Speaking of one group is not ignoring the other. Nobody said that sexual harassment against men is okay. It's okay to recognize that social norms affect the genders asymmetrically and structure language around that.
Engaging in identity politics opens up pandora's box :).
Men have a more difficult time obtaining social, emotional and physical intimacy with other people (in both romantic and platonic contexts). For the purely romantic context, there is a huge disparity in the required effort to obtain intimacy in a romantic relationship.
Women can obtain intimacy and have a very successful romantic life without making any advances at all. A man will have a very unsuccessful romantic life if he never makes any advances.
Society fails men on the social/physical/emotional intimacy front.
These are natural, primal needs have huge consequences on happiness. This lack of intimacy naturally causes men to seek intimacy in sometimes inappropriate contexts and situations.
Since a large cause of the behavior is the failing of society, it may be prudent to give higher leniency to men for these situations. The intimacy gap should at least be acknowledged whenever identity politics are brought up in these situations.
> A man will have a very unsuccessful romantic life if he never makes any advances.
#NotAllMen But seriously. I'd like to talk more about this in a different setting. This sentiment rang true for me before I got out of high school. After that, it mattered much less.
> Society fails men on the social/physical/emotional intimacy front.
This is a common view point, and it is false. There's a fixed amount of attention that can be directed towards certain issues. Accordingly, paying attention to certain issues is ignoring others.
In fact some definitions of attention define it as the ability to ignore unwanted or unneeded things. In general, I do think it is correct to focus on a specific, salient example of harassment, that is, women's harassment than the abstract. Just as I think it's better to focus on sexism or racism rather than "discrimination"
My original response doesn't ignore them, it was my additional commentary adding that all founders shouldn't have to deal with it. The discredit to the response itself is evidence that one side weigh more sway based on gender. No one should have these types of issues.
Right, and that should be obvious to any reader. My point is that this is an issue that is asymmetric between the sexes. Acting like it's not just makes it seem like we're trying too hard to ignore genders when they exist and affect us.
