What feminists don't understand about men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's called subtext. And it's obvious.

I agree with you.

[Anonymous]

Yikes.

[Anonymous]

My brother is a firefighter. He makes less than $100k. He is not hurting for sex.

[Anonymous]

Op, imagine if we had a society with less of an emphasis between the haves and the have-nots. With more of an emphasis on a decent living wage at all levels of society. The women you talk about (even a recent Breitbart article cited "one in five"women want a man who is equal or better than) might come around to considering other partners for procreation. After all, what these selfish witches really want is the most advantage for their future children. Which includes boys and men.

[Anonymous]

OP, you basically described the importance of feminism, and why it helps both women and men.

[Anonymous]

Glad to see more acknowledgement of feminism on this particular board. DCUM posters need it!

[Anonymous]

"You" have no "idea" how to use quotations "correctly". "Most" of "them" are entirely "unecessary". Since "they" are usually used to "denote" irony or sarcasm, I "can't" tell exactly "what" you are trying to "say".

[Anonymous]

I think in general, feminists have always recognized that rigid gender roles constrain men as much as women. See - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/stellar/gloria-steinem-sides-with-former-enemy-to-produce-modern-feminist-doco-series/news-story/d60c33680f5d2c232b720766d7b77aa7


And also, feminists ARE addressing inequities experienced by men. The societal impulse to throw away low SES men (because we view them as no more valuable than cannon fodder) will soon be an equal opportunity. All combat jobs are now open to women and the Senate recently voted to start including women in the obligation to register for Selective Service. If the legislation isn't reconciled with that attached, it is a near certainty that a Legal challenge would make the draft gender neutral.

As a feminist with a son and daughter, I worry about my kids being sent oof to war, but I acknowledge that both kids should have equal opportunities and equal responsibilities when it comes to their contributions to and defense of the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op, imagine if we had a society with less of an emphasis between the haves and the have-nots. With more of an emphasis on a decent living wage at all levels of society. The women you talk about (even a recent Breitbart article cited "one in five"women want a man who is equal or better than) might come around to considering other partners for procreation. After all, what these selfish witches really want is the most advantage for their future children. Which includes boys and men.

Well many feminists do not include boys and men. Boys are future rapist, men are rapist and oppressors. It is so sad seeing feminists with a son. A large part of Feminism is about the hate of men. Also the driving force behind materialism is women. As you point out, women want a wealth man to provide for their future(female) children. Why can you as a feminists provide for yourself or your family?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, imagine if we had a society with less of an emphasis between the haves and the have-nots. With more of an emphasis on a decent living wage at all levels of society. The women you talk about (even a recent Breitbart article cited "one in five"women want a man who is equal or better than) might come around to considering other partners for procreation. After all, what these selfish witches really want is the most advantage for their future children. Which includes boys and men.

Well many feminists do not include boys and men. Boys are future rapist, men are rapist and oppressors. It is so sad seeing feminists with a son. A large part of Feminism is about the hate of men. Also the driving force behind materialism is women. As you point out, women want a wealth man to provide for their future(female) children. Why can you as a feminists provide for yourself or your family?

It is unfortunate that so many men are rapists and that such a high proportion of violent criminals are male. That's not hate, it's a sad truth.

I provide for myself and children as a single mom, thanks. And do quite well financially, because thanks to feminism I can have a bank account, own a house, have a job, and even was allowed to attend University! and vote. All recent developments in the lives of women....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Men are judged almost entirely on their socioeconomic status. They have little incentive to worry about keeping things tidy and be a great housekeeper when people (including many posters here) "lose respect" for men who "only" make low six figures, and have unimpressive jobs, even if they are full-time. Men are ranked on a steeper bell curve than women. There are more "winners" and "losers" among men, and a relatively small number of "average." When was the last time you heard anyone other than a man called a "loser"?

Humans evolved in a way such that men are more "expendable" than women. They are more socially "stratified," and the "low" ranking males are "killed off" in wars, or other violence that is more commonly associated with low social status. "High" ranking males take their place by having more children. Women, due to the fact that that they can only have a smaller number of children, have evolved to be less stratified.

The "loser" males are the chronically unemployed, have dead-end jobs, or are in prison or homeless. The "winners" are corporate C-suite, IB guys, rock stars, etc. Women aren't living on this sharply polarized, socioeconomic knife's edge. In order to complete for higher socioeconomic status, men must focus on higher-stakes, higher-reward activities. Women can simply be physically fit and have a pleasant personality and they are generally accepted. There is less incentive among women for high-risk, high-reward activity because there is more room in the "middle" for women. This why women consistently become the "primary" housekeepers, the quintessential low-risk, low-reward activity.

Men make more money, on average, but this is partly skewed by the fact that the "losers" -- the homeless, unemployed, etc. -- are not included. They is also skewed by the fact that the "winners" make up for a disproportionate amount of the "advantage" among men. This is not a "privilege"; it is a requirement. Women are largely uninterested in settling down with men from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. They want an "equal (or greater than) partner." Women are active enforcers of the social pressures that result in men making more money and doing less housework.

I'm a feminist.

I don't judge men based on their SES. Your post full of random air quotes is stupid. Gender roles have evolved in our culture over centuries. There are many reasons that traditional gender roles are what they are. Some of those reasons are sexist. Some are practical - for example, historically, it's made sense for women to be the primary caregivers of young children because women are physically able to breastfeed while men are not. Women's work has also historically been restricted to the domestic sector, while men have had more options professionally for a longer period of time. I don't disagree that women end up in domestic sector professions and that men are judged on their professional accomplishments over their personal appeal a lot of times. I think that what you are failing to understand is that the reason that women are judged on their personal appeal is that they have been restricted from having professional accomplishments. They are judged on personal appearance and ability to produce children.

[Anonymous]

9:32 is so misinformed about feminism -- and statistics (most rapists are men does not = all men are rapists).

Both men and women should read about feminism and harms of current gender dynamics. Lots of work to do

[Anonymous]

Since women live ten years longer than men hasn't it been objectively established that they have the privileged rank in society. I mean nothing is worse than dying. Men just take it and accept it . Could you imagine the whining , hysteria , ribbons, vigils, fundraising walks and harranging that would occur if women died 10 years younger than men? Omg ... Breast cancer and equal pay would take a major back seat to "lifespan equality".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:9:32 is so misinformed about feminism -- and statistics (most rapists are men does not = all men are rapists).

Both men and women should read about feminism and harms of current gender dynamics. Lots of work to do

The funny thing about men who say "not all men are rapists!" or "not all men are violent!" is they are usually the first to claim that minorities are violent criminals and we need to get 'em out!

[Anonymous]

"s steeper bell curve among men?" Are you kidding?

Women are judged on looks, like men are judged on career success. Every single woman has her own bell curve, and falls off a cliff at some point. At the same time, each woman is on the curve of all women, which probably doesn't seem steep to you because you literally don't see women who aren't super attractive.