40
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2026
40 points (97.6% liked)
chat
8645 readers
434 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I think it is an attempt to discredit the idea of men being normal decent human beings by having prominent examples who are in fact mega creeps.
Justin baldoni
Russell brand
Both still I beleive tangled up in their recent SA done on the job while pretending to be allies to women. Justin bladoni got himself in charge of a movie about intimate violence which he maneuvered to abuse women.
There is something about the way the slight touch of femme seemed to be deployed as a distraction or disguise of the underlying bad vibe. Added some plausible deniability that he is too girly/compassionate/enlightened to do harm.
Just one part of overall camoflauge. This is also associated with wealth and whiteness, or perceptions thereof. Not all men who have what could be described as a "bun" are implicated.
This makes sense. If done to disarm women, to trick them into letting their guard down, then it becomes sinister
At the same time, taking the idea of "femininity as a distraction/disguise/plausible deniability for harm" to the extreme and you get the whole TERF idea of bathroom stalkers and whatever, right?
Yes its a fair point of mysogyny. Could also remember out that men can have all sorts of styles and therefore its expected to have all variety of abusive men. Are these people really over represented?
As a counter counter point, it could also non-sexistly be compared to men who perform/preach religious virtue to obscure their behaving at total odds with it.
I still think the whole "man bun" discourse was likely some kind of op jinned up to discourage this most minor transgressing.
yeah, i think you're right. taking this to its logical extreme is TERF shit IMO. like, "anyone AMAB who rejects their default conditioning or feels it's fundamentally not who they are is secretly doing predation" is a narrative that clearly leads to a lot of ugly shit.
it's kind of like performative male/softboy misogyny discourse. the part people should hate is the misogyny (which can be delivered by men of all shapes, sizes, presentation styles, etc (getting intersectional with it, can be delivered by anyone, but men do the majority/worst of the harm)), not the softboy aspect/unconventional "performative" presentation style. though i do get how those dimensions add to the feeling of betrayal, to a feeling of being duped by someone who should supposedly "know better" and be above such harms.
(been daydrinking so if i didn't phrase the point i'm trying to make well or wholly inclusively plz go easy but also lmk so i can learn)
Like the few serial killers who had wives and girlfriends, they would bring them out with them to lure in victims