Instead of appealing to people's sense of morality or laying out the endless statistics and research on the matter, writer A.R. Moxon put things into perspective by simply reversing gender roles.
Gender inequality is one of many societal flaws that we are yet to eradicate even in this day and age. Despite tireless efforts to balance the gender scales, some—mostly those benefiting from the way things are right now—continue to trample down every attempt at progress. Determined to demonstrate just how overdue we are for gender equality, a couple of years ago, one Twitter user painted a clear picture of what the world would be like if matriarchy replaced patriarchy. Instead of appealing to people's sense of morality or laying out the endless statistics and research on the matter, writer A. R. Moxon put things into perspective by simply reversing gender roles.
"Try to imagine men's reactions, if it was known for a fact the next 45 presidents would be women, and after those 240 years, a man running was considered 'identity politics.' We would lose our entire minds. We take women's patience far too much for granted," Moxon tweeted. "Try to imagine men's reactions, were it known that of the next 113 SCOTUS justices, only 4 would be men, and none of those would be appointed before 2205, and even then women's complaints about male appointees would be 'why don't they just appoint the person best qualified?' My God."
Try to imagine men’s reactions if we weren’t allowed to vote from now until 2170.— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) April 24, 2019
And if even in 2270 women were passing laws in 28 states to catalogue our ejaculations and prosecute those deemed unnecessary.
Would that seem bad.
Moxon went on to effectively illustrate just how ridiculous it would sound to men if they were put in a position of going through some of the injustices women have been subjected to for centuries. From not being able to vote for decades to being denied the right to a college education, the author painted what I imagine would seem a pretty dystopian scenario for men but is already the reality for women. "It came to me naturally. I wrote it as the Democratic presidential field was starting to come into focus, and a lot of the narrative was driven by the fact that many of the candidates for nomination were women," Moxon told Bored Panda of how he came to write the now-viral Twitter thread.
What if we men knew there wouldn’t be a male candidate for the presidency for 240 years, and even then he’d lose to the 2260 version of Roseanne Barr, who’d been taped bragging about assaulting men during the campaign—but the media talked about what a scary time it was for women?— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) April 24, 2019
I know, these are crazy hypotheticals.— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) April 24, 2019
Insane. It would never happen. It would be insane to treat a gender that way.
But if it did, wouldn’t it matter?
Wouldn’t it need correction?
We’d need to rethink everything.
"The way that it was talked about struck me as something both so predictable as to be mundane, and also extraordinary the moment I lowered my received framework to really hear what was being said," he continued. "A plethora of viable nominees should be standard and expected; after all, women make up roughly half the U.S. and world population. Yet, here it was, being presented as this extraordinary thing—because it was. It hadn't really been seen before. Even a single viable female candidate in the field was something that would have been unprecedented as recently as 20 years ago. And of course, a lot of the narrative was being driven around the idea that the nation just wasn't ready for a woman to run, and worry that a female nominee wouldn't be able to win."
A key point. You can play this exercise for many different types of people People of color. Women of color. Gay people. Trans people. Native people. Muslims. Jews. Atheists. Disabled people. And more.— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) April 24, 2019
Everybody's invited. No default settings.https://t.co/UypEF95ydC
"And it just hit me that this is the sort of narrative that women still have to endure. It's not something men would accept quietly, either; men would lose their minds at the unfairness of it all! Women absolutely should be enraged at the unfairness of it all, too! We should expect to see anger and frustration and a refusal to put up with it any longer! So there was a lot to play with in demonstrating those ideas, just by reversing the dynamic to let people who don’t see just how dramatically unfair dialogue is around women to actually see it," he added.
I'm trying to leverage the instinct in men—societally instilled and encouraged—to center everything around us.— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) September 17, 2019
We have trouble hearing women it seems.
So I'm centering us in a completely different story, one in which we've been treated throughout US history as women have been.
As for revenge on men ... well, that *is* a danger of insisting on a world where domination is the rubric.— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) September 17, 2019
Eventually 50% of the population, tired of their demands for equality going deliberately unheard, may agree to the terms men have set.
Maybe let's listen.