this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
758 points (85.9% liked)

Political Memes

5489 readers
2649 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 105 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

This isn't going to be popular, but part of the problem is not acknowledging that 42%. It's fucking insulting, frankly. Plenty of women voted for the bear.

EDIT: In light of reports of tons of guys saying "your body my choice" and shit, I actually regret writing this & everything below.

Like, what the fuck, boys?

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 82 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

52% of white women voted for trump.

Chances are that many of the people crying about men voting trump, are part of a demographic that mostly voted trump.

Trump apparently won the popular vote anyway. Most of everyone who voted, voted trump. But let's focus on men and then be surprised that young men who are very insecure about themselves anyway, feel attacked by the left and choose the right.

[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 26 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Please don't get me confused, I don't think it's good this many men voted for The Stain. Also, 52% of WHITE women, but I bet if you combined ALL women, that number would drop dramatically.

My broader point is, IMO, that 42% never gets talked about so why would it grow, yeah?

Or, put another way, when I talk about women, who are my allies against the Patriarchy, I speak of why I like them (because I do, I LOVE women). They are resilient, strong, resourceful, grounded, etc, all the good stuff, and I try to include all women in that, they are my allies. I try NOT to focus on trad wives, manipulators, "gold diggers", abusers, weirdos like MTG or Caitlyn Jenner , you know, bad people (and there are plenty).

But when I hear about men in the ally space, it feels like I hear all about how awful and dangerous we are and that's it. And there's ALWAYS this group of guys willing to go along with it and point and go "yeah, we totally suck! You guys saying we don't are the real problem!" But, how is that motivating to anyone? It makes me upset, anyways. Maybe I'm just a big emotional baby, who knows?

Anyways, I'm blabbing. Bad habit of mine.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 26 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I would rather kill myself than vote for trump, who is a sexist, racist and fascist.

And I am with you. The boarder left is in denial that they are alienating especially young men with that behavior.

[–] dwemthy@lemdro.id 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Meanwhile the right is actively recruiting young men. The name "Manosphere" for their recruitment cedes that ground to them with no resistance. "That's just how men are, they hate women and vote for Trump because celebrities tell them to." The right is actively selling their ideology to young men, the left isn't.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world -4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The left has nothing for them, the American left used to be racist and sexist too, but then they expelled the dixiecrats.

Where do you think all that sexist racist scum came from? You think they wave confederate flags for no reason?

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

The left has TONS for men. You think men thrive under the patriarchy? Not being able to express emotions, not being able to express fraternal love, not being able to pursue "womanly" or"gay" passions. Men have rarely been more alone and less happy than they are now and left wing ideology can free them.

The left just doesn't reach out like the right does. We could do a much better job.

The online left also doesn't do a great job calling out sexism and other behaviours that uphold the patriarchy when it victimizes men. That's pretty shameful and it's hard for men to feel safe online in leftist spaces. In person I've never had a problem and people have been wonderful. But it's a barrier to overcome that isn't there on the right. The right says "you're amazing because you're a man, join us and regain your rightful amazing place that your deserve". That's a hard message when one side says you're amazing as you are and the other, the side that prides itself of being open and accepting, is proud to tell you you're worse than a bear and you shouldn't feel hurt by that because it's what you deserve.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

America enforced an ideal for men that they have to be impossibly strong, stupid, brutish, and horny.

It's only over the past 20 years that that started to break down, but large parts of the country are still infused with those values.

Everybody is acting so shocked because they lived in the nice parts of the country till now.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago

That's exactly it. The right is telling them they STILL have to be impossibly during stupid brutish and horny. That's basically what an "Alpha Male ™" is. Only the left has an escape for that toxic definition of masculinity, I'm frankly baffled at how we're losing the fight for boys and men. I've never seen the left fumble so badly. But there are a lot of great men on the left working HARD to fix that, so I have hope for the future

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago

The left has TONS for men. You think men thrive under the patriarchy?

The fact that you're using the word "patriarchy" already contradicts the first sentence, lol. Your whole paradigm rests on a foundation of "all the bad stuff is ultimately male-caused". It's your version of original sin, except that ironically there's actually a path to redemption for religion's original sin. Your version can't be redeemed--you'll always see males as the enemy. Your worldview literally requires it.

The left has TONS of one specific thing for men and boys: contempt.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

while were demographic blaming you might as well start talking about latinos

[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

An I demographic blaming?

Honest question, why so defensive? This post is demographic blaming, but am I supposed to go, "oh yeah I suck even though I am an ally." Is that it? Is that what you want? Subservience? Or an honest conversation so we can move forward?

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I just don't know if its all that valuable. The real change is not that Trump got a bunch of extra votes, its that nobody came out to vote for Harris, the percentages largely are distorted on that basis. Latinos opted to not vote so trump got a higher percentage of latinos, possibly because of Harris' right wing immigration arguments.

The vice presidential debate where walz sat there and agreed with vance was the truth of this election.

Women largely didnt come out to vote for Harris for some reason despite abortion ballot initiatives being largely successful. I've heard enough stories that its possible GOP largely just challenged every woman's signature/voter status on every ballot they could across america.

[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I see what you're saying, and I actually completely agree with a lot of the sentiment. I think the real issue is broader than simple demographics.

That said, if you feel like the obvious alienation men are feeling from allied spaces isn't a big deal, well, I guess that's something you can choose to ignore at your own peril. I don't think it's a good idea, but I'm just some stupid dude.

[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

That problem seems like it could solve itself...

Face eating leopard party hungers...

[–] AngryRobot@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Nobody hates women like other women.

[–] Monstrosity@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I could not disagree more. There's a lot of dudes who really, REALLY hate women. I mean, that should be self evident.

Also, to be clear, there's very good, reasons for folks to be skeptical about inviting men into allied spaces. It's complex. People are complex.

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

How would you know it's 52%? Isn't voting anonymous?

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
[–] orrk@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

white women voted trump, POC voted Kamala, but minority does mean less

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm not familiar with the concept of an exit poll. I will look it up.

[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago

An exit poll is conducted after a voter exits the voting booth. It's conducted by a private organization (usually either a news organization or someone working in collaboration with a news organization) and polls people to find out how they voted. The exit poll is voluntary.

Organizations can then categorize that info based on age, gender, race, area where they voted, and other details. News organizations can then use that info (along with a bunch of other data, including polls conducted leading up to the day of the election) to extrapolate who will win an election in a given area. Typically, despite being somewhat limited in their scope (not everyone at every polling location nationwide is polled), the exit polls are usually reflective of the actual election polls.

Campaign organizers for the next election can also use the data to help figure out their strategies for the next election. For a general example (I came up with it off the top of my head), "We failed to gain the aged 60+ black male vote in this state. We need to study how to appeal to them better in the next election."

Fun Fact: The actual official votes actually take days to count. So these and other types of election polls really help news organizations predict the results even just a few hours after the election polls close, and they're rarely wrong. Sometimes, they're even able to call an election the minute the polls in that area close*. These news organizations often each crunch their own numbers, too, so they don't necessarily all rely on each other's data.

*I should note that each state has its own rules about how and when they release election results. Often, to avoid influencing voters who haven't voted yet, they won't release results (including results from early voting) until polls in the entire state have closed. This is usually the case with news organizations announcing their predictions, too. That's why some news organizations are able to immediately predict some races as soon as the polls close.

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Why do you accept that young men voted for Trump. But when you're told, using the same source of data, that white women did too suddenly you're all questions?

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

In my country voting is anonymous, how would anyone know based on their sex or color or whatever how anyone voted. Here, your vote is considered private so asking a person how they voted as they walk out the polling station is just a foreign concept to me.

What's even weirder is how you came to your conclusions. You really have to explain the mental gymnastics you used, because you're really coming out of nowhere.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Hey, I think his point is rather simple and don't require much mental gymnastics, if you are a little generous in reading it by ignoring how it is phrased.

His thought process is,

You saw the meme and there is no comment or expression by you towards how they knew men voted for trump. You seemingly just accepted it but when I express the 52% statement, you correctly doubted my words and expressed interest in how people would know. Why did the potentially photoshopped screenshot from some random news channel with similar information, didn't trigger the same response in you?

Ofc it is flawed to assume that you weren't wondering about that when looking at the meme. For all everyone else knows, you saw me as someone who could tell you as I was presenting similar information. So their hostility wasn't proper. But the core of the question might be interesting for yourself, which is why I try to communicate it better.

If you weren't wondering about the method of obtaining the data in the meme, you might want to reflect on why.

[–] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

If you weren’t wondering about the method of obtaining the data in the meme, you might want to reflect on why.

Literally what started this chain of replies, me asking how one gets these numbers. I learned how Americans come to these numbers now, I just feel there's some hostility in some of the replies simply for not knowing how something works but wanting to learn. It was simply the comment where I again saw someone mention numbers and now I really wanted to know where the numbers originated. I could have asked the same question in a top comment but I think the place where I asked is kinda irrelevant.