to the work place... why is only the second belief considered to be the "real" reason? Aren't both of these structural beliefs? Don't both groups deal with them as hurdles in one way or another? It's not like being allowed to work is inherently the good one, and being allowed to look after the home/kids is inherently the bad one.
Maybe I shouldn't even be thinking about it because it... doesn't really matter if female privilege exists or not, but then it doesn't really matter if you say "on accident" or "by accident" and my girlfriend an I still argue about it like once a week. Basically what I'm trying to say is that I'm not a guy who needs to be right, I'm a guy who knows you're a lot more educated about these issues than I am, so if I disagree, I'm betting there's something I've missed or misunderstood.
I think you've misunderstood, because Finn wasn't saying that the reason it's there is that it harms women, in fact I don't think he was trying to tell us why patriarchy exists at all.
He was trying to illustrate how patriarchy hurts all genders through the same structures. The same thing that tells women they are weak and unworthy, tells men that if they are not hard and unfeeling then they are unworthy, which leads to the problems with men's mental health.
Like, these structures overall hurt women more, in more direct ways, and are accessible to men in ways that they are not to other genders.
So while men are individually hurt by the structures, as a group they are helped by them. On the opposite, women are individually sometimes benefited by these structures, but overall as a group, and individually across a lifetime, they are disadvantaged by them.
For example, a woman may get resources given to her by a man, because patriarchy tells us that men are material providers for women and children.
But this comes at a high cost, it comes with the expectation that she will provide this man with some form of intimacy in return, reducing her status to something of material value to be bought or rented in exchange for gifts. And if she does not, the cost may end up being her very life, or her bodily autonomy.
In this instance both are being harmed, as the man is reduced to little more than Hades' Plenty Vault, while the woman is reduced to a commodity. But only one of the two is at risk of further, deeper harm because of this situation.
@@Jane-oz7pp So, I fully agree with the sentiment that women are overall worse off as a result of these structures; however I don't agree with your comments that women only individually benefit, and never benefit as a group. I mean, for one thing, it's very much context dependant. But following from that, where is the line between an individual benefit and a group benefit?
An individual woman convicted of theft might recieve a shorter sentence a man who committed the same offence. She has individually benefitted from our society's ideas about women. But that will go for most female defendants. When a majority of a group recieve a benefit as indivudals, then surely that means they also recieve them as a group? What makes that an individual benefit rather than a group one? And how can you have a group benefit that isn't ultimately just applied to many individuals?
@MyLittleDashie 7 Well, but who gives those sentences? Mostly men, since they are overly represented in the positions that form the justice system. And who really benefits from it? Also men, since men in prison are disproportionately minorities and poor people, and so white and rich men benefit from having them in prison. It's not only about the disadvantages, is also about power, and most structural problems that affect men are perpetuated by other men. (Which is addressed in the video, in the last part on the patriarchy).
Edit: this is not to say that women don't have roles that also perpetuate that system, but they are either more insidious, supportive roles, or the few women that manage to climb the social ladder, but don't change the status quo, even if it hurts them
@@trinidadgondi This comment feels really messy to me. For one thing, I don't think you can claim that men getting longer sentences is a male privilege because it was mostly other men who chose their sentences.
I also don't agree that rich white men benefit from having other men in prison... well, I guess they do in the US thanks to the privatisation of prisons, but that's not the case everywhere.
But even if it was a benefit to some rich dude to have some poor guy in prison, men are both benefitting and suffering in equal measure as a result of this structure, so I fail to see how you could call that "male privilege". Surely that should be reserved for things where men gain overall. Not things with zero net gain for men as a group.
As for your comment about power, what you're describing there is patriarchy, not male privilege. Being massively over represented in power *is* a male privilege, but it's not the only one, and it doesn't negate the possibility of female privilege existing under different contexts.
@@mylittledashie7419 but you cannot separate male privilege and patriarchy, since male privilege comes from patriarchy. That's why we are talking about systemic power structures. And yes, we can talk about male privilege even when it affects other men because that's how intersectionality works: in the case of prisons (not only in the US, but unequal societies in general) the convicts are not getting punished specifically because they are men, but because they don't have other sets of privileges. Even if you forget the people handling the sentences, what about paying for a lawyer, bail, the reason you commited the crime in the 1st place...
But in what place do women, because they are women, hold structural power that benefits them?
Edit: of course, the fact that you said "a male privilege", as if it was a list of privileges and not just a general system makes me think we are having a conversation with different definitions... I don't think of male privilege as a list of things that men have that women don't, I think of it more as the fact that our political, economic, and social structures are designed with men at the top in mind, which benefit them specifically because they are men, and men that don't benefit from it, or do it to a lesser extent, is because they either don't fit with the ideals of masculinity, or because they lack other sets of privileges, like wealth
Engagement for the engagement god!
I can think of a way in which patriarchal norms can sometimes amplify women’s voices in certain spheres of discourse, but not because of respect for women as human beings but because of the so-called innate biologically essentialist characteristics ascribed to women by the patriarchy. If a woman is seen as “respectable” she can be afforded a platform even if she uses it to harm other women and minorities. JK Rowling is a great example of this- she is a rich, white, “respectable” woman, so she is seen as trustworthy as she fits this motherly caring kind of archetype. So her saying horrible transphobic things on the internet had such an impact on transphobic radicalisation in a lot of English speaking societies. When she says that trans people are dangerous to women and children, a lot of people trust her. Even though it’s technically “privilege” it doesn’t actually benefit women on the whole - it harms them, unless they are happy in that very specific role ascribed to them and are ready to give up autonomy in return for it.
This is a really good video, especially as someone who was socialized and thought they were a Man for decades (and in reality is transfemme). I can tell you from my experience, I have never had "female" privilege even when I pass (at this point it really depends upon the person so I've given up trying to know how to "pass"). Patriarchy oppresses everyone but men are less oppressed than non men.
Thank you for making this update! And thanks to Aranock for talking to you! I watched the premiere of the video in which you discussed female privilege and I disagreed with you, but I saw that Aranock wanted to talk to you so I didn't leave a comment explaining why I disagreed. She is much better at explaining these things than I am. Plus, I didn't think you really meant that female privilege exists. I thought you were using that phrase to describe something that is true - that women are exempt from some of rules that men must follow under patriarchy - but I wouldn't call that "privilege" in the same way that men have privilege.
The way I would describe it is, like, for example, someone who is disabled may not be required to work, and I guess, from a certain point of view, you could call that a "privilege" because working under capitalism sucks. But that point of view doesn't take into account that people who can't work are considered "useless" or a "burden on society," and it's difficult to survive in our world without a job which makes life harder. For women, they have the "privilege" to be emotional, but that doesn't take into account that emotional people are considered "irrational" and "childish," and it's difficult to get anyone to listen to you or respect you, which makes life harder. One thing I've noticed is, privileged people assume that other people's circumstances are exactly the same as their own, so they imagine disabled people are getting a "free ride" from the government to sit around at home and do nothing, and women are getting love, sympathy and care whenever they express their feelings or talk about difficulties they face. But I'd call this a "privileged point of view" because they're unaware of the hardship these things create in life. Women are more likely to be demonized (Amber Heard comes to mind) than given an ounce of sympathy. In a vacuum, it would be great if no one had to work in order to survive and if everyone could express all kinds of feelings without judgment, but that doesn't happen in our society, and it won't happen without destroying patriarchy and white supremacy.
Many disabled people would be able to work if roads, buildings and workplaces were more accessible. America's car-centric city planning screws everyone over, but the fact that it makes public transportation so bad is a major reason people with disabilities that prevent them from driving need so much support.
Also, just like minimum wage, disability/SSI payments are a pittance that don't take the current cost of living into account. You can lose them entirely if you marry, regardless of how much your spouse makes or whether they're also on disability. For Medicaid, if you have more than $2000 in the bank they may make you spend it down or (in Ohio's case at least) put it in a weird uninsured bank that gambles with your money to maintain eligibility every year. If you don't have someone willing and able to let you live with them, and you can't afford or don't qualify for subsidized housing, you're on the street.
America really feels like it doesn't want to change anything so that many disabled people can work even though it would be much better for the economy. It just wants to demonize them for needing help to justify barely helping them.
Reason #6739 of why @Aranock is a wonderful human person! I love when our community supports itself through connections like this. ❤ Happy Pride
Same to you, my friend! 🏳⚧
You have such a great way with words.
It says everything you need to know, that I have very seriously considered transitioning f2m, not out of dysphoria, but due to misogyny. I am almost 50, and still deal with misogyny on a daily basis. I am married, I am the breadwinner, I am the one who knows about mechanics and building. I have to go through my husband when getting anything done in order to bypass pushback that my husband has never had to deal with. If I present to a tradesman, the job I want them to do, that I am praying for, I get mansplained to, I get told to do it differently than what my goal is, I also get charged more money. If my husband presents he gets told what a great idea, and that he is spot on, absolutely right, and he gets a better rate than I would have. In my twenties I had a breast reduction in an attempt to not be seen as a pair of tits. To be treated fairly in the workplace. Could you imagine getting a dick reduction surgery because of the way people treat you?
Now see, this is a video I could link someone to if they really don't get it. It won't seem like I'm insulting them. I don't have to be all "ignore the intro, I promise the rest will come back and explain." Just a chill dude laying it out in a way that explains who the victims are, without implying that everyone else is fine, or that everyone else is at fault.
I like feeling my brain blossom. Thanks ❤
I got a question here: If we start seeing women as potential predators and would acknowledge, that they can be dangerous, would that be a part of smashing patriarchy and misogyny? I ask, because I kinda saw that thing as female privilege, but swolesome said, this thinking is rooted in misogyny. Or is the right way to stop seeing men as potential predators?
The thing about female privilege is that it's not something they get automatically - it's been claimed by scraping out tiny territories within the patriarchy that men have _allowed_ women to get. And yeah, sure, they can be vicious and awful within those territories (my brother works in elderly care and has experienced it in the worst ways from sexual harassment to systematic bullying), but we have to remember that they only have that limited privilege under a Sword of Damocles - "step out of line" too much and the patriarchy takes it away.
Never forget that patriarchy is not a system of equals. It's the patriarchs on top and everyone else stepped on, _including lower-ranked men._ The MRA type people prey on the hurt and isolation of men stomped on by the patriarchy and aim them at the wrong targets.
...summing up: Basically, yeah, kind of. With the aber that female privilege generally only lasts until either women "step out of line" or it becomes too profitable to allow women to have it.
@@snorpenbass4196 It just feels to me, that to break misogyny in this particular instance, women need to be seen as bad people somehow. Kinda confusing. I got an example for this. I once saw a YT-video where an experiment was made. In a public park actors were playing a couple. First, the man was attacking here loudly and used some force, and they stopped it pretty early, because always someone stepped in immediately. After that, the actors changed and the actress attacked her boyfriend, with force too. Very rarely someone showed some courage to stop this interaction. It seems to me that to break misogyny we need to start to take women seriously, that they can actually be harmful to get them out of the "victim" role patriarchy assigns them to.
@@kshamwhizzle6544 I think we are not talking about who has it better or not here. It's just kinda seems to be the way to get out of the prey/victim role, which is rooted in misogyny, would go through being also seen as a possible predator and being dangerous by taking into account, that women have agency and can be strong and assertive, and can therefore also harm people.
@@kshamwhizzle6544 Almost all perpetrators of sexual assault are men in the statistics. I won't argue, that this is right, especially for harder cases of SA and rape. But it seems to be rooted in misogyny, that women can't really be perpetrators of SA, because they are seen only as victims and/or prey. I think the statistics would be very different if a women grabbing a mens crotch or kiss him without asking for consent would be seen as SA. But it's not in 99% of the cases, because it does not fit in the picture of women=victim and men=predator. So almost all of the cases are not in the statistics, because SA like this is not seen as SA.
@@cheaxel Ever wondered why women can't be held liable for rape in the US. It isn't "patriarchy" it's people like Mary Koss who genuinely have a vendetta against male victims. She is the foremost recognised advisor on sexual crimes to the CDC, FBI, DoJ etc. It was her research where she deliberately wrote male victims of female perpetrators out of that shaped the current definition of rape.
According to this logic, if men are excused for graping women it's not because they are privileged, but because they are regarded as incapable to control their instincts. Therefore if women are blamed for grape, it's actually a sign of empowerment for women because it regards them as the ones in control of their sexuality.
Good video, good points, i agree with a lot of what you said, and thanks for the work you put into it. I have always had a problem with people who view patriarchy as too closely linked to plain maleness. I have always tried to view patriarchy semi-literally; as power of the fathers. If men are powerful and have intrinsic value as males, why do we waste them so frivolously? I'm not talking alpha-beta bs, i'm saying that many men are treated as disposable. I don't know how you can look at the military and not see that, but also in everyday work. And one of the reasons i'm already feeling defensive writing this, is that most of the time when i point this out, i get reminded of how much worse structural discrimination is against women. I mean, yes, acknowledged and agreed, but that doesn't cancel out the systemic discrimination against many men as people. Yes, it's totally coming from the power of _some_ men, i.e. the Patriarchs, but they depend on the subjugation of most men just as much as they depend on the subjugation of almost all women. That's why i don't see is as productive in the long term (though i completely understand the reasons in the short term) of seeing it through a lens of Patriarchy, rather than just general gender normativity. Try seeing your arguments through that lens and i think you will see that they all still hold up, but we don't have to go around talking about how this privilege isn't really privilege, even though it sucks too, but in a different way, etc. etc. I hope this makes some kind of sense and doesn't come off as too hostile. I'm angry about work, and i worry it bleeds through. Anyhow, look forward to viewing more of your videos.
"many men are treated as disposable. I don't know how you can . . . . not see that" Are you speaking of Finn when you say "you"? If so, I think that you might discover that you and he are in agreement about that.
Have you read The Will To Change Men, Masculinity, and Love by bell hooks? Finn has specifically recommended it in his videos, and it talks about exactly what you are - particularly Chapters 3, 6 and 8. I think you might find a great deal of solidarity in that book.
2 videos about correcting yourself in a row?
Based king.
thanks for the video. You gave me a new perpective
Okay, sure, I see your point. But have you considered that your extreme reasonableness, your overt compassion, your gentle tone, your hypnotic gaze, and your elevator music in the background might make it completely impossible to finish your video without being lulled into sleep? Or is that just a problem for my ADHD brain?
...ASJWMR
Ever heard of Norah Vincent, she used to believe men are privileged, until she put herself in men’s shoes.
We learn to take advantage of the few opportunities allotted to us by our oppressors. Some of us stand outside of that box.
AHAHAAAAAAAAA THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR THANK YOU!!!! 🤘🤘🤘🤘🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳
It's easy for me, a trans amab person, to admit that women seem to have experiences of which I am jealous.
If you're out here on the internet seriously saying that you're jealous of the "priveleges" of women in society... maybe it's because you're trans too? No cap.
Nobody is perfect. But you are a good teacher.
Wow bisexsual lighting and transgender shirt, you went all out
Thank you for the video
I'm a cis man who's never really been comfortable with the ways of being a man that society pushes on me. You're one of the people I trust the most when it comes to learning to be a man in non-toxic ways.
Thank you for all the time you spend teaching. This video is a great example of what I need to learn.
The only thing I hate about you is that your videos are so well made they don’t need to be longer.
You genuinely have a gift for making video essays.
Great video as always!
thank you, sir, so well said
I totally agree but unfortunately my brothers wouldn't be good with me telling them this.
Thanks for this, I’m attempting to structure a discussion over racism vs reverse racism which parallels this discussion in that reverse racism happens on an individual level, but not a structural level and it comes from a different place than racism. And to complicate it further anti-Asian racism is different to anti-black racism even though both are systemic. As a mixed race person I have similar experience to all three forms in parallel to a transperson’s experience with both forms of sexism. Explaining that things follow or preceded an action is a helpful way to frame racism as well.
Thank you. I apologize the following is so long, but hope that's OK.
I like your content and your channel, but I was concerned in a prior video when you started to talk over women. And it made me uncomfortable because I am cis, and I try to respect both trans experiences and also the reality of intersectionality. When it comes to the trans community generally there are some unique cross overs, and I try to be mindful and sensitive. I know that trans men were raised AFAB, and I know that trans women were raised AMAB. I also know there is a difference between a woman being raised AFAB and a man / nonbinary person being raise AFAB, and it's the same for the AMAB context. My trans women friends are both bold on the one hand, but also fragile on the other, because of the difference in their experiences, that I--as a cis person--did not have. Raised AFAB, there was never a time I was provided all the attention and affirmation any AMAB person gets. There is a great video, sent to me by a nonbinary friend, that features the voice of a trans woman, Paula Stone Williams, where she very bravely discusses that difference--how, while she did have to carry the weight of not being her authentic self, she also had AMAB advantages in other areas, which cis women around her recognized when she came out. She is very honest about her experiences and work in those areas, while still acknowledging the heavy price she paid for coming out as a woman.
I acknowledge and try to be mindful of my cis privilege. I also try to see the 'good' side of the trans woman experience in what they bring to the table from their different experience. Some of my trans woman friends speak as boldly as any cis man, because they are used to being heard in areas, outside of their transness. I have /CIS/ privilege. But "female" privilege is simply NOT a thing. As one of my nonbinary friends put it, "female is the label they put on people to know which half of the population they can oppress from birth." When someone talks over me, at me, aggressively, it has a very "male"-centric aspect to it that is read by my cis female context as "manly"---because I mainly have gotten that from men all my life. When it comes to trans women who do this, I like the fact they speak out boldly on trans and women's issues--they are, to me, in some ways, a model of what a woman sounds like when she hasn't been wholly dismissed from the moment of birth, and that's refreshing. But on the other hand, when a conversation is happening, and these attributes come out /at/ me, it's infuriating, because that sort of talking-to/over aimed at me, has, because of my female experience of oppression, been done /to/ me by men, who have not taken me seriously because of how they were socialized--from the time I can remember. My cis privilege does not magically erase my female oppression.
On the flip side, I have trans men friends as well. And there is one who has the problem of talking over women. He uses "I was socialized as a woman" to insert himself in women's issues (where trans women belong, but he does not), OVER the women themselves who are giving their experiences. One of my trans male friends (a different guy) has a child that he birthed while still presenting as a woman, before he'd come out. I am a cis woman, I don't have a child and, to my knowledge, have never been pregnant. I respect his experience and defer to him on what pregnancy was like /for him/. He can inform me what it was like to be pregnant--as a man. He cannot tell me what it's like to be pregnant as a woman. And if a woman is talking about pregnancy, he can talk about his experience with pregnancy, but he should refrain from talking about what that experience is like /for women/. To be clear, again, this guy does not do that--but this other trans male friend does things like that /all the time/, saying he can speak over women about what this is like /for women/, because he was (in his own words) "socialized as a woman." But a boy socialized as a girl is not a girl. Trans men /are/ men. And I respect that. And I wish this guy did as well.
Alternatively, when it comes to cis male institutions, as you say they are huge male majorities. In the year Trump was elected, there was some celebration about it being a year where record numbers of women, and especially women of color, were elected to our federal Congress. I googled, and women are now at about 1/4 of the Congress. I do not see that as a reason to celebrate. I am literally being told to celebrate being horribly under-represented in a very important institution of power. I was told to celebrate, as part of Women's History Month, the single woman Medal of Honor recipient. There have been over 3500+ awarded. How is that cause for celebration? And the one woman who did get it, lived as a man. No. I do not celebrate that 1 woman(?) in 3500+ was considered worthy of this honor. Men run financial institutions, government institutions, educational institutions, corporate institutions, healthcare institutions, military and law enforcement institutions, science and research institutions--they are the majority in power in every power structure. And every single "advantage" a man can name that they believe women have, is the result of the denigration of women by these structures.
In the US, the "draft" is a big one: Women don't have to register for the draft. This is because men, historically, believed that women were not capable of military function. It was only recently that women in the US were allowed to enter combat roles--and that was due to years of women fighting for that right. Women were barred from these roles (even though they found subversive ways to be in combat), which limited their ability to gain promotion and pay increases in military careers. And now that they can be in combat--if a man would like to sue over the draft, he could actually achieve having it applied to women as well, based on the fact that women now qualify for all military roles. So, it has been women fighting against patriarchy who have opened the door for more equity in the draft and combat--against male oppression.
In the US women gaining custody of children after divorce is another big one. But if you look at the history of custody, you will find that when children were able to be exploited for labor, the laws gave men full rights to children. If a woman wanted to leave her husband, she also had to leave her children behind and abandon them. It wasn't until child labor was no longer there to exploit, that (male run) family law began to shift to custody for women--which threw many single mothers into poverty (a problem that can be demonstrated through statistics to this day)--because our male systems of power will not provide a social safety net, and we do not value traditional women-centric careers enough to pay them a living wage.
It is a fact that the number one predator in US society, of women, is cis men. We are more likely to be r*ped or killed by men. The number one killer/r*pist of men? Not women. Other men. And this leads into the next issue: When men raise issues like you mention at the top of your video--male resources for r*pe/SA, for example--those are legitimate issues. I agree with providing resources to men. But the power to change policy on that does NOT lie in the hands of women. The power structures that craft public policy are male owned and operated. Men are doing this to other men--and /women/ are being blamed.
Recently in Texas, where I live, our Republican majority House, with a Republican House Speaker in charge, impeached our Republican Attorney General for a long list of corruption and investigations against him. After it was done, Trump and other Republicans--even here in Texas--blamed /Democrats/. I thought "Yes, that's exactly what it's like to be a woman."
Trans men, especially non passing trans men, and young trans boys, absolutely have a place in discussing issues that effect women, because even though we aren’t women, it effects us as well. Your friend isn’t saying he’s a woman. He’s saying he’s afab, therefore deals with afab problems. How can you not understand that? And also I don’t like how you tell trans people what they can and can’t experience, can and can’t do, and speak as if you understand us. Even if you’re close with trans people, you absolutely shouldn’t be doing that. I’m not denying passing trans men can have male privilege, but it depends on the context. You seem to be of the mindset that as soon as a trans guy comes out, he’s suddenly gained all male privilege. No. Cis men are not welcoming at all. I still look like a girl. I still put up with the same bs I did before I came out. I’m not misgendering myself by calling myself afab. My sex is female. Every trans person knows this, and is able to differentiate their gender and sex. Let me put it this way, a trans man escaping an abusive situation should absolutely be welcomed into a women’s shelter, even if he is not a woman. A non passing trans man cannot “talk over” a cis woman on women’s issues. Even a passing trans man still has a right to speak up. And trans men have a place when it comes to the topic of pregnancy and abortion.
Now fatherhood and motherhood? Different things, a trans man cannot insert himself into conversations on motherhood unless he realized he was a man after raising a kid, therefore he knows what motherhood is like. I know what girlhood is like, frankly I hated it, and still have to put up with womanhood until T fully changes me. I can talk about girlhood, hell I didn’t endure all those painful years of being forced into femininity, only for some random cis woman to tell me I have no place telling my story on it. I certainly do, especially since it hurt me in ways cis people will not understand, although I imagine some cis girls could relate to some of the pains I endured. Periods, the pressure to perform, crappy relationship with my mother…
My point is, so as long as someone experienced it, such as me experiencing girlhood, your friend going through pregnancy as non passing trans guy, they absolutely have the right to talk about it. Excluding them is just erasure. Now, I can’t talk about motherhood or pregnancy because I’ve never been pregnant, or a mother. But I can tell someone what it’s like to be a daughter, because I spent the first 15 years of my life being one until I was accepted as a son. Even when I am eventually passing, I still can tell someone what it was like, because it was a lived experience.
You’re so upset about trans men supposedly speaking over cis women, when you’re actually speaking over us. A trans guy opening up about his experience being pregnant only for you to shout “But you’re not a woman!!!” Is speaking over him. And a trans guy being pregnant likely has the same, but worse experience, as a cis woman, since pregnant trans men have reported that doctors and nurses misgender them, and call them moms. So even when we don’t want to participate in girlhood/womanhood/motherhood, it’s still forced upon us by society. And if we’re going to be shoved into those boxes, we should especially have a place when speaking about it. Not every trans guy came out at like five years old and has been living as a man since. Many of us vividly remember living as a girl/woman. Many of us are forced to. I’m not denying my gender by admitting I lived as a girl once. That’s just a fact. And in some contexts, I still *am* living as a woman. I’m not passing. When I go out and public, everyone is going to assume I am a woman, and transphobes refuse to see me any other way. I’m not going to go around and correct and come out to every single person I bump into. My neighbors think I’m a woman? Okay, I never interact or talk to them so it doesn’t matter. The cashier at the grocery store? Still don’t care. I get misgendered on a daily basis.
I’m still careful when I’m walking alone, I’m wary of being alone with men. I fear getting SA’d, have to deal with unwanted male attention. And it’s not like I’m going to forget any of it when I pass as a dude. But for now, whether I like it or not, to the world, I am very much still a woman, even though I am not.
Long comments in good faith are always okay, and I appreciate your insights a lot. Intersectionality is so essential in these conversations, and I sadly think it's one of the places people who *need* to understand these issues get lost--that it's "too complicated" and folks would rather see things as black and white, either-or, instead of trying to parse the different layers and coming to the challenging conclusion that multiple things are true at the same time.
This was a very necessary discussion for the larger examination of social privilege, and I think there is a *lot* to unpack with the concept of socialization, particularly comparing and contrasting it with enculturation; even within that topic there's complexity given that TERFs have turned "socialized as" into a transphobic dog whistle.
My own rambling aside, hard agree. The idea of "female privilege" implies women holding systemic power, and the opposite is true. There is also a complex problem of trans men (particularly trans men who "pass") assuming some sort of authority on what it's like to be a woman because of our lived experiences, and I very much fell into that trap. We certainly have a better idea of it than cis men, but not more so or even equal to that of actual women. At the end of the day, my experience is what it's like to be a man being *perceived as* a woman, which gives unique perspective, but doesn't mean I know what it's like to literally *be* a woman. This is an important distinction, because my voice in issues impacting women needs to be one of support, not guidance or authority.
@@FinntasticMrFox Yes, and actually that brings up another of the "positive" things that trans women bring to the table for cis women, that I didn't remember to address. I don't recall if it was you who did a piece where a trans man talked about what it was like when he realized he had male privilege, when women crossed the street to avoid him. Similarly, trans women can give details of (1) what men said in front of them prior to transition and (2) how they were treated prior to transition versus afterward when they began to be coded as women. For me, it was very validating to hear their stories, because it confirmed that what I suspected about how I was treated differently, was legitimately real, and not just suspicion in my head. I think as far as "socialized as"--that is a huge bonus that trans people bring to the table, that insider look into what men/women say when they believe they are speaking within their own company. So, as you note--you have that experience, and so you do have more insight than most cis men will ever have. Obviously it's up to you what you do with that information--whether harm or good--but it is definitely a unique and rare opportunity that cis people will never have.
I don’t know how to explain this well, but I feel like highlighting the ways how patriarchy harms men and women in juxtaposition of eachother is impossible to do without pointing out how men and women are held to different ideals.
Not in the obvious way, I mean that men are supposed to be Strong, Smart, and Good Leaders, etc., and if they’re not those things they’re now Lesser Than and sometimes therefore Woman-Like. There’s also social competitiveness. You can’t just be physically strong, you have to be strong-ER than other men. It’s a lifelong king of the hill battle, and becoming king doesn’t even feel like winning. It sucks.
Women however, have to juggle between several different abstract Good qualities, that all have negative downsides. (Ex. Sexually desirable = Good BUT you can’t be confident or obvious intentional about it or else you’re a whore, a slut, and now unworthy and therefore Bad. Good with children = Good BUT you are now a designated baby sitter and will always be looked to for taking care of children over men).
Women and men have fundamentally different struggles because the enemy fights them with different tactics. Their privilege / plights from the patriarchy were never comparable to begin with.
So in the end, i don’t think female privilege exists either. And I loved this video. I guess I just wanted to point this out. Gender is so complicated, i wish we were all agender and single sex beings that reproduce asexually or something.
NOTE: these are all based off observations throughout my life living in Canada. I understand that western gender norms are not at all universal. Also i’m afab so i may be wrong about how people deemed as men are treated by our patriarchal society.
Thanks for the video.
Thank you
Spot on
I can't help but think about how my former bestie told me he used this plus sized girl for her body as an experiment to see if he could get over his fatphobia and I was so disgusted. I actually took a decent amount of joy out of the fact that he left his 100$ pillow at her place and he'll never get it back. I told him that's just the price he had to pay for using someone in such a disgusting manner. I should have ditched his ass then, but when you only have one friend in the world because you're a worthless cripple loser who can't really leave the house all that much, it's difficult to face life completely alone without any friends. eventually my selfish ass did leave him cuz he just needed to have a space to say racist things and my genocided mind wasn't gonna be that space anymore.
I'm just here because I value your opinions 😊
Well said
"... Weakling? Perhaps more blatantly, AG1 BY ATHLETIC GREENS"
TH-cam ad placement is unintentionally hilarious sometimes.
Omg, perfection. 😂
Firstly, why aren't there even autogenerated subtitles? Secondly, awesome shirt.
Thank you! And it takes a while for the auto-generated subtitles to process. I usually update them as soon as I have time, so hopefully it won't be too long.
@Swolesome Thanks, I didn't know that. Sorry to be a bother about it.
@@lizb7271 All good!
Can't say I 100% agree but you bring up some good points and I respect your position on the subject. I agree that is not a contest. The problem I have with people using the term "Male privilege" because it almost always has been used as an attack which is even worse if the male is opening up and stuff he talks about gets shoved down his throat by someone who is female and calling themselves a feminist.
That said the intended meaning whether or not that's what it was when it first came out. Probably needs to be changed because certain symbols being misused and people deciding that it is bad.
Then there's the internalized misogyny of some feminist factions (i.e. sex work, stay at home moms, etc.) telling women what they can or can't do like patriotical society did.
We are trying to understand and think from different viewpoints but sjw's (and alike) do not. They are unaware of the average/ typical men's and boys's experience. Their entre conxept of male priviledge is kinda bs and they portray their analysis of the reality %100 such while it is not correct.
oh, snap, rustled jimmies. that's a pastorama blast, relatively recent, still, i'd so thoroughly forgotten
I always enjoy your videos but have you ever thought of putting out health and fitness content as well?
I have thought about it! I don't really have the setup or resources for it right now, but it's something I'd certainly consider doing down the line. I think I'd need to be focusing on TH-cam full time as it's a lot of work running a channel. I currently work directly with clients, so my fitness-focused brain power is going there.
@@FinntasticMrFox that's fair enough, still enjoy your channel none the less
Good video - comment for the algorithm.
I’ve heard a bunch that patriarchy isn’t a synonym for men and that it oppresses both genders to enable a small specific set of people at the top (ie the patriarchs - sounds kinda like capitalism huh).
I guess I would have assumed that proper gender role performance of either gender would bring rewards under the system and failure to perform the role would bring punishment. I guess I would have defined male privilege as the benefits received by performing the male gender role as defined by patriarchy and female privilege as the benefits received by female gender role percance as defined by patriarchy. I guess that speaks to what was said in the video about individual privilege vs systematic privilege? Idk I followed the logic of the video correctly but we trying out here to be better people and take down gender roles
Glad you posted this, because the original “female privilege” section felt very surface level, and reminded me of the aggression myself and other cis women received from trans men in college just because resources specific to women existed on campus. It was a vibe of operating from a scarcity model which isn’t liberating to anyone, it only creates infighting. I felt like your original take is a prime example of what fuels the TERFs, and it was honestly dangerous messaging for those of us living as cis women. Yes, cis people have privilege, but to suggest that somehow cis women could have privilege over cis men in any way is just surface level garbage. We’re allowed to cry in public because we are already seen as weak and less than. We are allowed to be emotional because we are already seen as hysterical and unstable. These are not privileges, no matter how much it sucks that one who identifies as a man wishes they could cry in public. You still have the privilege there, we are just fulfilling expectations of being “crazy.”
"You still have the privilege there"
It's not a privilege NOT TO be allowed to cry in public.
@@RazvanDinca-be5mo no, it’s not. Boohoo. Does anyone kill you over your gender? “Men are afraid women will laugh at them, women are afraid men will kill them.” Seriously learn some feminism 101 before you try to argue with me.
it's hard to admit you've made a mistake, if more people could it'd be a smarter world anyway
❤
🐶💜
But society *does* treat men as a resource. Everytime a conflict breaks out, military planners will treat men as just a resource to be exploited to wage war. “We need 50,000 men to carry out this operation.” “The enemy is draining our manpower.” We’re treated no differently from munitions or barrels of fuel. World War 2 is a prime example of this, but also Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Absolutely! And this is part of patriarchy. Both women and men are commodified and objectified in different ways under this system, it's why feminism backed (and helped give rise to) the men's liberation movement, which was specifically aimed at addressing harms like the one you're talking about here.
@@FinntasticMrFox so if men and women are both objectified by the system, what makes the system a patriarchy? The term “patriarchy” implies that current gender roles were entirely set up and decided by men, when women (as a whole, not as individuals) arguably have been at least partially complicit/responsible for these norms as well as men throughout history (see the female anti-suffrage movement, and the various female monarchs in European history that continued to uphold the gender roles of the time). Especially when you consider that women are traditionally expected to take on the role of raising our society’s children (either via parenting or teaching), this gives them significant sway over the kind of ideals a society will adopt and/or abandon, at least on paper.
Honest question, have you read much feminist work? Because intersectional feminism gets into exactly this; how patriarchal structures are reinforced, the gender binary, and the ways these systems hurt people of all genders. I’ve recommended bell hooks on this channel before, her analyses of patriarchy, how it harms men, and how it’s culturally reinforced are excellent. Based on what you’re saying here, I think it would resonate and provide better explanations than I’m able to give in a TH-cam comment.
@@FinntasticMrFox "But it's because of the patriarchy" is just feminists' way of denying female privileges, and male issues in society.
You are brainwashed. Stop reading feminist books they are full of man hatred.
Feminists created and still support things like The Duluth Model which is plain sexist against men.
Literal laws created to hurt men and privilege women.
And you sit there with a straight face and say feminism helps men.
Brainwashed
DOG BLESS
I are a charm
I think "privilege" is maybe just not a useful framework for describing gender in the current day. I think it's more accurate to say that society imagines a Hegemonic Ideal™for both men and women, and one's "privilege" is more tied to how closely one resembles that ideal, regardless of gender. To talk about any kind of unilateral "male privilege" requires us to tease apart gender, race, class, etc and I think at this point that effort has shown itself to be an oversimplified non-starter, one which largely serves to benefit people who are white and moneyed. I would love it if discussions of gender aimed at men were not so universally focused on extolling us to "recognize our privilege" or prove that everything bad that happens to men is actually *really* because of misogyny-- it really just doesn't matter, the patriarchy screws us all, we all benefit from dismantling sexist stereotypes, and maybe men would feel more of a personal stake in feminist politics if the rhetoric could evolve beyond relitigating 90s comedy-movie-style questions about "who has it worse."
I 1000% agree with this take
Gender is too complex for a simple oppressor/victim narrative, and as far as I can tell, the way it currently operates is harmful for almost everyone.
I can definitely see this angle, and originally this was going to be the discussion (it’s a video I still have planned) but I wanted to be clearer about what is *meant* by “privilege” in these contexts. It’s simply something that doesn’t affect you more so than something you get to have, and that’s an important starting point. I agree it is overwhelmingly complicated; there are a lot of moving parts, and depending on the context it may or may not be helpful to talk about certain concepts. The context here is people understanding what I mean (and what most people taking a sociological approach mean) when talking about systemic privilege.
I am looking forward to collaborating with people to explore this further, though, because there is a lot to tease apart and examine.
i feel like genital cutting on male children is one example of a structural problem that doesn't come from misogyny.
It's actually an example of patriarchal power hierarchies harming people assigned male at birth. Routine genital cutting in the USA was pushed by Harvey Kellogg, a man who was able to enact an atrocious practice specifically because he had power and influence due to being wealthy, white, and at the head of a successful business.
Not all of these ills come from misogyny, specifically, but all of them come from male power structures.
@@FinntasticMrFox that makes sense, I can agree that it comes from a male power structure, especially since cut men are/have largely been the people pushing for it to be done to children.
I think having the legal right to every healthy part of your sexual anatomy holds weight- if AMAB people don’t have that, that’s something that should be acknowledged
I completely agree. AMAB and intersex children deserve protection, and they routinely have their bodily autonomy violated by surgical procedures. It’s very telling how this most recent “protect the children” movement never mentions this awful practice.
great now I'm sad that I don't have anu privileges :( xD
Algorithm
you can recognize that there are two sides to the coin of misogyny, but this is a very, very white take on the idea of a lack of female privilege. weaponized femininity very much exists and transmisandry does as well.
I’m a little confused-did you miss the part that mentions being white, able-bodied, and thin being necessary for the apparent instances of female privilege to exist? Would it not then be the whiteness and thin and able-body granting privilege? Yes, those things intersect with someone’s female identity to modify how the privilege manifests, but it is not being female that is granting the privilege, that was specifically mentioned.
@@FinntasticMrFox BRAINWASHED. Black fat women or any type of women are granted female privileges just because they are female.
In domestic violence cases, divorce deals, child custody cases, prison sentences, female on male sexual assault, and many other areas women are given preferential treatment.
@@FinntasticMrFox Maybe it is.
Personally I just see things like this as an excuse for women not to think about how they reinforce misogynistic behaviours. Like if they have "no privilege" it means they don't have to "check their privilege", if they are seen as a "victim" institutionally, it means their behaviours and actions that cause more cycles of violence remains a "suggestion to stop" for "people mentally well enough to not hate men". It creates a situation where I can be in a bad situation but I have to not lash out because the people causing me harm are "victims" and they can randomly lash out against me with minimal social, legal and economic consequences. I'm sure academically you can explain how racism is privilege plus power so hate crimes between ethnicities of a lower economic and social strata to a slightly better off ethnicity "isn't racism", but that just doesn't work in real life examples. People are still going to be hurt and the layman isn't going to care how institutional intelligencia classifies their strife in the moment. I'm *feeling* like this is bad with my *feelings* , it doesn't *feel* good. I understand the logical steps you took to get to this outcome and I know it changes literally nothing but wording, but it still *feels* like this whole outcome only happened because a AFAB didn't *feel* good looking at the term "Female privilege" and cooked up an academic deconstruction of the term to "prove" it doesn't exist.
@@clau-chaunicol884 Yeah I just don't think with the entire institution of feminism and academia are suddenly going to forget that patriarchy hurts women primarily because the term "female privilige" exists. There are words and terms to describe people in white supremacy who aren't white who benefit from white supremacy and we don't forget that black people usually have it the roughest, even if lightskin people may have a better time due to coloursim, and we don't think its impossible to be racist against Asians because they are "white passing" (its a stupid term, I know, I'm not a fan of it). If privilige is important and allows people to self reflect then why do we deprive women from this opportunity to self improve? It *feels* like women just want to keep throwing verbal and social jabs at the men around them in leftist spaces and deprive the men from fully contributing to that space.
You are right, I'm frustrated that as a man I'm not invited to the conversation at large and I don't even have the language to think about these things in the first place. Feminists keep gesturing to men to get "onboard" and solve sexism and so we can change behaviours to create a better tomorrow but in my experience they just want to hear their thoughts about how "men need to change" echoed back at them. "Contextual benefits" sounds too positive. If I was describing a relationship between two people and I said someone had "contextual benefits", you'd think they decided to live in their hometown or something and forget about it entirely. If you replace that word with "privilige" its normatively loaded as bad or at least something you should be aware about moving forward. I'd rather just use the same word to describe how women can act in ways harmful to myself, themselves or others without fully understanding what or why they are doing the things they are doing. Object thinking, toxic passivism, emotional real-estate landlordism and feminine apathy are all terms that could describe female privilige and be negatively normatively loaded so at least people don't think its a good or neutral thing to be when I point out they have that and are displaying that behaviour.
I will round off on some thoughts on ways men can change to fascilitate a better future. Firstly I think when people say men need to be strong to protect others. The implication is that they are protecting women. I think this is actually not great to push as an idea. If you are performing an activity "for" someone that could lead to ideas that the person "protecting" *deserves* something. I think women can protect themselves just generally fine without a man around. I think the modern man should be entirely ok with a woman not treating them kindly. I think men should be strong for their own reasons and their own purpose. I think masculinity and being a "man" is defined by being strong and maybe powerful first and foremost and the journey to that is a personal social journey of self discovery. I don't think we should rent parts of ourselves out in the hope others appreciate us and "keep us around". If there is a situation where danger befalls them and their family, its up to their personal journey with strength to decide how to react. I still think most men would protect their children or wives for example. But this would be a choice and not an expectation that burdens young boys who don't have that strength yet and pushes them towards stoicism, con-men and violence. Also strength should not just relate to the individual person but also the connections to others in their network.
In oppressive societies, any privilege is granted at the whim of the those in control of the systems that run that society. As a result those privileges can come and go like fashion. Most ppl have a difficult time wrapping their head around systemic issues be they racism, or sexism, or classism, because it’s hard to put yourself into shoes that you haven’t walked, and if your feet are hurting because of the shoes you’re wearing you’re probably going to feel some kind of way about people telling you you don’t have anything to complain about. I honestly can not fault someone for feeling that way, because if everyone was aware that we are all victims to some degree of the same system, the idea of anyone having it worse would never come up; we’d get to the business of establishing a system of justice where no one was feeling marginalized.
I agree a lot with this. Everything that oppresses men is a consequence of patriarchy. A system which will give you power- but not guarantee love. That patriarchy is enforced from the inside with men, where as its a oppressive force from the outside for women. It's important that our language expresses that difference, men's and women's gender issues are different because of the difference in power. The one thing that pulls at me is the word "individual" to describe the problems/benefits the effect men/benefit women. I understand the need to separate these benefits from structural oppression which is something men don't experience, but men's issues are issues we face as a group. I'd use the word individual to describe an outlier experience not a consistent pattern. I understand the need to have a different term as the problems men face are symptoms of the devaluing of women and femininity aka the patriarchy, and to make sure there is not false equivalency, I'm just not sure if "individual" is the right word for it.
I appreciate this a lot--I often use the word to describe a single person's experience within a larger system, but what you've brought up is important, and I think the word misses that. It's key to address systems directly and not through implication, particularly when you're speaking on a community level. I'm going to be more conscious of that and hone my explanations, thank you!
I constantly feel privileged as a woman. I think even the word gymnastics people play to try to avoid admitting female privilege can exist, or that male sex based oppression can exist is one of those many female privileges.
I'm not trying to be rude here but did... did you watch the video? It's always very confusing to me when someone comments pointing out a criticism the video is literally addressing--in this case, focused on entirely.
@@FinntasticMrFox I did. And I disagree with it. 🤷
I am convinced it's politically motivated how the terminology works. I will never understand "the terms you are using are alienating the other party due to their implications" is to launch on an academic tirade explaining the terms.
It's fundamentally Jargon: "special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand." In business we specifically avoid Jargon at all costs when communicating to people outside the individual teams: fusion scientists create all sorts of visualizations, AI researchers create metaphors, but for "some reason" it doesn't work that way with Gender Theory. I wonder why?
Many will hate the comparison but to me it sounds exactly like manosphere stuff, a lot of jargon designed to make the discussion hard to follow and motivate people to certain ends while also being able to dismiss any criticism by falling back on hoitytoity logic. The way they yell words like hypergamy for whatever they want and then when they get called on it they defend it with overly academic discussions.
It reminds me of an article I read about "Toxic Femininity" where ultimately the conclusion was "It surely exists but using the term isn't productive and won't help bring about change" while completely missing the hypocrisy of the widespread use of "Toxic Masculinity."
I don't get this conversation. Female privilege is undeniably a thing, and male privilege is undeniably much more pronounced. Both of these can be true at the same time, and yet the only positions I ever see discussed are "male privilege isn't a problem because female privilege exists too" and "female privilege doesn't exist at all".
Anyway, here's my problem with the explanations in the video: It all comes down to "two sides of the same coin". Women are seen as harmless, men are seen as agents; for both, this comes with disadvantages: women are seen as passive while men are seen as harmful. Again, this doesn't have to be equally bad; being seen as dangerous doesn't need to be as bad as being more likely to be victimised for both to be true. And none of these are individual either.
Another example to underline this: I've often seen the argument that "men get sent to war because men are seen as replaceable", and the common response is just that this is somehow based on male privilege because "women are seen as objects to be guarded". Again, both of these can be true at the same time, and neither has to result from the other. You could turn this argument around easily, and say "male privilege (not being objectified) is *really* just a result of female privilege (being seen as inherently valuable)", and it would make just as little sense.
This really isn't a competition, and that goes for both sides of the argument.
You just used female disadvantage and misogyny as a way to minimize female privilege, then followed that with minimizing male disadvantage and misandry as a as way to define male privilege... then had the guts to ask why anyone would be annoyed by that. If you can't see it then no one can explain it to you. Pointing right at it. ======> Its "Patriarchy"
He's so brainwashed.
Ok little pedantic thing that I wanna get off my chest: at like 0:40 u call me a grown ass man. I am not. I am a trans fem teen. I am not grown OR man. I am just an ass. So in conclusion, I'm not a grown ass man, I'm an ass.