World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Curious downvotes on this one.
Lemmy is a quite misogynistic place.
Its often no fun to be a woman on here. They might rip you apart, if you say something slightly feminist (depending on where you say it). Made me think of leaving several times already.
Please don't leave! Keep speaking your mind, if enough of us stick it out we can drown out the users like Captain Asshole here.
I understand if you do, but I hope you won't. I like this place despite its flaws and I hope it won't turn into a far right community.
Block anyone or any instance you find regularly being outright misogynistic and slowly, but surely, create a better place for yourself.
The problem is that blocking only solves the smaller issue and basically sweeps Lemmy's sexism under the rug instead of addressing why sexism is so prevalent in leftist spaces. And I don't think it's up to women to educate men on this, it's up to men to educate other men on this. We have to keep in mind how exhausting it is for women to 1) deal with sexist shit and then 2) basically be told they have to teach men about [traumatic things that they've been through and shouldn't have to re-experience by talking to men]
Wouldn't sexism be even more prevalent in right-wing spaces? Or would you say that it's pretty evenly distributed over the political spectrum?
Sexism is prevalent in right-wing spaces as well. I'd say it's more prevalent and predictable in right wing spaces, but it's still prevalent and IMO far more disappointing in leftist spaces from people who supposedly claim they're progressive.
The entire fucking Internet is a "right wing space" at this point.
Please don't leave. We all need you here. (But I understand if you do...)
You're not alone! Please stay!
It fucking sucks. This place was great shortly after the reddit exodus. Now it's just as bad, if not worse.
As a man, are there any fucking online spaces that haven't been co-opted by right wing interests? I'm sick of this "red pill" bullshit infecting the minds of young men in every corner of the internet. Nowhere is safe. I wish they'd crawl back into the holes they came out of.
We are going fucking backwards and it's infuriating.
I still have hope.
On reddit there were also a lot of right wing nuts, incels and raging misogynists, but they tended to concentrate themselves into their own subs and echo chamber bubbles. If you kept yourself away from the "Manosphere" (like r/incels, r/MGTOW, r/MensRights..), the likes of TheDonald and the equaly disturbing misandrists of r/FemaleDatingStrategy it wasn't that bad.
I hope this wave of toxic behaviour towards each other is just some kind of growing pain and these toxic people will find themselves seperating into their own communities wigh time.
It's not just misogyny. I'm watching the sweetest, most kind user getting ripped to shreds for posting articles from MSM about candidates across the spectrum, who are of neither major party. The toxicity is wild , self-justification more wild. In the short time I've been on Lemmy, it's "gone to hell in a fast car and keeping it hot," as I hear a user elsewhere say. about certain topics. I'm quickly becoming of the opinion the up and down votes get discarded and a randomized ranking algorithm put in place.
It's not misogynistic to not want the half of humanity that gets murdered multiple times more often (over 3x in the US) than the other, to be erased as victims.
You obviously don't (want to) know what 'femicide' actually is.
It's true, that the total percentage of men getting murdered is higher. But they do not get murdered for their gender. Nor are they being murdered mostly by women.
When we speak of femicide, we talk about that women are disproportionately murdered by their partners or ex- partners and family members. The most dangerous place for a women is her own home.
Most attempts on a woman's life are done by her spouse. And in the past, these murders and attempted murders were often ignored or disregarded, because it's "just" a domestic dispute. It happens...
But the number of femicides worldwide are actually rising significantly. And that's why its important to call it out and shine light on it. We can't just shrug at another ex boyfriend who set his girlfriend on fire.
This doesn't erase male murder victims, but makes usually invisible female victims visible. The same way that women's right are not taking away any rights from men. You are not being repressed by women having equal rights.
When people talk about a high rate of deaths from barfights or whatever, that doesn't erase victims from robberies. You only cry about victims being erased, because its women we talk about.
You don't even have to take my word for it.
https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/2023-11/gender-related-killings-of-women-and-girls-femicide-feminicide-global-estimates-2022-en.pdf
https://www.womankind.org.uk/resource/a-femicide-factsheet-global-stats-calls-to-action/
https://www.statista.com/chart/31326/estimated-number-of-female-homicides-by-family-and-partners/
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/10/states-must-eradicate-femicide-globally-un-expert
Lemmy is filled with the most opinionated kind of Redditors and Russians it can fit on the servers, it's a moderator miracle it didn't go full incel.
Hopefully it was from the perspective that the comment is not helpful in reducing the number of murders of women.
I don't know, I don't personally see the harm in merely motivational comments or rants. But I thought it might be that.
I honestly have no idea how any Lemmy comment might be helpful at reducing the murders of women.
Maybe if they proposed some policy, or shared some stats and facts, instead of merely a statement of hope.
Not really. Specifically saying "end femicide" is like fundraising for breast cancer treatment, but only for men, who are a small minority of those with breast cancer.
You are over three times less likely to be a victim of murder (in the US at least) if you are a woman, than a man.
There is zero reason to oppose murder of one sex any more or less than the other, and it takes the same amount of effort to voice opposition for both, as for only one. So going out of your way to advocate only for the half of the population that suffers this fate far less often, understandably comes off as sexist and callous, to the objective observer.
How many in that statistic are men being killed by women? How many of those murders are the result of gang violence that’s predominantly committed against men by other men?
I assume you’re referring to this stat:
… which equates to about 79% of all murders.
There’s a lot of nuance in that broad, sweeping statistic, but here are some statistics that are more clear:
… so the problem isn’t that more men are being murdered in general, but that an overwhelmingly larger number of men are murderers, and they target each other quite a bit. Gang violence stats are wrapped up in that 79%, and most gang violence is male-on-male.
Here’s another:
Many of these stats are situational, making that overly-broad figure misleading.
Also, the likelihood of being murdered increases quite a bit when a woman is pregnant:
And that doesn’t include all the violent sexual crimes against women and girls, that are also committed at a far higher rate than against men and boys.
The overarching fact seems to be that men kill men a lot, and they also kill women an order of magnitude more often than women kill men, so maybe the problem here is men’s propensity for violence.
e: If that’s what you meant, I agree, we should be finding and implementing ways to reduce male toxicity in general, which includes many things like supporting mental health care and opposing norms (mostly within the online ‘manosphere’) that promote and foster toxic rather than healthy masculinity.
There is a big difference in intent. Do these 3x times men been murder just for been a man?
The femicide(at least in a decent country) is a category of crime, a discriminatory crime, is not a normal murder, is associated with rape or domestic violence, etc.
Thinking this is a question of any merit already exposes you. It does not matter, at all, what sex a murder victim's murderer is, to the victim--they are equally dead.
The attempt to minimize male victimhood with this insane implication of 'if the perpetrator is the same sex, it doesn't count' is actually pathetic. For shame.
Reminder that the vast, vast, vast majority of males have never and will never murder anyone, despite these disgusting sexist narratives.
Literally irrelevant. The victim is no less murdered. What kind of ridiculous justification is this for devaluing male victims?
'But the reason they were killed isn't as bad (according to me)!'
Who in their right mind gives a shit? They're still murdered! 'I know your son was murdered, but don't worry, the motive wasn't one of the (in my opinion) really bad ones'. Seriously?
So to push this absurd 'logic' just a bit further, if the same number of women were murdered, but the motives were in alignment, incidence-wise, with murdered men, this would be an improvement, in your view, even though the same amount of killing has occurred. Because motive makes a murder more or less bad, apparently. Absolutely absurd.
'Sure men are killed way way more often, but people who kill women are (I assume, hehe) more likely to do it for a way more worser reason' is some of the dumbest, flailing, desperate attempts I have ever seen to minimize and erase male victimhood.
I'll just say this: End femicide.
If the sex of a murder victim changes, at all, how you perceive the crime, you're sexist, period.
At least have the guts to admit it instead of pretending this is a noble stance.
The sex, gender, ethnicity etc of the victim, and the perpetrator, can give very important context that can point to very important issues that needs to be dealt with. If you're alluding to the actual deaths of the victims being equally bad no matter their gender because they are all humans, then congratulations for passing the lowest threshold for human decency.
Wanting to end femicide doesn't mean you value women more than men, it's pointing to a specific issue. It also doesn't mean that other issues doesn't matter.
Yeah, and as low as that is, there are many in here who don't pass it, so shame on them.
It's the same sort of thing as when there was that big statement made some years back about 'stop targeting women journalists', alongside a statistic that 11% of the journalists who were killed over the prior year were women. In other words, '89% of killed journalists are men, so stop killing women'. At best, a statement like that comes off as foolishly ignorant--at worst, it comes off as callous and indifferent to male victims.
Everything has context, and context matters. Your can look at any issue from different perspectives and through different lenses. From different perspectives, different aspects of the context might be of different significance, etc. As such, there could very well be a perfectly fine reason to say "stop targeting women journalists". But that doesn't, at all, mean other perspectives are invalid.
Wtf are you talking about. What a weird thing to write. I'm very much not OK with being murdered thank you very much.
Listen, cut him some slack - it's really hard to keep your hands dry when you're writing inside of a bubble. They're very soapy, and you can't move too much or they'll pop.