Nah

She claims it changed a month ago but never said it’s over between us concretely, neither did I ask, so that’s on me.

Dude… Just no. If she was done with the relationship it was her responsibility to inform you. Don’t gaslight yourself just because it’s hard to be upset with her.

If you were in a relationship and she didn’t end it, and then proceeded to date someone else, that’s cheating.

She could have just told you, she chose to go behind your back. And it’s not because she was scared of hurting you, if that was the case she wouldn’t have cheated on you.

Good luck out there.

She had also expressed that she was ok with me seeing the pics I had of her, knowing well that many of those were wildly sexual (she even sent a :( when I said I’d delete them)

She’s the asshole for how she’s dealt with this entire situation. Those are mixed friggen signals. She sounds fucking greasy. Best of luck.

Okay… So based on this new info I’m going with YTA. You know this is his main hobby, you know he’s passionate about it, you guys have talked about it in the past, why make drama? Why spend your time trying to make him feel wrong? If you don’t want to be with the guy as he is, you don’t have to be with him.

And he’s either an asshole or socially dense. If he knows you’re unhappy, and he’s just letting the relationship drag out, fuck that.

Dude… You’re getting played.

They were supposed to repair the 3 devices, but instead fucked them up? Obviously they owe YOU.

They’re deflecting, and taking advantage of you.

Lol! So this won’t get to OP, but if you’re ever in this position, call their bluff and submit something to the labour board.

Even if you don’t win, if this is a corporation the company is going to HATE the manager just for being put in that position.

Even if it’s privately owned, no owner wants to be put in that position.

Just a rando passing by. I wanted to say I really appreciate you breaking this down. This type of head to head debating is what I was really hoping to find on Lemmy.

I never called Bob at the hardware store ruling class 🙃 but the ruling class is patriarchal and composed of men.

Okay… So previously in our discussion you dismissed systemic misandry, because “it’s not a power structure”.

If Bob isn’t considered apart of the ruling class, then the oppression of Bob, and other men by the ruling class IS a power structure, and fits your definition of systemic misandry.

And by all means you don’t have to engage with me. The only thing I’m really expecting you to teach me is the biases in your rhetoric, so no pressure.

Men literally can’t suffer from a power structure by your definition of those terms. It’s not that men don’t experience oppression from power structures, it’s that your definition of power structures is oppression by a “ruling class”, and you see men as that “ruling class”, so by your definition they can’t be oppressed by their own power structure. It has nothing to do with men as individuals.

THIS is why you need to expand your perspective. That line of reasoning is complete mental gymnastics. It’s friggen hilarious how feminists justify their own bigiotry, and reinforce the perceptives they claim cause so much harm.

Like you may not believe it’s moral, but your fundamental perspective is “men are in charge”. I find it like… interesting as fuck that this is what feminism has looped back to. Shit like this makes me think that as a species we are really just too petty or too stupid to get past our own biases.

I’m really disappointed in your inability to confront your own biases. You set definitions, I meet them, and then you just move the goal posts.

How you call Bob at the hardware store “the ruling class” is BEYOND me. 99% of men don’t have any sort of ruling authority. So you’ve created a term that holds men to a level of responsibility they don’t have, and then you use that to disqualify the actuality of misandry in society… Fuuuck…

Thank you for taking the time to lay out your biases for me. You’ve really helped me breakdown this shit, and I appreciate that. Sorry for any anxiety I’ve given you, but seriously… you need to expand your perspective outside of feminist rhetoric.

I am aware of what issues affect men.

I don’t see how you can make that claim at all when you don’t even read male forums, much less can’t even put a vague number on your own exposure.

Here’s a good article from a woman that lived as a man for 18 months.

Multiple competing perspectives are crucial. You are not immune from bias.

Its not that I don’t consider it to be misandry its that its not systemic against men as a class. It is not a power structure

But… toxic toxic masculinity is systemic against men as a class, and it does operate on the level of societial and institutional pressures. That fits the critia for a power structure.

And 99% of men are not “the ruling class”, so I just don’t see why you would even make that generalization. Especially when the vast majority of issues we talk about are dependent on societial norms, not institutional structures.

Is that the crux of your argument? Until women hold the balance of leadership roles systemic misandry isn’t a thing?

There exists biases and discrimination against men, but nothing that does so using the structure of a system and through institutional power.

So you wouldn’t actually consider societal pressures against men as misandry? You wouldn’t consider the structures that force men to disregard their own emotions to take on provider roles as misandry. You don’t see men commiting sucide at 3 times the rate of women significant enough of a qualifier? You don’t see how influences like these connect back to men having to be “hard”. You don’t see how men are used and disregarded by society? Like I am literally missing a piece of my body, and it’s just socially accepted.

Like men aren’t just in power, men are pushed towards power.

And… I just realized you acknowledge toxic masculinity. So toxic masculinity does effect all men, on societial and institutional levels, which fits your definition of misandry.

[…] biases and discrimination against men […] using the structure of a system and through institutional power.

I don’t take it to be criticising women’s issues, but rather the bias.

You should definitely take the leap! If you can approach male spaces without bias you’d gain deeper perspective into these issues.

And your definition of misandry?

Poor in my mind is not having basic necessities. At $30/h here you could definitely like… own a house, pay all your bills, buy groceries, pay for a vehicle, and still have like… $500+ left in your budget on a single income.

Can you define your use of misogyny?

Average wage in my area is around $30/h.

So a bunch of men experience the same thing completely independently from each other, and you’re here just assuming there aren’t systemic processes at play? Like do you just think men have some biological affinity for suits and ties? or Jeans and T-shirts? Or it’s just a coincidence or what? Like we live in a world of cause and effect, everything you see in society is a matter of systemic influences.