this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
80 points (90.0% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2585 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"The election of Donald Trump has sparked a surge of interest in the United States in South Korea’s 4B movement, a radical feminist crusade that preaches the four B’s: bi-hon (no marriage), bi-yeonae (no dating), bi-sekseu (no sex) and bi-chulsan (no childbirth),” the Los Angeles Times reports.

“Since Nov. 5, there have been more than 500,000 Google searches for ‘4b movement,’ while on TikTok, Instagram and X, support for the cause has been trending among young women voters who are vowing to swear off men.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It's to protect against pregnancy in an environment where women's rights have been eroded.

If Project 2025 takes away abortion rights and even contraceptives, sex becomes a really big risk.

[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The movement is to deny sex, not specifically to deny pregnancy. If it was about that, then sterile men and women would be excluded from this movement, but there is no mention of that at all. It’s just “swear off men, swear off sex”.

[–] raynethackery@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

bi-chulsan (no childbirth)

See, this is one of the FOUR Bs.

Being pregnant is risky enough in an enlightened society where no healthcare is withheld. I'm not a woman but I don't blame them for trying to protect themselves.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

There's what is stated and what is implied. In the absence of any sort of formal or "official" organization, participants get to choose their own level of involvement.

I often refer to "birthstrike" as a conceptually similar and related group.

[–] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Well they should consider making the implication clearer, because I honestly feel that the way it is stated will do more harm than good. If it is a birth strike aimed at abortion risks, then call it that.

I have supported women’s rights in every way I know how in my lifetime, but I can’t go along with this movement as it is currently stated—to me that suggests that they need to refine the messaging a little, or explain the desired outcome more clearly.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Indeed, it seems this messaging may end up with the same energy as "defund the police" did...an albatross to put around the necks of the majority of people in this country (even if they don't always vote. FFS.).

Also, the chuds are just going to call all the liberal men dating liberal women "cucks" even more at this point...this will feed right into their enjoyment and they are going to bask in it.