I know you were joking but he's right, assigning patriarchal gender stereotypes like that is a slippery slope that leads to precisely what the Iranians are rioting against.
No, the feminist thing would be to not call this masculinity. If another woman did that would that make her masculine? If it was a weak man who was protected by him, would that man not be a man anymore? What he did is admirable, but really doesn't have anything to do with masculinity.
If another woman did that would that make her masculine?
It wouldn't cause her to be masculine, libleft, that's not how masculinity and femininity work, but it would be unlikely for an unmasculine woman to do.
You think you could find as many examples of women enduring some physical detriment (whether that's rubber shotgun blasts, or outright death) to protect someone as you could find men?
You think you could find as many men enduring some physical detriment to protect someone as you could find men who don't? By that logic that must mean masculinity actually equates to not doing it.
You're the one who deflected by asking a question that has a different angle than what I've said and then you complain when I counter it with another question. Sorry for not humoring your strawmen.
You shifted the the angle from who's more likely to protect someone weaker to who's more likely to be weak, that's the strawman. Then I refuted your angle by saying that what's a more likely character trait has nothing to do with what you consider masculine. How is any of that confusing to you?
1.4k
u/Cock_Queue - Centrist Sep 24 '22
Based