opposite gender (such as sexist discrimination, r@pe, murder, etc.)?
Like, should I have to suffer an unfair double standard just because other men's horrendous actions? What if your father, brother or son was suffering from so much irritating stress from society to the point of suicide?
- Yes, men make up the majority of sex crimes and homicide, therefore, there should be double standards against them. It's better to be safe than sorry.43% (3)21% (3)29% (6)Vote
- No, it's pointless, retarded and a waste of time. We all have fathers, brothers and sons that we love very dearly and don't want them to unfairly suffer for the past or for other people's actions.43% (3)79% (11)67% (14)Vote
- Depends.14% (1)0% (0)4% (1)Vote
Most Helpful Guy
OK, blacks make up the vast majority of violent crimes. Should we double down and talk about how we should protect whites from "those violent blacks?"
No. We look at their situation, try to work on the underlying issues, and speak out against people who would assume blacks are violent, or those who would blame them for violent cultures. It would be racist to cross the street just because the approaching man is black. It would be racist to say "You don't know what it's like to walk the streets in fear. You are black. You are usually the perpetrator." because we understand that for one, most of this violence is black on black, with blacks being the majority victims.
Now take the stats on men. Men are also most of the perpetrators of violence. The violence is mostly male-on-male, with men being some 80% victims of homicides, muggings, and generalized assaults.
Yet we tell men "You don't know what it's like to walk the streets in fear" despite that a man is more likely to be assaulted in this way. If it is dating or sex, I could understand.
We talk about how male violence stems from male privilege and entitlement.
We spread images that say "Would you take an M&M knowing 1 in 10 of them are poisoned? Pick one. After all, not all M&M are poisoned." There is literally no other group you could say that about.
Basically, it's like in the movies. Once you have established a hero and a villain, it doesn't matter what either does. If they do the exact same good and bad deeds:
A bad deed by the hero is a mistake, or in the service of justice.
A good deed by a hero is heroic.
A bad deed by the villain is because he was just born evil.
A good deed by the villain is suspicious. He is just tricking you.
This is what I don't like about trying to apply overarching story lines to actual gender issues. It colors how we view everything.0