No sex. No dating. No marriage. No children. Interest grows in 4B movement to swear off men
No sex. No dating. No marriage. No children. Interest grows in 4B movement to swear off men
In the days after Donald Trump was elected president, a South Korean feminist movement is capturing young women’s interest on social media.
Summary
Following Donald Trump’s recent election victory, Google searches for “4B,” a South Korean feminist movement advocating a “no sex, no dating, no marriage, no children” stance, surged in the U.S.
The 4B movement, popular among young women on social media, promotes individual resistance against conservative politics and the erosion of reproductive rights.
The trend reflects a broader ideological divide between young men and women in the U.S., where women under 30 are significantly more liberal than men.
You're viewing a single thread.
-
“Young men expect sex, but they also want us to not be able to have access to abortion,” Thomas told The Post. “They can’t have both. Young women don’t want to be intimate with men who don’t fight for women’s rights; it’s showing they don’t respect us.”
Sounds reasonable and fair to me.
-
In over 50% of America's land area Rapists get to pick the mother of their child.
Flee red states.
The only why they'll learn is if the rational people leave. The whole fill strategy will never work because red states need you more than you need them.
Flee red states!
Project 2025 advocates for tracking of child barring age women and girls. They will turn you into brood sows the moment they get a chance and justify it as the moral good.
Flee red states!
Blue states aren't perfect but we at least know what freedom is and don't need a 2000 yeast old book to decide what we should do next.
-
Fleeing my state isn't an option. Besides, my state didn't used to be red. A lot of states flipped or at least went from purple to red. So it's not even a guarantee if you uproot your entire family and life that you get to stay blue.
I feel so demoralized when this comes up, as if it's my own fault I'm living somewhere with terrible laws. I voted. I got other people to vote. I changed a few minds on abortion (not easy to do!). I don't have the money or resources to start somewhere else, and we're all about to have less money.
-
Are you willing to risk your mother's, sisters, and daughters bodily autonomy on a under performing political party?
I'm not saying leaving will be easy. And I'm not saying it paradise and blue States. But I am saying red states don't deserve you. Start making a plan at least because they won't stop.
-
It's my bodily autonomy. I'm a woman of child-bearing age. I even want to make a child sometime in the next four years. I'm risking my health. I can't move. I will end up broke with zero resources in another state, with no job, and my husband will need to start his career from scratch if we move. We just can't afford it. Plus wherever we move, we'll be separated from both our families who are local here. And again, even if we move, wherever we start over could just be red in two election cycles anyway. Moving isn't the answer.
-
One in five women in the United States experienced completed or attempted rape during their lifetime.
The chances of having a miscarriage is 1 in 4 pregnancies.
Multiply those statistics for every girl and women in your family.
Add in the fact that red states have disproportionately more sexual violence than blue states.
Are those odds you are willing to take?
No one is say moving well be easy. But you can start saving, planning, and applying for positions in safer areas. (politically, economically, and socially.) You don't have to just move your core family. Everyone that cares about women's rights can move too. If migrant women with no job, no prospects, no money, and no path to citizenship to receive services can do it, so can you.
Red states don't deserve you. Every day you play the odds
-
-
-
-
-
An awful lot of generalizing there.
-
I don't think anyone involved thinks she's talking about every single young man. Well, except you, of course
-
Now he's just worried that they're talking about him. Which they probably are considering his immediate defensive reaction.
-
"Young men....." wow I wonder where that idea came from
-
Jesus Fucking Christ, do we literally have to have women say things like:
"Young men -- not all, just some, well in some areas most, but a lot of young men -- expect..."
This tiptoeing bullshit to not anger some fragile men is insane. I lived as a straight man for over 40 years and this new idea that men are somehow put upon whenever a woman brings up being objectified, or has an issues with interactions with /takes a breath some, but not all, just a large amount, enough to be traumatizing, particularly as it's systemic to the patriarchy, men.
This is ridiculous semantic bullshit in response to women feeling like objects and pushing back.
We're better than this, and I'm tired of watching us act absolutely horrible whenever women point out systemic, extremely frequent issues they have with men, and have to inch around it so as to not break our fragile egos.
-
I agree. It's like the whole "Not all men" deal: nitpicking the details of the phrasing instead of tackling the root issue. You're only fighting those symptoms that affect you directly, not the root cause.
The day I have someone yelling in my face that I'm to blame for some other man's rape is the day I'll argue about that issue. Until then, let's focus on the actual problem: In this case (some) young men being pieces of garbage.
-
Women need to say, "Well, not every man is a rapist, but every person who raped me was a man, amd when I tried to speak up, almost every man told me he needed more evidence, that was an extreme claim that could ruin that man's life, and when I tried to call police, they were made also of men who also rape and commit domestic violence at high rates, and when I went to court the judge was a Trump appointeee.... So I guess really no men are rapists because the system doesn't allow us to label them. Or maybe that makes all of you dangerous."
-
I teared up a bit reading your comment, I'm so sorry you all go through this, and continue to go through this.
The worst part is a lot of the men saying this shit, even here in this thread, consider themselves 'Leftist'. They know it's the wealthy causing fighting amongst the poors to distract, and yet still these men fall for it. They think there's some 'women's agenda' coming for them and never once look back and think to themselves 'wow, thank god they want equality and not revenge.'
-
-
Just the word "most" or "some" would avoid this whole conversation. Why does it have to come to this every time?
-
Why does it have to come to this every time?
I don't know, why do men require people to use extra words not to hurt their feelings?
“Young men expect sex, but they also want us to not be able to have access to abortion,” Thomas told The Post. “They can’t have both. Young women don’t want to be intimate with men who don’t fight for women’s rights; it’s showing they don’t respect us.”
See, they even included parts like that, and still people are here whining about it.
-
My feelings aren’t hurt by the presence of people who hate me.
But I will call a spade a spade. A person too lazy to add the word “some” to their statement does hate all men. Can’t be bothered with a syllable to honor them, and that’s hate.
-
-
-
Women just want to be put in their place.
... ... ..
obviously not ALL women, why would you even think that? Just the ones who conform to my incredibly contemptuous description of them (a majority of white women apparently).
-
Just the ones who conform to my incredibly contemptuous description of them (a majority of white women apparently).
Going to need an attribution there, champ.
-
What kind of attribution do I need? I'm only talking about the ones who fit the description. Seems to me like trump voters fit that description but hey, if I'm wrong no biggy. After all I am only talking about the ones that do. Can't you just infer that?
-
What kind of attribution do I need?
Just the ones who conform to my incredibly contemptuous description of them (a majority of white women apparently).
That one, what the fuck?
Can’t you just infer that?
NO. No we can't just 'infer' this.
-
NO. No we can’t just ‘infer’ this.
fucking lol
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I’m definitely not young. I’ve pretending to know me though.
-
I’ve pretending to know me though.
You've what? Had a stroke?
-
-
-
It doesn’t seem generalized at all to me.
- A series of laws are passed that make this thing riskier.
- Do less of the risky thing.
- Make it clear why.
What’s the problem?
-
Hmm so this movement excludes men that want abortion to be available then? Missed that.
-
I think the subtext implies that you can have sex with people that don't suck. This is the female counterpart to, "don't stick your dick in crazy".
-
I mean the "no sex, no kids, no marriage" slogan seems not that.
-
Taking into context that it's to protest people against reproductive rights, I take it that it's to punish and withhold specifically from those people.
-
I think they are more saying none of that with people who don't respect our right to our own bodies
-
That is mentioned nowhere in this argument. But the credo of the movement is:
No sex. No dating. No marrying men. No children.
This sounds pretty intentionally absolute in nature
-
A quote taken right from the article, “They can’t have both. Young women don’t want to be intimate with men who don’t fight for women’s rights; it’s showing they don’t respect us.”
-
-
-
-
Did really some of the American women need for Trump to be elected twice before learning this? Isn’t this supposed to be common sense, not just only for women?
-
Either everyone but you is stupid, or you’re missing something.
-
Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t understand why a movement is necessary to understand that you shouldn’t have sex with people that, in your opinion, suck
-
-
-
-
It's about risk management, first and foremost.
I suppose you might get a second look from a 4B-practitioner if you had a vasectomy (i.e. to remove the risk of pregnancy), but I'm a man so I can only speculate on this. And of course this isn't such a great option if you do plan to have kids some day. Then again, despite the anti-abortion rhetoric of "don't have sex if you aren't ready to reproduce", planned pregnancies are much more dangerous under abortion bans.
-
Would you mind saying what you mean here? I’d like for you to explain your thought a little more.
-
I'm responding to "it doesn't seem generalized at all". If that were the case it would not be a movement based on absolutes that apply to all men
-
It most certainly doesn’t exclude anyone unless you think someone refusing to have sex with you is an act of exclusion.
Most of all of us are refusing to have sex with you at this very moment.
-
This seems to assume that I'm concerned this will impact me. I'm not, at all. Not slightly. It wouldn't even impact me if I were even single, which I'm not.
I could probably put out an ad on Craigslist offering to pay someone like this for an interview and still never meet such a person or even get an email back about it.
-
It seems that way because I chose to say “you”, which is my bad. I meant it in the broader sense though, most of us are choosing not to sleep with the rest of us, most of the time.
There is no added exclusion to that just because some of us become more firm in refusing to, and give reasons why.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Did the hat fit you?
-
I voted for Kamala thanks.
-
Even incels can vote for Kamala
-
You really nailed me. What a joke this place is.
-
That’s not helping.
-
Dig a hole speed run any%
-
Try not to come off as a misogynistic piece of shit in a Lemmy thread about women protesting with their bodies challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
It's talking about people who support trump. But you can't only target them as people will just hide their political views to get laid.
-
-
