Is modern western society designed to serve women and handicap men?

[Anonymous]

It's no wonder men are turning into transgirls.

yes

no

maybe

other

[Screenwriter]

You are selecting an interesting slice of what constitutes "gynocentrism." Certainly the suicide rate among young male teens is far higher than the rate among young teen women. Just because there has been a recent focus on the rate rising among teen girls does not mean young males are being ignored.

Men go to jail for not paying child support they have been determined to BE ABLE TO PAY, but refuse TO pay. Women WITH children get into public housing units because they are burdened with raising children that the men who owe them child support refuse to pay, or have left the picture and cannot be found TO pay.

If we were truly in a gynocentric society, the men owing this support would be found and would have to pay up, or the court systems would award men their children to raise half of the time, to free women to pursue higher education and higher paying jobs, and have women pay support to men raising families on their own. Since this ISN'T happening, this is hardly a gynocentric culture.

The largest slight against men in this culture is in sending ONLY them to fight wars, though today there are more women in combat positions than there ever were, it is still not equally distributed and no draft is in place if a war should occur. Even the peacetime army, navy, air force and marines keep women out of most combat positions. This is not because the women applying for these positions can't hack them, it is because of the outdated, sexist attitudes of the patriarchal society we inhabit.

MEN enforce these decisions. If women equally occupied all representative, senatorial, supreme court and lower court slots and governorships nationwide, many of these situations might change.

Men are just as valuable to our society and culture as women. It has nothing to do with who pops out a baby. It's all about the fact that two parents need to raise them. Whatever risks have to be taken to guard democracy, both men and women should share those risks. That is the bottom line.

Sexism holds back BOTH sexes. Patriarchy fuels sexism. The more women who are in STEM, in the military, in the courts, governorships even presidencies, the more women who will aspire to and occupy these roles. The more women who have sons and fathers who love and support them, the more empathy these same women will have for ALL men.

The sad few women who sell themselves on Only Fans, cannot possibly know their value as anything other than sex objects. Objectification of men and women devalues ALL OF US.

[inhua]

"patriarchy" isn't upheld by men. it's upheld by women
using the apex fallacy isn't a reason to push for equality of outcome

[Asad1ONE1]

Life is short for a reason

[Screenwriter]

@Asad1ONE1 That is a dark, dark response...

[Screenwriter]

@inhua Patriarchy is upheld by both sexes because it's what's been in place for thousands of years. It benefits the status quo. This works on many levels, but disadvantages both sexes because it denie men flexibility in their lives and work choices. Not looking for "equality" of outcome. Looking for flexibility.

[Asad1ONE1]

What'd mean by "dark, dark response"? You meant to say I'm being pessimistic? I'm being "realistic". Stop making assumptions.

[RandomGuy1030]

Child support is backwards though. Who should pay for kids they don't see or influence. In fact they're told and shown you're a dipshit by the fact she brings in new men over being with you. Do I say fuck her, go to prison if you have to, just don't pat a cent to her

[Screenwriter]

@Asad1ONE1 Didn't make ANY assumption. "that's why life is short" seems a pessimistic response. It might be somewhat realistic. But still pessimistic. I'd like to see life last as long and as happily as possible. But all the isms around make life difficult... Gotta fight the power. Fight the power that be!

[inhua]

@Screenwriter patriarchy isn't upheld by men though. men have been trying to topple it for years only for it be reinstated by women because women select for men who are strong, tall, handsome, rich, competent etc. whenever a king, emperor, warlord overstays his reign, men from below will eventually overthrow him and a new ruler takes his place. that's why no civilization/dynasty lasts forever. the vast majority of men were either soldiers, peasants, merchants or slaves. women have always been the unchanged constant and would surrender themselves to their new ruler. men didn't do such a thing and were instead executed.

[Asad1ONE1]

It's not pessimistic. It's "realistic"

I said "life is short for a reason".

[Anonymous]

Here we go again...
No
Lets put some dose of prespactive here

Verry few earn on onlyfans most lose money on it
Out of that the top like 5 was a man, till he decide to go and open his own service

Scopping a report saying its record high while by your own image provided the man are still lower then what they where before, its horrible 100% but scopping one title pointing on what is easy to point to and ignoring all the rest of the "Man suisde are high" is just trying to find an issue

The Public housing.. do I even need to comment on how that is BS, its taking things completely out of context

So have to say no, its not like that
Its degin to make the richer richer and give aome lucky once a chance that is not much of a change

[Xovr3]

Hold up, are you really trying to make the argument that suicide for men is lower then what it was before so it's not a big deal? Where was the fucking outcry for men like there is women when suicide was on the rise for men? Men suicide rate is lower then it was and STILL nobody has yet to really talk about it like they do women.

If we don't talk about mens suicide rate while it's going up or when it's at the peak nobody will talk about it. That's the fucking point, nobody cares about men like they care about women

[Opinion Owner]

Have you read what I said.. like that part I wanted to make clear so I put 100% to make that part clear?
Also what you saying is just not true
Nobody talk about it is BS, I mean yes it used to be like that, and breaking the stigma around suiside is something being worked on for a long while and still needs work
And ya, nit just man suisde in general

I mean I don't know if you read only clickbaitnews dot com, but I still remember hearing over and over about "suicide where majority man" talked about

Its not that man suisdie is not talked about or is pointed, and hell its likely a big part of its drop, because people start getting it, suicide hotline become a more common thing, showing more of it become less tabo

But you know what, you right I drop a really important part in my original post that I should have put
Its called Clickbait

You tell me what pulls eyes more "Man suicide is on the rise again"
"Man suicide is still high"
"Man suicide is higher then the last 10 years"
or
"Woman suicide is the highest it ever been"

I hope that subject is talk about, 13 reasons why did not a bad job to open it, but it should keep going, not as any sex problem, but as something that is generally important to deal with, even more for man

Click bait is click bait

[Opinion Owner]

Also went in and read, guess what?
The article talk about both rise suicide of man and woman
The title is clickbait, not the article

[Xovr3]

When peole talk about men's suicide it's usually smaller men's rights advocates, and if a bigger main stream media talks about it then its usually only talked about for a short period of time. When people talk about women's suicide it makes massive headlines all over the place.

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 maybe where ever you live, and in the big news sites that we all know how trust and how really research all there things are right?
That is not true, when talking about suicided its talked as a whole, because just likes its not a woman problem, its not a man problem, its a problem that both have and both need help with it

Also the is horrible completely but just for the point of it
save.org/.../

That thing is horrible, because if you read that stats you get something really horrific about it
"There are 3.9 male deaths by suicide for each female death by suicide."
"There are three female attempts for each male attempt."

You know what that means?
If that is correct?

1. Man are better in offing them self then woman (and il get to it later why)
2. the attempt is much closer for both sides so it may even end up to be around the same amount except females apetaly sucks at it

Now on point 2, lets address it, why am I saying its really close, even that it says that 3 for each one?
Because the one man remain there, is the one that failed our of the others that did it (lets say 4) and the 3 girls there are the left from the one that succeeded in it thing is someone that suicided dose not count anymore as attempted

To point 1, why man are "better" at it then woman? from statics and sites I check on this seem to say its mostly as man are more risk takers, and tend to have access to more dangers tools and items to assist them in doing so (Such as guns, saws, drills...)

But don't get me wrong I am not in anyway trying to take away from suicided its horrible regardless of what sex someone is or was
I am just saying its a general problem, and in most cases that is how its shown and talked about:

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 www.nbcnews.com/.../2-year-decline-suicide-rates-rise-rcna49766
www.medpagetoday.com/.../101188
www.nbcnews.com/.../teen-suicides-increased-many-states-pandemic-rcna25825

What you show here is a title, a title and that is it, the articles always talk about both sides, not giving favor to one or the other, that will only be the title, and that is not because one is more important, that is because one is a better clickbait at the time
People don't talk about woman or man suicide, people talk about suicide because it dose not have a sex

[Xovr3]

If you go Google and search womens suicide at the top of the page they have a hot line you can contact for help. If you search men suicide on Google they don't have any hotline at the top of the page for help.

[Xovr3]

Also, women's suicide has 611,000,000 results on Google while men only have 38,800,000 results on Google. That means there are 607,120,000 more results on google when searching for woman's suicide, even tho men are more likely to die from suicide. So more results for women and women have a hotline at the top of a Google search and men don't. For you to think they care equally is a fucking joke.

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 When I search in both I get a hotline on the top of the page, same one but again that could be a local thing, as it is a local hotline

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 ya results that do not include the word man... seem to be mostly about books, or cases they where driven to suicided like case story
I wonder if man have less story cases like that, as it become too common, or if its because they use different word then man, stuff like Father, Brother, hero, veteran and so on

[Xovr3]

When people talk about suicide they usually use words like men and women. The other ways of saying it is not as comman. They clearly talk more about woman's suicide then they do men's suicide. I can almost guarantee when people are talking about men's suicide they will almost always mention womens suicide in the exact same article talking about men, but when they talk about women's suicide I can almost guarantee they never mention men anywhere in the article. It's almost never just about men, people have to mention women when they talk about men because people care more about women then they do men. Also, when I specifically type in "Men's suicide" I don't get a help hotline to contact and when I type in "Women's suicide" I do get a help hotline.

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 So it may be a local thing, anyway any article I did find was about man and woman don't think seen one only talking about one dropping the other except if it was about reasons and the like, that mostly focus on reasons of one side

[Xovr3]

It's not local, when I use a VPN I get the exact same results.

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 When I say local I mean where ever your checking, my local place has both cases top results are hotlines

[Xovr3]

What do you mean wherever I'm checking? Like I'm using Google? What are you using to check?

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 Google, but it dose change result a little depending on the local place
Maybe just to make it clear I live outside the US.. so that may be effecting that some what depending on what you may get?

[Xovr3]

Again, I have used a VPN to virtually change my location. I live in the USA and have looked at my normal results. I have then changed my location to the UK and I get the exact same results. You need to figure out a way to not see your your local results because it doesn't represent the bigger picture of what's actually going on.

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 ok then taken what you said
Google search in the US "man suicide" first result a build in google thing (really nice don't have that here) Help is available" with a number to call
Second result statistics and more of that it seems
Woman suicide... same exact results in the top then signs and statics about woman suicide

I got no idea what is going on by you, even with VPN it shows me hotlines for both with a build in thing, and after that not hotlines just articles and statistics

I wonder what the hell Google is doing by you? are you login? dose that maybe effect the result some how?

[Xovr3]

No, I'm not logged into anything. Also, when I type "man suicide" I get the help hotline. But again most people don't say "man suicide" that's an innocent way of saying it. Most people would search "Men's suicide." When you type it the correct way "men's suicide" you don't get a help hotline.

Also, this still doesn't change that fact there are 600 million more results on google talking about women's suicide over mens suicide.

[Xovr3]

Incorrect* not innocent

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 aww.. no.. most search man suicide... and I am not pulling that out of my butt.. I looked up on google for that
Also just so you know man seem to be much more search then woman, so I guess the interest is much larger then what you seem to think

only time woman suicide past man is Aug 2004 for some reason
So your wrong it seems the interest in it is higher for man then woman

And here is the result for you:
trends.google.com/.../1676329200

Hopefully that link works
If not use google treads and check it your self

[Xovr3]

Again, you can't use the word "man" because that word isn't always used to talk about men. You could say "man that person is dumb" or you could say "man it sucks that so many women and men commit suicide." The word "men" is way more specific when talking about males. If you look at any artical of men commenting suicide they will always say the word "men" not "man"

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 But when people search for it, seems like they use the term man much more then men
And you talking about "talking" not about "typing" that is very different on how people will search stuff

[Xovr3]

The word "man" means 1 male, while "men" describes more then 1 male. When using the word man you can only say "1 man killed himself" you can't "say 2 man killed themselves" it would be "2 men killed themselves. " the correct way to talk about more the 1 male would be to use the word "men"

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 ok... so wait.. and woman can be used for both? so in that case should we not include result for man and men together on the search? and that will also show why woman gets more?
Also again by trends seems like more people type in man then men
And hey both cases it count for a male person, so again it shows interest in men over woman, and that will honestly make sense seeing that the numbers are higher on that part

[Xovr3]

"Woman" decribes 1 female and "Women" describes more then on female. The correct way to search for multiple females would be "women."

Also, you are looking for what people search not what is actually out there. Men might be searched more because there are MORE MEN looking and searching for help. There are still WAY more articles about women's suicide over men suicide.

[Opinion Owner]

So searching women suicide give me 2,880,000
Searching men suicide give me 2,900,000
So... more men then women?

[Opinion Owner]

man suicide gives 3,510,000
woman suicide gives 3,110,000
Man has more as well

[Opinion Owner]

So missed something?

[Opinion Owner]

and the 's is not something you put in a google search except if you looking for something spastic, it tends to effect the result badly as ' character is out of the basic letter symbols

[Xovr3]

No

Womens suicide = 626,000,000
Women's suicide = 633,000,000

Woman suicide = 699,000,000
Woman's suicide = 736,000,000

Mens suicide = 21,400,000
Men's suicide = 39,800,000

Man suicide = 871,000,000
Man's suicide = 912,000,000

The numbers added up -

Females = 2,694,000,000
Males = 1,844,200,000

Overall there are 849,800,000 more results for females then there are males.

Also, the words "man" "man's" and "woman" "woman's" is not the correct word to use when looking for more than 1 person.

The reason males are being searched more is probably because more men are looking for help then females.

[Opinion Owner]

Or maybe because people heard its higher
Honestly are you trying to look at this in a non biasd eye, or are you trying to find the answer that fit your world view?

Overall it just start to feel like you decide "people don't care for men" and try to see stuff that way
I am just getting to the point that I feel that no matter what stats, info or anything I'll show you, you just push back to that
Online articles is not showing how much someone cares
Not all results are articles
Most likely not all results are even relevant
I show what people are looking for and then its just about man on his own not a general option being possible
So just saying think about it, are you really looking? or are you fitting stuff to a native

There is no way for any of us to show to here or here I think
And I just feel like anything I show will be dismissed so I guess I'll end my part here have to agree to disagree

[Xovr3]

If the graph was flipped and it was women who were killing themselves at a much higher rate you would be fucking outraged, you probably be calling everyone sexist and saying women are depressed because we live in a male domanated society is some kinda bullshit like that, but since it's men killing themselves at a higher rate you just brush it off your shoulder like it's not as big of a deal and think that women are equally going through it aswell. There is a reason men are using more letahel was to kill themselves and women are not. Its because these men actually want to fucking kill themselves.

[Opinion Owner]

So your saying women's death dose not matter and it only matter here because its men?
No, you don't, and I don't assume that, or make up stuff just to try and take you out in a bad light
So please follow and read what I said, without just trying to make it a us vs them thing
Suicide is horrible regardless of the sex that is doing it
And if it was woman I will remain with the same option as I got now, because I don't think it depends on what sex you are

Honestly Please think over what you doing here

[Xovr3]

Just look at the poll, there is almost an equal amount of men and women supporting the women and a very little amount of women supporting the men.

Women don't care about helping men as much as men want to help women.

I'm never said women commiting suicide is not a big deal, It clearly is a big deal. You on the other hand want to downplay men killing themselves because it's lower then it was before.

[Opinion Owner]

I never down play anything, and you keep putting that in my mouse when I never down play, please reread

I was talking about why that spastic headline show it, that is all
It feels like your not reading what I say, but made me a devil and pick what I said when I did not

I also did not say you said that, I was trying to give you a mirror to how your posting about me, Your saying I said stuff I did not say

And last, what poll? are you looking at a different post? the poll here is talking nothing about supporting anyone, its asking a question about how is society, and I disagree its what the poster says it is

Really, look at what is said, read what is really here, stop trying to fill up stuff to fit a nartive you decide to stick to please (because if this is not what is going on, I honestly have no idea what is)

[Xovr3]

Yes the poll here is an indication of who supports who. Look at any issue of men and women that has a poll and most of the time women are are not supporting men but tons of men do support women, it's not just this poll.

The first post you shared was infact trying to downplay what men are going through. When you say "just trying to find an issue" that is infact downplaying it because they arnt trying to find an issue, it is a fucking issue.

[Opinion Owner]

Sorry to say but your drawing horns and adding a tail to people
I did not refer to suicide alone but was referring to the other photos showing there
And that taking out a title from context

And sorry but no, this poll is not about support
I voted here no as I don't believe the subject holds true, I do not believe western society is build to handicap man or serve woman
That means nothing about if I support or don't support men

My main post was mostly about how its not serving woman

The part on trying to find an issue is taking clickbait titles and trying to make that center stage as if its all that there is, and its really not all there is

[Xovr3]

When you say "just trying to find an issue" you are downplaying it

You clearly don't know what showing support is then.

In almost every stat men have it worse then women.

On average men die younger

More men are homeless

Men usually get more jail time the women for the exact same crime

It's called circumcision for boys while it's called female genital mutilation for women even those both are genital mutilation.

Men die at work way more then women

Men are the majority victims of violent crime

Over 40% of domestic abuse victims are men but all you ever hear about is women being abused

Women get more funding for cancer research

More men are failing out of school

More women are going to college

And I know I'm missing a lot more.

[Opinion Owner]

When I am referring to taking clickbait titles then yes I down play that, people can show things that show what you say here will show more, that dose not

Ok.. sorry guess you mean I need to just agree to all post man say? regardless if its true or not to "Show support"?

That is interesting stats, and I completely agree they need to be worked on, however I don't think that shows the title is true
I think this issues come else where

I also have to say I don't get the "Woman get more funding for cancer research" cancer is kind of universal no? so how dose that work?

About the domestic abuse of man, I seen you post about it, will say as was considering to post there
Yes it should be talked about more, and most of the cases of man domastic abuse is not pysical but mental that you seem to not put there, there not hurt less, you just can't see it

Anyway this stuff are issues, I just don't think western socially is to blame, but that we need to change it, starting at man self image, and moving on from there

[Opinion Owner]

O, and about circumcision
That is a spastic act of cutting a spastic part that as much as I was able to tell gives more issues then good to the man (I research it on a different topic)
Over all it dose not harm there pleasure or ability to preforme
In woman case when its done? are you talking about the part they try to cut her never endings that give pleasure in sexual acts?

You think this two are the same?
And you will also have genital mutilation if you refer to a different action on a man part that is not that one set cut of an axses skin

If I miss understood you here, please explain what you mean better, as this are the only two assusions I think about to this

[Xovr3]

Yet again you are only thinking about women. Just because it might harm women more doesn't mean it's ok to do to baby boys. The definition of genital mutilation is cutting someone genitals. Cutting a baby boys healthy genitals is 100% genital mutilation and that's what they do to baby boys. Again, all you can ever do is pull men down by making a case for women. They are BOTH bad and they are BOTH genital mutilation it's not a competition as to what is worse.

Also, the circumcision studies everyone uses was a study from the CDC that was done in bad parts of AFRICA were the have tons of diseases! Thats a horrible place to conduct a research study for the health of first world countries. Actually, tons of studies show foreskin is extremely beneficial to men. The fernulum of the penis if often removed during circumcision and that's the most senastive part of the penis. Also, if the study were to be taken seriously then we should start removing women's breasts too so we can protect women from breast cancer, correct? Unless you only think its acceptable to remove parts of a mans body for "health" reasons? Lastly, If you remove ANY body part you will lower the risk of getting something because you don't have that fucking body part any more, it's common sense.

One last thing, I was circumcised as a baby and I'm pissed off about it, something was taken from me as a baby that I can never get back. Dont you think that's a little fucked? No you probably don't because you don't care about guys.

[Xovr3]

More funding as in people give more money to women's cancer research. People give more money to breast cancer research then they do colon or prostate cancer research. Yes, men and women can both get breast cancer and colon cancer, although female prostate cancer is extremely rare. Breast cancer is usually associated with women while colon and prostate cancer is usually associated with men and because of that people usually give to breasts cancer research.

I'm not saying people should automatically show support for men just because they are men, even though that's what people do for women. All I am saying is men usually show more support to women while women show less support to men.

Yes, it's both physical abuse and metal abuse. But what I was saying is that men are hurt less then women physically. Women usually get physically hurt more in domestic abuses cases simply because it's harder for a woman to physically hurt a man. If a girl smacked a guy in the face thats probably not going to physically affect a guy to much, but if a man smacked a woman that would probably affect her more than a man. Also, a lot of times if a woman smacks a man he will usually just brushes it off and does nothing about it, but that is still domestic abuse.

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 I am not only thinking about woman, can you please stop with your witch hunts? and placing words in my mouth I never said?
I was referring to why each one is called like its called you can do "genital mutilation" to man in a much much worst way, and that will be called genital mutilation as its first name
circumcision is a more common practice so it has its own name, its not about hate or love or care or support to one side or the other, its simply the use of langrage, and that one has a name for that specific process and one dose not
I mean if you told someone "Ya Jim had circumcision" you get what they did, if someone says "Ya Jim had genital mutilation" then you get a much worst image of it because you assume its not circumcision
And this is langrage not about support, not about if its right or wrong to do it, its taking what you ask in face value and giving it an answer that is reality not a made up "hate" to give there

There is more then just the CDC research, the report I seen about the health benefit of it was for England and the sickness of younger kids there
Its not that it can't be take care of it, its that its a risk, and its not cancer or something, it was to do with dirty piling up there, becoming and infection and more stuff
Only research I could find that said anything about it taking away from sensitivity of the man and harming them and the like where always researches with no given sources a kind of "Trust me because I say so" or calling on a research but never giving any mark on what research is talked about its just a "A research", never links, never connecting
There where very very few cases where it was different and that was for adult circumcision, that as the body is developed at that point it did create more harm, and is put more on question if it should be done
For kids how ever anything I could find that had anything to back it up said there was no bad effect to the man

[Opinion Owner]

@Xovr3 part 2
Cutting woman breasts may help with the cancer, but will take away the option to feed babys so... really? are we really going to try to claim that?
There is lots of funds going to all research, breats cancer effects both men and women and is pretty common all on its own, compere to others that have soooo many veritys
Beside that heard about the pink label? that is good marketing for it, someone did a great job, and its not to do with it being about woman, its about someone marketing it well, and you go again trying to turn something to a one side issue, "breats cancer, only relevant to women" is there man cancer that is common as much that is not getting as much funds?

I completely agree on that part of the abuse, I am just saying the way you put it there was really showing only the physical part that I think is doing a bad show to talk about it and how it may effect man even if its not seen as much

[Xovr3]

Its 100% genital mutilation when you are doing it to a baby boy who can't give consent. When a woman gives permission it's also called circumcision. "hey Sara went and got circumcised" or "hey Sara went and got genital mutilation" it works the same way, and yes there are adult women who have went at got a circumcision done. But when it's done without permission it's called genital mutilation for girls and it's still called circumcision for boys. When you are cutting genitals without the permission of the person you are cutting it's genital mutilation, it doesn't matter how much it does or does not affect the person. Yes it 100% takes away sensitive from guys, the research you are looking at is bullshit. Look up the "frenulum" also, do you think the foreskin is numb with no feeling? Foreskin has TONS of nereve endings, it's has around 10,000 to 20,000 nerves while a woman clit only has around 8,000 nerves, meaning you are 100% taking away sensitivity.

[Xovr3]

Also, you don't need your breasts to feed a baby in modern times. You are using the excuse for removing foreskin is for health reasons, well removing women's breasts would prevent breast cancer, that is a health reason to remove all women's breasts. If you want to make it MORE then just the health of the woman like the ability to feed a baby then you better make it MORE then just the health of the man too. Why is your ability to feed a baby with your breasts more important then a guys foreskin? What you are saying is women's bodies are more important then men's bodies, are breasts more important the foreskin? In my opinion me having foreskin would be more important to myself then it is for you to have breasts. But I never had a choice it was forced onto me. Again, do you think it was OK that I was circumcised even tho I fucking hate that it was done to me? Is my feelings about my own body not as important as a woman's breasts? Also, if you don't like having foreskin as an adult then just get it removed, at least you get the choice, i never had the choice. Also, link me the study to the England circumcision research. But at the end of the day I don't care because removing ANY BODY PART lowers the risk of getting something on that body part because you don't have that body party anymore.

Breast cancer research, cervical cancer research, and ovarian cancer research all those cancer affect mostly women and they all get more funding then any cancer that affects men, like prostate cancer, and testicular cancer.

[Opinion Owner]

Il stop here
Your consent "No, what your saying is (women thing) more important then (men thing)" sticking words in my mouse and intentions in my heart is not respectful, but I guess I don't deserve respect
I mean you keep saying what I mean so clearly you know it better then me

I honestly did not know they call it woman circumcision, even that ya where its more common its called circumcision to man or woman
Its language not matter of care

I can try to find the research again but seeing how you act to everything so far you likely just going to dismiss it because its not in your world views

Feeding babys with alternatives was proven to be an issue and not be good for most kids, if there is a different alternative I am not aware of it
Also when someone gets breasts cancer they cut it off then

[Opinion Owner]

Doing it when your older is risky unlike when your young
Your parents must have agreed to it then?;they made your design as they do a lot of it when your young
Your parents had a choice
Its not that I was talking about cancer at the foreskin but under it/inside of it

Anyway I am done, having a disction where you keep blaming me for what I did not say and did not mean, is not protactive and not respectful
You can fight your made up demon your self

[Xovr3]

Yup, I guess parents should get the choice to remove their healthy newborn daughters breast buds and breast tissue too so they can protect her from possibly getting breast cancer in the future. Removing them as a baby would be way easier then removing them as an adult. But I'm sure you wouldn't agree with that or support it. Just like me and most men who would noy support doing that to a baby girl, but yet tons of men and women support taking a knife to a newborn baby boys genitals.

Whatever

[inhua]

it's always been designed that way. the "patriarchy" isn't upheld by men but women. they select for men who are strong, tall, handsome, courageous, dominant, aggressive, violent, rich, famous etc. not men who are weak, short, ugly, soft, passive, spineless, submissive, broke, nobodies etc.

men have spent millions of years through blood, sweat and tears making the world a better and more comfortable place for women whether it's killing off all the predatory animals to reach the top of the food chain, building better homes and shelters, creating new inventions like mattresses, washing machines, air-conditioners etc. establishing laws that protect women and girls e. g. rape and legal AOC, going to war to protect their families often at the extension of a man's own comfort, lifespan and even his own life

for some fucking reason these days, a man who is too comfortable whether he wants play video games, read comics, watch anime or party and fuck as many women as he can or whatever lifestyle he chooses that's too comfortable, society wants to shame and guilt trip him

at the end of the day, it's not really modern western society but all of society through time that has men serving women despite what the feminist revisionist history says. the majority of men were not kings, emperors or warlords. the majority of men were soldiers, peasants, merchants and slaves many of whom never passed on their genes to the next generation. difference is in today's modern western society, there's a lot of virtue signaling about equality going on when there's clearly not. case in point

https://www.youtube.com/embed/XNrWuZV3jjw

[NamerOfStars]

Kinda; it was designed to protect women, and men were the ones expected to do that protecting. Consequently, they were granted more freedoms (to be protected is to be restricted, which is why you don't see people breakdancing in plate armor) and regard.

The regard vanished as Feminism, backed by corporate interests, rose to prominence, conning the masses into thinking that women were disadvantaged by the arrangement, telling them they'd be MUCH happier laboring fourteen hours a day on a factory assembly line in the days before OSHA standards.

The freedoms vanished as women began demanding equal access to everything men had and did (although only on the top end; no mass calls for more female garbage haulers or ditch diggers, oh no!), but still insisting they have THEIR own privileges. It arguably reached its nadir in 1993 with Hermesmann V Seyer, which ruled that a man HAS to pay child support, even if the child was the product of rape because the father was eleven years old at the time. That was just one state, but many others promptly made laws saying exactly the same thing.

The State declared men's lives and bodies to be essentially public property, and the animosity between the sexes has not only grown so great that women won't stand up for their men (even their husbands and sons), but so entrenched that men won't even stand up for themselves.

And yet people still wonder why so many young men are withdrawing from society and living simple, frugal lives for their own sakes...

[Xovr3]

I think the problem starts at home and also how people support each other. Tons of women support other women and tons of men support women while very little amount of men and women support men. I think it's extremely natural for men to want to help and support women and its extremely natural for women to want to help and support men.

But in modern times TONS of parents are always telling their daughters that boys/men are bad, they will never say anything nice about boys/men to their daughters while on the other hand parents are ALWAYS telling their sons to be nice and kind to girls/women. It's also all over the media that men are bad and women are opressed and that's simply not true. This is creating a divide between men and women and making everyone unhappy.

If you want anything to change in the future you need to start teaching your daughters the good/positive things about boys/men and also start teaching your daughters to be kind, respectful, and loving to men/boys and stop telling your daughters that guys are bad people.

I get the reson parents teach girls that men are bad people because they want their daughets to be safe. But the problem is MOST men want to protect and help women not hurt them. If you want your daughters to be safe then teach them PEOPLE can be bad, don't say the word men or boys because that is simply a lie. Lastly, please don't bring up domestic abuse because over 40% of domestic abuse victims are men, women commit domestic abuse crimes at almost the same rate as men. Yes women are more likely to get hurt in domestic abuse, but that's simply because it's harder for women to hurt men. I'm also going to say this before anyone replies back to me. So if someone is not hurt that bad in a domestic abuse crime does that mean there abuse isn't as important as other people's abuse?

[Asad1ONE1]

I don't think most women think that way of men. And many already know the cruelty of women and support men.

[Xovr3]

@Asad1ONE1 Bro, look at the poll, almost an equal amount of men and women are supporting the women but very little amount of women are supporting the men.

[Asad1ONE1]

Much more women chose NO but I wouldn't even take a GAG pole remotely seriously lol

[D_Bone_Steak]

You know I took note of this stuff when I was just a prepubescent boy watching my Mom financially fuck over my step-Dad. Thought I was playing hardball when I had chicks taking me out to dinner and paying for all my shit. These trans-gender fuckers are playing the game harder than I ever did. They're out to win even if it's dominating a female sport.

I'm not going to talk shit about them because they're fucking winning. The real women don't speak up and they end up getting raped by some dude that says he's a lady in female prison. Not my problem. Want to stop me laughing about it ladies? maybe protest that shit instead of supporting it.

[RagnarRedbeard]

This is just human nature. In fact not just human nature, but the nature of the world.

Females are more protected because they carry children. The survival of any group, pack, tribe, nation, species etc. depends on reproduction.

Males compete with each other for mating rights, and to protect the females who carry their children, as well as their in-group. The survival of the group also depends on the males ability to risk their lives to defend it. That’s why we’re disposable.

[RandomGuy1030]

We aren't herds on deer

[CheeseMonster]

It's built to serve those in power. And handicap everyone else. Traditionally women have been handicapped by being treated like animals: without reason, only useful for breeding. Men by being treated like robots: without emotions, only useful for working.

This may seem like it benefits Women because you have to take care of animals, but you also have to give robots power for them to work. Both groups have advantages. But both are also handicapped. Women are often intellectually isolated in society (feminism has made progress against this). Men are often emotionally isolated in society. Humans don't grow much in isolation.

[blueonblack22]

Yes but it’s really the fault of idiot men in the first place for enabling this bullshit.

Feminism would have never succeeded if it wasn’t for supportive men who got behind it. Only fans wouldn’t even exist if wasn’t for all the pathetic morons who spend money on it. Even the mass media is controlled mostly by men who keep tolerating and even propagating this bullshit. Male legislators are the ones who helped pushed through tax payer funded programs the specifically assist women

When people tell men could “do better” I have to agree. We could do better but collectively refusing to enable misandrist bullshit.

I wouldn’t mind getting behind a boycott of onlyfans and other crap. Really force other men to come to grips on what they are enabling.

[oddwaffle]

There was this argument that women earn less than men for the same work. It's actually not true.

Businesses are extremely smart and they would do everything they can to save their bottom line. If they could hire some cheap to drone to replace expensive workers then they would do it in a heartbeat.

What makes people think these businesses would pay men more than women? They don't. They would fire all the men and hire the very cheap women if they could. But they don't. They keep the men working and paying them more for... "reasons"?

[Dargil]

I think the wokester culture strongly favors women. This is unlikely to be resolved until economic collapse, armed uprising or all out war steps in the way. I see this happening in 10 years or less. Presently men have allowed ourselves to be kowtowed by government, lawyers and Karens. There will be a time when men say "We've had a fukking nuff!" ..and unlock their gun safes. It won't be like our founding revolution. It will be a guerilla operation where those dismantling the country will be marked for silencing. Fewer than 1,000 people would be all it takes to change the country's direction. Disposition Matrices probably already have been drafted.

[genericname85]

dude just a few days ago i had a discussion with some fucked up feminazi on here. she actually made the argument that "women were not allowed in wars and that was partof the patriarcha oppression" basically saying that men being forced to go die for their country while women are "allowed" to stay home is somehow oppression, cause women also wanted to die in wars xD

[bamesjond0069]

Yes but it's not necessarily bad. As a man if you make yourself valuable to women as women's overall value decreases you get to clean the fuck up, mop the floor basically dunk on bitches.

I have two girlfriends. One cooks cleans does laundry. The other works and buys me things. I'm the fucking lion I lay around and just fuck them. This is what I get for surviving through this shit of a society we have. It's certainly one hell of an excellent consolation prize since they don't make first place top women anymore.

[purplepoppy]

For feck sake grow a pair off balls and drop the whining. Western society has been overly influenced by men for centuries. You made your bed, you sleep in it.
Your war meme? Who starts wars? Men with the macho bullshit.
Suicide? Second a guy needs help other guys ridicule him as a weak beta.
Social housing? You rather babies live on the streets.

As for only fans

[Asker]

Do you really think we men wanted Putler to attack Ukraine and it's sovereignty?

I don't get your OnlyFans point.

[Xovr3]

So what you are saying is that because of bad men who created bad things it's ok for good men to suffer because of it? You don't care about good men suffering because of the bad men?

[KrakenAttackin]

Perfect example by @purplepoppy, complete denial and actual contempt.

[Anemone978]

These are just dumb.. society uses women that is all it is... and there will always be dumb losers willing to pay for pussy... if you stopped all that women would have to change... and vise versa if women stopped being trashy whores men would have to change for the better.. to be honest I wish Russia would just drop the bombs already and wipe everyone out 😂🤣

[Adaeva]

Typically when teenage women attempt suicide they are not really trying to die. Instead it is an appeal for help and attention. Girls may take a deadly amount of sleeping pills but they do it at a time and place where they know they will found in time to get them to a hospital. That is why the suicide death rates for teenage girls are very low compared to teenage guys because typically the teenage guys actually intend to die.

[HighValue]

Of course it is. You didn't even mention all the exclusive free grants for women to go to college that men aren't eligible for, or the courts helping women to steal kids away from good fathers, or that in schools the majority of teachers offer significantly more assistance to girls than they do for boys on their classwork.

[Anonymous]

The people who dominate our social sciences (School, news, entertainment) are overwhelmingly people who desire to push a particular agenda.

As such they care little for what is really happening and only what they want people to beleive and do at their manipulative command.

That is why there is such a huge disparity between what is actually happening right now and what they choose to tell us to focus on.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Yes. Men aren't designed to be helped except as you said the handicap or elderly men who can't no longer look out for themselves.

We men just have to go through life the rough way.

It's just how it is because men are the stronger than women.

[Asad1ONE1]

Emotionally stronger too? Wtf? Lol

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

@Asad1ONE1: Yes. Men are the stronger of the two genders.

[KrakenAttackin]

It's all true and yet no one cares. Just look at the attitudes of the GAG women and it's clear to see they don't give a fuck about their fathers, brothers, husbands, or sons. The fantastic selfishness of women never ceases to amaze me, although I should know better by now.

[Subarugirl]

@Apple1996 How long before he starts to catch on you think?

[Apple1996]

@Subarugirl none of the men here ever catch onto anything 🙄

[Apple1996]

@KrakenAttackin some of us women here definitely still care about the men in our lives. I've literally given everything I have to support my husband and 4 sons. Can't really see how that is selfish at all

[Subarugirl]

@Apple1996 some people just don’t understand the sacrifices mothers make

[whirled_up_girl]

@Subarugirl @Apple1996 Well, I don't have sons or a husband but I sure have done a lot for my father as he has done a lot for me. I've never disrespected the men in my family, not my father, not my grandfathers, uncles, or male cousins. I have also treated my male patients with as much care and respect as my female patients. I don't think any of that or what either of you say will matter to @KrakenAttackin though. He's determined to lump us all into the same category as man haters, even though he seems to hate it when women do that with men.

[Subarugirl]

@whirled_up_girl he’s just angry because he feels like he isn’t getting what he deserves, and because of past trauma, so he has to direct that somewhere

[SpokenTruth]

You bet it is which is why I like millions of other men would love to leave the country and go east to countries such as countries like Russia. Some men have left some men have had plans in it including myself many men.

[SpokenTruth]

I would still love to move to Russia except I have decided to completely forget about relationships and marriage only I would love to live in a country that doesn't have it in for men a country where men and boys too can have a little dignity.

[SpokenTruth]

PS that will never happen in this country because women will never acknowledge what they have done or take responsibility for it.

[Asker]

Sure, if you enjoy gold diggers and being targeted for easy green card. Go right ahead.

[SpokenTruth]

And what would you get in this country? Gold diggers targeted for a easy divorce retirement plan? Take your pick.

[rabbitzzz]

You are wrong about it being just 'western' society.

Few men on top still lead social hierarchy. Then there are the women at he middle. And then there are countless men at the bottom. Faceless.

[findacure4wokeness]

It seams that the people who created western society are appreciated the least. It relies on Straight Christian men to build and maintain it yet our leaders invite everyone else to shows up and take it from us.

[CALIGVLA]

Well, aren't you guys the "defenders of the Western civilization"?

You get what you deserve.

[Asker]

You're in it as Well. What's your point?

[CALIGVLA]

The last thing I'd do in life is to fight for this corrupt "civilization."

[WhiteBoyChill]

@CALIGVLA But isn’t that all the more reason why we should fight to change it? If it were once something better?

[CALIGVLA]

@WhiteBoyChill The foundations of this civilization are all rotten. We can't keep doing the same thing the generations before us were used to doing over and over and expecting different results.

[Anonymous]

Society has always been gynocentric.
Western Women are the most entitled, privileged, and narcissistic humans to ever exist in the planet. Yet play victim every chance they get.

[serious_miss419]

Ok and what should women be then?

[KrakenAttackin]

Absolutely true. Western white women are the wealthiest, most educated, most privileged, have the most opportunities, and yet they are just miserable AF.

[Anonymous]

It also why guys are staying single and quite a dew are going monk, they see that modern western society has nothing for them, and if they are looking for a long term relationship/marriage they are going overseas to look for it.

[Asker]

And enjoy the gold diggers there, who see those men as an easy green card inheritance.

[Jersey2]

I said no. But divorce laws are grossly slanted and there are double standards along with toxic feminists hitching all the time that men, gasp, act like men and not like women.

[Vaporvan]

I feel so. I pity a lot of western men, when they always seem to get blamed for problems in their countries while the women there do whatever they please and push these toxic, abnormal feminist values onto their societies.

[Anonymous]

Kind of, yeah.

Did you know that of the divorced men and women who owe child support, the percentage of deadbeat moms is significantly higher than deadbeat dads?

[Asker]

We don't get to chase our passion like they do for a modest paycheck. We are slaving away our time for the whatever the amount of the gender pay gap is. That's why.

[KrakenAttackin]

And when was the last time a dead-beat mom was sent to prison?

[captain_voidwalker]

It's not suprising the picture below has always been what feminists want

[DaveToo]

The picture you have has absolutely nothing at all to do with male privilege or handicapped men or women.

[annabananna]

Modern society is so much easier for both genders than the way we lived in the past.

[Subarugirl]

The patriarchy harms both men and women, exploiting both.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Subarugirl. The "patriarchy"...*sigh*... You can bitch about the patriarchy when women are half of all the dirty, dangerous, arduous jobs, have the same life span as men, and... oh fuck, I am wasting my breath.

[Subarugirl]

@KrakenAttackin... and why do you think that men were forced into those possitions... because of the patriarchy...

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus really so drafting men and sending them to their deaths wasn’t forced?

[Cubus]

You don't understand how war works.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Cubus This makes more sense to me.

[KrakenAttackin]

@Subarugirl. Are you exploited?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus I’m not talking about voluntary recruitment. I’m talking about being drafted.

[Subarugirl]

@KrakenAttackin men and women are both exploited, just in different ways.

[Cubus]

I see you still don't understand.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus oh I understand what you are saying but that is not what I am talking about. You don’t get to ban women from certain positions for centuries and then complain they don’t do them when for hundreds of years they were literally not allowed to then expect it all to totally change in 70 years

[Cubus]

And I see you didn't really read what argument.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus oh I read it, you’re missing the point

[Cubus]

You either say women should be drafted as well not only men, or that there should be no draft at all.

Who didn't get the point here?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus that is not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about for how long women weren’t even allowed to chose, and how you can’t blame them for having never even been given that choice to begin with.

[Cubus]

"and why do you think that men were forced into those possitions... because of the patriarchy..."

"that is not what I’m talking about. "

You again contradict yourself.

[Subarugirl]

@KrakenAttackin so what’s your problem here? Are you upset that these jobs aren’t split 50/50 or are you upset because women are working jobs you don’t think they are equipped to handle?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus okay since you’re having trouble understanding… if half of the population is literally barred from doing certain tasks… who is forced to do them? … that’s right the other half. See how that works?

[Cubus]

From your comments it seems you don't even know what this scary "patriarchy" is.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus which is exactly why you should ask and not make assumptions.

[Cubus]

So tell me. So far none could have.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Patriarchy is a social and/or social system in which positions of dominance and privilege are primarily held by men.

[Cubus]

"Patriarchy is a social and/or social system in which positions of dominance and privilege are primarily held by men."

"The patriarchy harms both men and women, exploiting both."

If men have privilages in patriarchy then why are they harmed by patriarchy?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Patriarchy harms men by disconnecting them, and frames seeking support as weakness. It’s an endless pressure for men to conform to a narrow prescription of masculinity, to compete with one another, and to prove their manhood by surrendering their individuality and denying their humanity. It’s also the pressure to take risks, to ignore one’s health, and to cope through substance use.

Look at male suicide and mortality rates. Look at how male victims of domestic abuse and sexual violence are treated and viewed. Look at how violence and male supremacy are viewed. Look at how 98% of mass shooters are men and how many men have suffered because of it. The patriarchy teaches men that there only value as a human is to make money or kill each other…. That it how it harms them

[Cubus]

"Look at male suicide and mortality rates. "

If patriarchy is what makes people commit suicide then why has suicide rate among women drastically increased in last 20 years, that western society are departing from patriarchy?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus because there is a direct correlation, it still affects and is deeply ingrained into wester society because as I said, patriarchy harms men and women. Men still commit suicide at 4x the rate women do.

[Cubus]

You didn;t answer my question.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus because the patriarchy is still deeply ingrained into Western society and there are other factors that affect a societies suicide rates. If you tell a man that his worth is directly correlates to how much money he makes… and that seeking help is weakness.. then the market crashes… make sense?

[Cubus]

"The patriarchy teaches men that there only value as a human is to make money or kill each other…. "

Oh, here we have a beautiful example of being lost. Yes, there is such a requirement. But but not because of patriarchal system, but because the expectation of resourcefulness is based on women's preferences. So even if on a formal level society does not expect men to provide for the family (which would be an unrealistic requirement in most countries of the world), women expect at least participation in the household budget, and they lose respect for men who are resourceless.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus that might be so where you are from but that isn’t the case in the USA

[Cubus]

You know that genetic adjustments are not cultural and cannot differ in different countries?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Im not talking about genetics, Im talking about culture.

[Cubus]

And you can't accept that women prefering resourceful men is a genetical adjustment for our species to survive.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Lol that isn't genetic it's just logical. Beauty and what is considered attractive is heavily influenced by patriarchy, just take a look at the modeling and fashion industry.

[Cubus]

I'm not talking about beauty. Unless you believe resourcefulness = beauty

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus what is considered attractive is heavily influenced by the patriarchy

[Cubus]

You didn't even replied to my point 😅

You're trying to come back to evil patriarchy constantly, and not adddess what I'm talking about

[Xovr3]

Women are the audience and creators of modern fashion shows. If you are worried about the patriarchy in beauty and fashion then you need to place your energy on other women because most men don't actually give a fuck.

Do you try and take care of yourself as best as possible? That's all most men care about when it comes to women's beauty.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Well that is what I am talking about

[Cubus]

And it does not correlate in any way with my point

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Then you are off topic. If you have a point, make it instead of being circuitous

[Cubus]

When you are off topic and you try a technique of calling your interlocutor to be off topic instead...

It does not work. Don't waste your time

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Im talking about how the patriarchy is harmful, if you are trying to make a point then you should make it.

[Cubus]

I already countered you on that.

Why do you come back to the lost argument

[Subarugirl]

... you never made a point, are you going to or just keep talking in circles?

[Cubus]

""The patriarchy teaches men that there only value as a human is to make money or kill each other…. ""

Oh, here we have a beautiful example of being lost. Yes, there is such a requirement. But but not because of patriarchal system, but because the expectation of resourcefulness is based on women's preferences. So even if on a formal level society does not expect men to provide for the family (which would be an unrealistic requirement in most countries of the world), women expect at least participation in the household budget, and they lose respect for men who are resourceless."

Yes, you are right, I never made a point :)

Who are you trying to deceive?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus respectfully you are wrong. But you did hit on a valuable point... there is more than just one way to provide for your family, it's the patriarchy that makes it seem that providing financially is the only type of provision required of a man.

[Cubus]

"respectfully you are wrong."

If I am wrong then why you fail to prove it?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus You did prove anything either, you just gave an opinion. You got it partially right, women do want partners, but its the patriarchy they tells men the only thing they need to contribute is money.

[Cubus]

You also didn't prove anything else. You just gave an opinion

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus okay I’ll try and simplify this for you… why do you think that so many men believe that the only thing they need to contribute in a relationship is money?

[Cubus]

I don't, because it's not true.

[Cubus]

I can tell you that no normal man believes he doesn't have any other responsibilities in the family. And I believe, as a man, I know more about it than you.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus If that were true then why are women who work just as much as men still doing the majority of domestic labor?

[Cubus]

Do you have any proofs for your thesis?

In my house houseworks were always split. My dad was vaccuming, my dad was cleaning the bathroom, cooking - depends who finish work and got home earlier

It all depends on your possibilities, your work schedule and many other factors. My mum usually ends job earlier, so usually she makes dinner. But if she has to stay at work late - my dad makes us dinner. Because that makes sense. There's nothing unusual about it.

I can speak for myself, but from what I seen visiting my friends - it is similar. I have never seen for myself a situation were one gender has no houseworks.

You say things like "men are not expected to do anything" "men do less houseworks" but you fail to prove it in any way.

I can also say "France has an epidemy of alcoholism" but it is worthless if it's just mere shouting, without proofs.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus
www.americanprogress.org/.../
greatergood.berkeley.edu/.../how_an_unfair_division_of_labor_hurts_your_relationship
www.inc.com/.../...flexible-work-arrangements.html
journals.sagepub.com/.../0192513X21993899

I mean all it takes is a simple internet search but sure I can help you with that

[Cubus]

Ok, where are there any proofs for the fact that women do less housework there. It is stated that "women do more houseworks" but there's no proof, no research, no data, that follows it.

Do you actually read this text before sending this to me?

[Cubus]

"Most workers in the United States—including most working mothers—are employed full time, and most mothers are either breadwinners or co-breadwinners for their families."

Ok, that's simply not true.

"Having children that are younger than 6 years old reduces mothers’ work hours but does not have a statistically significant impact on fathers’ working time."

No shit Sherlock. Having little children requires women to take care of them and does not impact men's working hours. Nothing new.

"While mothers of young children spend less time on paid work, they are significantly more likely to engage in household labor and chores on days when they also work for pay. "

Yeah, it's so unnatural - you spent less time at your job, so you have more time to do houseworks, than your spouse that spends more time at job.

"Although mothers of young children spend more time on work, household labor, and child care than fathers, they are not more likely to have access to workplace policies such as paid family and medical leave, paid sick days, workplace flexibility, and affordable child care"

That's another issue and has nothing to do with this.

"Compared with fathers of young children, mothers of young children spend significantly more total time on paid and household labor. "

Wow, it's so weird that women are more adjusted to taking care of little children.

"Because of their caregiving responsibilities, it is not surprising that parents of young children spend more time than the average worker on the combination of paid and unpaid labor."

Ow, wow. Taking care of young children requires you to work more, than the ones that do not have little children. That's a revelation.

"While the percentage of workers reporting 40-hour work weeks is largely the same, the proportion of those reporting very long hours—defined as 49 hours or more per week—has increased from 13 percent in 1976 to 16.1 percent in 2017."

Yeah, that's a really big change. 3%

[Cubus]

"The majority of both male and female workers in the United States work full time, although women are more likely than men to have part-time positions"

Have you ever thought that this may be one of the factors leading to who does the houseworks? If women are more likely than men to work part-time (and have more time left) then it's nothing unusual that they have more time to do houseworks than the ones that are less likely to work part-time

"Mothers whose youngest child is less than 6 years old are more likely to work part time than mothers of older children—26.3 percent compared with 22.1 percent."

Wow, taking care of a young child is time consuming. I didn;t know that

"Although most mothers work for pay and contribute significantly to their families’ incomes, working women earn less than working men on average"

Maybe because they are working part-time more often as the source stated before?

"When the average wages of all women who work full time year-round are compared with the average wages of men working full time year-round, women earn 80.5 percent of what men earn."

This is an average difference in earnings between all men and all women, which does not say anything

Imagine you have one group, a memeber of each that earns (random number) 3000 dollars, where 90% of that group are women and 10%, and another group, where an average member of this group earns 10 000 dollars, where women are 10% and men are 90%. If we assume that in both groups women earn more than men, then if we calculate both groups together then it bould turn out that men averaged earn more. Is it discrimination? No. It's called "Simpson paradox". Actually this can be an answer to all of your arguements.

[Cubus]

"Women’s housework and unpaid family care also provides the backdrop that supports men’s labor force participation, because when women in different-sex couples perform this labor, it frees up their partners’ time to engage in paid work."

No shit Sherlock. When one side takes care of housework the other side has more time to take care of a job.

"There is a culture of overworking in the United States, but very long work hours are not as common in other advanced economies.42 Among 38 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries with available data, the United States ranks 10th in average weekly hours worked on the main job for workers ages 25 to 54."

Ok, so in the end what is true? That overworking is not common in other advanced economies than USA, or that USA ranks 10th out of 38 when it comes to working hours? Because that contradicts itself

"Women work fewer hours on average than men, and mothers whose youngest child is under age 6 put in fewer hours than other women, including those without young children and women whose youngest child is age 6 or older. "

No shit Sherlock, that taking care of a young children requires time

"Mothers of young children in the lowest earnings quintile do not have different average work hours than other women, but in every other earnings quintile they work less. "

Ok, that's surprising. If you have a badly-paid job you have to work more to make both ends meet (no, it's not really surprising)

"So, while in some cases mothers and fathers report spending the same amount of time on a task such as housework on days when they engage in that aspect of the second shift, in all instances mothers are significantly more likely to be doing that type of work on any given working day."

Maybe because women work part time more? I mean - the source stated it before.

[Cubus]

"For example, men report spending more time on home maintenance, repair, and decorating and caring for the lawn, garden, or houseplants. But these are tasks that are performed less frequently, on average, than tasks such as food preparation or laundry—which women are much more likely to do."

Maybe because taking care of the garden is more time-consuming than doing the laundry?*Simpson's paradox*

"In fact, along many of the demographic breakdowns, fathers’ involvement in food preparation and housework on days when they also worked is so uncommon that sample sizes are too small for analysis."

Also known as "we don't have any proofs , so it's no use to analize it.

Also - it seems my father is too small for analysis, as he was always preparing packed lunch for me and my mother to job/school. Is this "food preparation"? Of course it is? Does these stats include this? Probably no.

"For example, the rates of participation in food preparation and cleanup increase with fathers’ earnings and family income, but the amount of time they spend on these tasks decreases"

Ow, wow. It's so strange that if you can afford the washing mashine you spend less time doing the laundry, then someone who has to do it manually.

[Cubus]

"Overall, mothers are more than twice as likely to also do housework on days when they work for pay—38.7 percent compared with 15.8 percent of men—and they spend significantly more time when doing so—1.17 hours versus 0.90 hours for men"

Maybe because they work part-time more?

"This may reflect that lower-earning mothers are more likely to work part time and report shorter work hours than higher-earning women and thus have more time available for housework. "

The source actually admits it :)

Ok, I think we may end this article here, I believe it'senough an evidence?

Honestly, I don;t know what's the point of this article. You could have cut all of it, leave this one sentence and the result would be the same. I only lost time reading all of this, I wouldn't have lost if they just admited it in the first paragraph.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus that was a lot of writing to just agree..

[Cubus]

Yep, you could have saved me a lot of time by agreeing earlier.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus well you spent a lot of time arguing with me just to back up my original statement lol

[Cubus]

You spend a lot of time arguying with me just to ultimately lose.

Your sources debunk themselves.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus lol except you just agreed with me.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus so they didn’t

[Cubus]

Yes, they did.

I gave you an example :)

[Cubus]

Still fail to prove it.

[Cubus]

When you lost an argument and say "but you just agreed with me"

You're funny

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus okay you’re not understanding, which is cute. I’m asking for proof which apparently you don’t have because you can’t give it. Which is ironic

[Cubus]

You're the one who started the thesis, so you're the one who have to prove it.

You still didn't prove patriarchy exists.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus okay, let me put it this way, who makes up the majority of government officials? Men or women?

[Cubus]

Men.

Because men on average have more testosterone which makes them want to compete more and any such positions are highly competitive

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus good job, and what is patriarchy? A social or governing system where positions of power are primarily held by men.

[Subarugirl]

and as you just said, the majority of government officials are men... ergo.. patriarchy.

[Cubus]

The first fundamental error with this definition is that, by this definition, women are incapable of being at the top of this power system because of their gender. We've been seeing for several decades that this is bullshit

[Cubus]

Using your definition school system is oppressive because the vast majority of teachers are women. Ergo: men are discriminated in that field

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus... the vast majority of principals and super intendents are male...

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus You really believe that women are incapable to be at the top of a power system because of their gender?

[Cubus]

"the vast majority of principals and super intendents are male..."

Ok, that's just a shameless lie.

According to zippia stats the majority of school principals are women.

Why are you lying? What are you trying to achieve by this?

[Cubus]

"You really believe that women are incapable to be at the top of a power system because of their gender?"

You said this. I didn;t.

You oppressive monster. How dare you insist that women are incapable of being at the top of the power system? What would other women think about you if they knew? :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus "men make up 67.3% of high school principals and 60% of middle school principals. That is a key division in the field: According to a 2015 report by NYCOSS, 81% of new superintendents came from either a middle/high school principalship or elsewhere in the district office."

www.usatoday.com/.../

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus "The first fundamental error with this definition is that, by this definition, women are incapable of being at the top of this power system because of their gender"... you said that, not me.

[Cubus]

I said this debunking your deginition of patriarchy.

[Cubus]

*definition

[Subarugirl]

How ever I miss spoke, I mean the vast majority of school superintendents are male. Over 71%
www.zippia.com/.../

[Cubus]

You're only giving data for high schools. What about other schools?

I will tell you - the majority are women

Aha - I caught you on manipulating data :)

[Cubus]

If we count all schools - the majority of principals are women.

It's not polite to lie

[Subarugirl]

Except it isn't. A patriarchal society is a society in which men are assigned greater social status and power than women.

Contemporary sociologists consider any system that contributes to the social, cultural, political, and economic superiority or hegemony of men as patriarchal.

Many earlier sociologists considered patriarchy to be the natural result of biological differences or differential tendencies to address society’s need for a division of labor.
However, more recently, academic scholarship has highlighted the negative effects of patriarchy, seeing it as an issue of injustice similar to racism or classism.

In patriarchal societies, men continue to dominate the best-paid jobs, and women tend to be paid less for equal work.
Feminized professions that provide high value to culture and the economy, such as education and nursing, remain underpaid compared to male-dominated industries.

The expectation that male jobs would be paid more than feminized jobs originated in the idea that men must be the ‘bread-winners’ while women’s work was a supplement to the household income.

In the West today, women are seen as equal participants in the workforce. Nonetheless, remnants of patriarchy are still visible in the continued underpayment of feminized industries.

Furthermore, men still benefit from women’s unpaid labor in the domestic sphere. Studies consistently find that women do most of the housework and take care of the children at greater rates.

[Cubus]

You don't fight back, when it comes to education. Good that you're finally agreeing with me :)

[Cubus]

"However, more recently, academic scholarship has highlighted the negative effects of patriarchy, seeing it as an issue of injustice similar to racism or classism"

You still fail to prove it. Even though you had almost 100 comments for this

[Cubus]

"Furthermore, men still benefit from women’s unpaid labor in the domestic sphere."

Women still benefit from the fact that their husband chose better paid jobs and help them financially :)

[Cubus]

"Contemporary sociologists consider any system that contributes to the social, cultural, political, and economic superiority or hegemony of men as patriarchal."

So according to your logic any system that contributes to the social, cultural, political, and economic superiority or hegemony of women as matriarchal.

[Cubus]

"A patriarchal society is a society in which men are assigned greater social status and power than women."

So, according to your definition we do not live in a patriarchal society, because women are the one who have greater social power than men, as they (as we previously agreed on) hold a majority of jobs at education, which shapes the mindshape of citizens.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus the fact still remains that administrative and positions of power are still held predominantly by men

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus I have you are just struggling to understand. This should help you understand
https://helpfulprofessor.com/patriarchy-examples/

[Cubus]

What "positions of power"? Government?

In Finland 5 out of 5 of leaders of the parties of the currently rulling coalition are women. Does it mean that there is no patriarchy in Finland? :)

[Cubus]

I am just reading this article

"Patriarchal Legal system – In patriarchal societies, the laws and rules are biased towards males. Legal provisions and laws are in favor of men, which leaves women exposed. For example, a patriarchal legal system may require men to sign documents on behalf of their wives. "

Yes, right. Legal provisions are clearly biased towards men. Especially in family courts, where women get child custody in 80% of the times according to studies. Or when it comes to retirement - in my country women can go on a retirement 5 years earlier than men (60 for women, 65 for men), not to mention women live longer.

[Cubus]

"Unequal Distribution of Domestic Work – In patriarchal societies, men benefit from women’s unpaid labor. To this day, studies find that women do most of the housework and childcare in the Western world."

We already debunk it - the source you sent me said that women do part-time jobs more often than men, so they have more time than men to do houseworks

"The Perspective that Men are ‘Fit to Rule’ – A patriarchal society tends to have men dominate in positions of prestige and power. For instance, men continue to dominate the political system and are culturally seen as fitting into leadership roles more naturally than women."

Already debunk by the Finland example

"Greater Power for Men in the Family – Many patriarchal societies encourage and expect the woman, no matter how bad the marriage is, to stay married to her husband. This is based on the idea that a woman cannot survive on her own. "

Show me a society that believe women cannot survive on their own.

"Male-Based Inheritance Rules – In the case of inheritance in patriarchal societies, male children often inherit family capital, such as family property, wealth, heirlooms, and so on. Similarly, we can see how the passing-down of the male’s surname represents remnants of a patriarchal social structure."

That's another clear bullshit. Both males and females inherit in the same amount in law. And if you want to disinherit someone it must be because of "violating principles of social coexistence". You can't just disinherit someone because of his or her gender

I am a law student, you won;t fool me in this

[Cubus]

"Privileges for Men in Cultural Roles – Patriarchal societies constantly distinguish between men and women and expect different behaviors from them. Attributes that are associated with femininity are undervalued, and attributes associated with masculinity are privileged."

Yes, that's why when Titanic was sinking a lot more women were saved then men, as men believed that women should be saved first.

Moresome. Women of the Second or Third class (poorer) survived more than men of the First class

First class survivors: 57 out of 175 men and 140 out of 144 women. Very discriminative.

"Patriarchal Gender Socialization – Patriarchal families encourage their boys to embrace masculine traits from an early age. Behavior considered to be feminine may be subtly discouraged, while toys and clothes will be gendered from the very beginning."

It's actually opposite. Boys, especially in schools, are discouraged to show masculine traits

"Expected Obedience of Women to Husbands – In a strictly patriarchal family, every wish and order from the man in the house is to be strictly adhered to. Humility, respect, and obedience must be directed toward the man at all times. Women and children are expected to follow what the patriarch says or does."

Another clear bullshit, If men forces you to do something you don't want to do you may go to the police with it.

It's a short analysis. It's really easy to debunk what you sent me. Don't bother yourself with such lame stuff :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus I can understand why you are confused. It takes objective reasoning and intelligence to understand and looking beyond bias which is evident you are struggling with.

[Cubus]

Are you sure you are not talking about you?

I debunk all of your arguements with ease.

And no - it doesn't take "easoning and intelligence to understand". That article you sent me is such poorly logical that a kindergarten kid would debunk it.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus actually you haven’t debunked anything, it’s sad you can’t actually see that. I can’t teach the blind to see. When you’re ready to be willing to learn, I’ll be happy to explain but until then, I can’t help you

[Cubus]

You have my comment sent 3 hours ago that debunks all you sent me.

Seems basic argumentation is too complex for you to understand

Good to know I won the discussion :) :) :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus lol it’s cute you think that but no it didn't

[Cubus]

If you had any hopes to win this you would still send me more thesis like before. But you don't.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus well you’ve been striving to comprehend but sure here you go

d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/.../...11p-libre.pdf

[Cubus]

'It was tremendously successful"

Still waiting for any proofs for this success.

"Within this definition, patriarchy can be seen as
having a particular structure, a particular organization of relations of power that
involves not only men over women, but also men over other men"

This is contrary to your previous argument that "patriarchy" is a system that gives men privilages

That's all, as this text starts a lot of thesis but never cares to prove them.

And using movies (that are fictional) as arguements that patriarchy exists is just laughable 😂

I can say "Aliens exist, because in "Independence Day" they attacked Earth" - it's that level.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus have you tried actually looking them up. I’m telling you the sky is blue, and you’re asking for proof but won’t look.

[Cubus]

I did what was left there.

Except everyone can confirm that sky is blu and no one has confirmed that patriarchy exists.

Patriarchy is like yeti. Many heard of it, but no one ever seen it.

[Cubus]

If it was the same category as "the sky is blue" then there would be no discussion.

Discussion is only in cases where one can't confirm something

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus you did though?
Who makes up most of congress men or women?

[Subarugirl]

Who wrote most of the laws that this country was founded on?

[Subarugirl]

Who has mad up the vast majority of this countries leaders?

[Cubus]

I already told you why most politicians are men.

Because men on average have moore testosterone, and testosterone makes one want to rival more. And politics is a highly competetitive field

I already covered that before

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus yes you have, and you are soo close, and a patriarchy is a social and or governmental system in which positions of dominance and privilege are primarily held by men.

Ergo, a social and or governing system were positions of power and dominance are primarily held by men is... patriarchal by it very definition.

[Cubus]

So Finland doesn't have a patriarchy? :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus I do not know enough about Finland's socioeconomics or governmental systems to make a conclusive statement.
I know that Finland is considered to be one of the most equal countries in the world, and according to the BBC "The region has a glowing reputation as the best place in the world when it comes to gender equality, thanks to welfare states that support working families and promote parental leave, and legal, political and cultural support for the goal of gender equality." It also appears that Finland's parliament is split nearly 50/50 between male and female parliament members.
So, from what I have read, Finland's government is not currently patriarchal.

[Cubus]

You know because I told you.

In Finland leaders of all 5 parties of the ruling government are women.

So, using your definition, if the majority administrative and positions of power are held by women there, so there's no patriarchy there. It's matriarchy instead :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus It's not MY definition it is THE definition. And according to the definition, it would appear that is correct that, Finland is more matriarchal than patriarchal, but I fail to see the relevance of Finland when talking about the patriarchy in the USA.

[Cubus]

So patriarchy does not exist in all countries? :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus I never said that it did. I have been talking about the United States.

[Cubus]

In your state both governor and secretary of state are women, right?

In your state all three major candidates in the last governor election were women, right?

Does it mean men are discriminated in your state, as the social system does not give them opportunities to be in power? :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus centuries of policies and culture doesn’t miraculously just change in 20 years. While things are improving, we’re still suffering the effects of what history has written. Which is evident in the past couple of years.

Women weren’t even allowed to serve in the military at the same capacity as men until 2013.

[Cubus]

"Which is evident in the past couple of years."

What is evident? The fact that men throught the history dominated in most jobs?

I debunked it like 5 days ago. Throught the entire history (until like 50-70 years ago) the vast majority of jobs were physical jobs. Men are on average taller and stronger (so better at physical jobs), so they were doing them. It's nothing unnatural.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus lol you didn’t debunk anything you gave an excuse. The fact that women were banned from most jobs.
Doesn’t mean the patriarchy doesn’t exist, you just tried to justify it. Still doesn't justify the fact that women weren’t allowed to own their own property until the 1900s, to vote until the 20s, women weren’t allowed to have their own passports until the 30s, weren’t allowed to attend most Ivy League colleges in the 40s, or the legal right to have their own line of credit until the 70s. Then with the repealment of Roe v Wade which was a massive step backwards.

Not to mention the issues with the medical field. All of which still affects day to day life currently.

[Cubus]

'The fact that women were banned from most jobs.
Doesn’t mean the patriarchy doesn’t exist"

Ok, you just agreed with me. We may end this :)

[Cubus]

You failed to proved that patriarchy exists ultimately

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus no I didn’t the patriarchy by definition does exist weather you agree or not.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus if not in your country, great, but it does exist, in the US, and many other countries all over the world, all you have to do is look.

[Cubus]

"Still doesn't justify the fact that women weren’t allowed to own their own property until the 1900s"

Of course they were allowed. There were a lot of examples, where the property, was inherited by a daughter.

" women weren’t allowed to have their own passports until the 30s"

Lol, guess why. The first passport (in current meaning of this word) was invented in 1920.

"legal right to have their own line of credit until the 70s"

Because it was invented in 1958. The same case.

[Cubus]

"no I didn’t the patriarchy by definition does exist weather you agree or not."

You said a few comments ago that it doesn;t exist everywhere.

You just contradicted yourself :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus no I didn’t you miss understood. Do you know what a double negative is?

[Cubus]

I know and you never used it

[Cubus]

Admit it - you can't prove your thesis that patriarchy exists :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus by definition it does weather you want to except it or not.

[Cubus]

This definition also incorrectly says that women cannot get into power because of their gemder, which is not true, as there are many female leaders.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus no it didn’t… here I’ll quote it again. A patriarchy is a social and/or governing system where in positions of power are primarily held by men.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus think you missed the part where it says primarily

[Cubus]

The fact that the vast majority of teachers are women debunks your theory

[Cubus]

Women are more than 50% of the population, and it's even bigger %, when you only look at adults. If patriarchy existed it would long ago be gone, because of democracy.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus teachers are just employees, school superintendents are the ones who actually hold the positions of power and majority are male. So no, it doesn't.

No that long ago, women in the USA didn't get the right to vote until 1920. If you think about how the country was founded from the beginning 1769 – The colonies adopt the English system decreeing women cannot own property in their own name or keep their own earnings, then shortly thereafter took away women's right to vote fundamentally taking away their voice in how this nation was established... so women weren't even a part of the democracy until a 100 years ago, if you dont think that still has an impact on culture and society today, you're delusional.

So I will ask you again, since you seem to be struggling to understand.
What is the definition of patriarchy within this context?

[Cubus]

"teachers are just employees, school superintendents are the ones who actually hold the positions of power"

Emmm, nope. A few members of my best friend's family are superintendents and they don't really have any power. Just make sure the schools exams/test scores are okay.

"The colonies adopt the English system decreeing women cannot own property in their own name or keep their own earnings,"

Again, that's bullshit. You have a lot of examples of women owning properties in the history.

"so women weren't even a part of the democracy until a 100 years ago"

The same, as Black men. But it conflicts your thesis that men were privilaged. Nope, only some men were privilaged, when it comes to voting.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus What is the definition of patriarchy

[Cubus]

None, because patriarchy doesn;t exist.

You claim so, so you are obligated to prove it.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Okay then answer the question. What is the definition of patriarchy with in this context?

[Cubus]

I already told you - there is none, because patriarchy does not exist.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Lol Oh I see you are just in flat out denial. Open a dictionary lol

[Cubus]

The fact that something is in dictionary doesn't mean it exist.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus and since you do not know the definition of it, I'll pull it up for you. Patriarchy is a social system in which positions of dominance and privilege are primarily held by men.

And like you agreed earlier, men make up the vast majority of government officials which is certainly considered to be one of the highest positions of dominance and privilege. Ergo a society in which primarily men hold positions of dominance and privilege is by definition a patriarchy.

[Cubus]

And who elects government officials? Citizens. And there are more women in voting age than men.

[Cubus]

In the democratic society, the souvereign is the nation, government officials are its representatives chosen in elections. And more than 50% of the nation are women. So if you want to talk about dominance, then women dominate men, when it comes to choosing who is in power.

And for privilages - you still failed to prove it.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus that is irrelevant.

[Subarugirl]

The reason behind it doesn't change the reality of how things are. It still is.

[Cubus]

You still fail to prove it.

And when I ask you you respond with "this is irrelevant"

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Lol I did, I gave you the definition, and all you have to look at who holds the majority of power.

[Cubus]

You can easily check who holds the majority of power. Just look at election base.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus or look at who is currently in power... not that difficult.

[Cubus]

I see. Currently in power in the democratic countries is a nation that picks its representatives.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus okay... that doesn't have anything to do with anything. I know you're struggling to wrap your head around this but at least stay on topic

[Cubus]

You still refuse to accept that your thesis is not true.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus by definition it is. A patriarchy is a social/governing system where men hold the majority of power.. there are thousands of patriarchies.

[Cubus]

Women are the ones who hold the majority of power, as they are more than 50% of voting base.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus You mean the women that suffer from the wage gap, do more unpaid labor and who are underrepresented in government. The US isn't a direct Democracy, it's a Presidential Democracy... and there are no congressional term limits which means there are members of the house and congress that were elected 2 generations ago that are still in power.

This country is predominantly run and governed by men, that is the definition of a patriarchy.

[Cubus]

I believe by "unpaid labour" you mean housework.

Women on average do more housework, because studies show that women on average work less hours and more often have part-time jobs, than men. The same about the "wage gap".

And you still fail to overcome the fact that women are the ones who elect people in power.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus That doesn't change the fact that it's still a patriarchy, the reasoning behind it doesn't change the fact that the USA is predominantly run and governed by men, that is the definition of a patriarchy.

[Subarugirl]

That's like me telling you the sky is blue, then you are arguing explaining why it's blue, doesn't change the fact that it is still blue.

[Cubus]

You still fail to give any arguements for this

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus I have you the reality and the definition, your reasoning doesn't change the facts

[Cubus]

I already told you how reality works - women are the ones who have an upper hand at electing officials.

[Cubus]

And you actually contradicted yourself on the definition.

Something like 13 days ago you gave a definition that "Patriarchy is a social and/or social system in which positions of dominance and privilege are primarily held by men."

I already proved you that in all democratic countries (I believe India is the exception) positions of dominance are held primarly by women, as they are more than 50% of voters, and decide who's gonna be elected

But it didn;t fit what you started saying afterwards, so you decided to abondon it :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus lol that has nothing to do with weather a society is patriarchal or not... totally irrelevant. What is relevant is what is.

[Cubus]

You said 13 days ago that what is relevant is who has the dominance. And in democratic countries (where the positions of power are in the hands of the nation) women have the dominance.

But yes - you're contradicting yourself with what you has said before :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus You totally misunderstood again, no wonder you are struggling to understand.

[Cubus]

Saying your interlokutor misunderstood your thesis, if you do have no arguements left?

That's lame :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Lol I am not arguing, I am just presenting and explaining the facts.

[Cubus]

I believe you mistaken "I am" with "you are" :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus No just you

[Cubus]

You still hate to admit that women elect officials.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus lol Im not arguing that women vote, haha that is common knowledge.
I am saying that just because women vote doesn't change the fact that the US government is patriarchal.

[Cubus]

You said two weeks ago that patriarchy is a system where dominance is held by men and now you retreat from this, because it doesn't fit your agenda. :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus No I didn't, which makes sense why you are confused. I said, "A social or governing system where positions of power are primarily held by men." Members of congress are certainly positions of power, being a civilian citizen isn't.

[Cubus]

"Patriarchy is a social and/or social system in which positions of dominance and privilege are primarily held by men."

That's what you said 15 days ago. It's easy to check.

You're contradicting your own definition :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus and being the president, or a member of the house or the senate are some of the most dominant positions of power in the US government.

You do know that dominance and power are synonyms right and are not contradictory.

[Cubus]

Guess who dominates when it comes to electing the president, or a member of the house or the senate?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus The states who have the most electoral votes. Being an 18 year old civilian is not a position of power

[Cubus]

Guess if the states with most electoral votes (California, Texas, Florida, New York and Illinois) have more men or women?

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus That isn't relevant to weather a governing system is patriarchal or not.

[Cubus]

Who dominates when it comes to electing the president, or a member of the house or the senate?

You: "The states who have the most electoral votes."

The states with most electoral votes have more women, than men.

Also you: "That isn't relevant to weather a governing system is patriarchal or not."

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus that is correct. Good job

[Cubus]

If you already admitted me right, then I believe we may end this :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus you’re right that women vote but even so that change the fact that US government is still very much patriarchal.

[Cubus]

Even if majority of voters that elect officials are women? :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Yes, in this situation absolutely.

[Cubus]

You seem to don;t care that this debunks your whole thesis.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus it doesn't, but since you have struggled through this whole lesson it would make logical sense you would assume as much.

[Cubus]

You are the one who gives a thesis that patriarchy exists.

So you are the one who has a duty to prove it

You failed so far

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus actually I already did but if you cannot accept reality that is your own problem not mine

[Cubus]

If patriarchy existed then women would not be the bigger voter base.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus As I have stated before the voter base does is not the sole indicator of whether or not a governmental system is patriarchal or not. The same way a person's gender is not a indicative of their political standing.

[Cubus]

Government is how you elect it to be. Most of voters are women

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus As I have stated before the voter base does is not the sole indicator of whether or not a governmental system is patriarchal or not. The same way a person's gender is not a indicative of their political standing..

[Cubus]

Government is solely on who you elect.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus That is false. Poland my have different policies but that declaration is not accurate for the united states and is not the sole determining factor for weather or not a governing system is patriarchal or not.

[Cubus]

That's the sole governing factor in all democracies

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus no it’s not, you should educate yourself on the different kinds of democracies there are

[Cubus]

We already coverted that issue.

You said that power hold states that have the most electoral votes and all of them have more women than men.

[Cubus]

*covered

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus But you still fail to understand

[Cubus]

You still can't find a way to prove it :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Lol I have many times, you can't argue with the definition of a word... Well I suppose you can but that is dumb

[Cubus]

I proved you that patriarchy cannot exist if the majority of voters in democracy are women, and you still fail to counter it.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus No you didn't it just went right over your head and you totally missed the point
www.theatlantic.com/.../
www.nytimes.com/.../what-is-patriarchy.html
www.theguardian.com/.../smashing-the-patriarchy-why-theres-nothing-natural-about-male-supremacy
www.wbur.org/.../america-has-a-patriarchy-problem

[Cubus]

These articles do not contain any proofs that patriarchy exists. They just say "yeah, it exists" and go outside the topic.

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus Patriarchy still persists because it maintains a system in which men hold power — political, economic, institutional — and what man would want to give that up?
Most of us are aware of the obvious ways in which patriarchy plays out in the workplace: women make 77 cents to every man’s dollar and occupy just 15% of upper management positions and less than 4% of CEO positions in Fortune 500 companies.

In other words, the workplace is still dominated by men.

In most relationships men are still the head of household.

As adults, it manifests in other ways as well — in how women shoulder their family’s emotional labour, i. e. the invisible mental work of holding a household and relationship together. If women register that this is unfair and complains, they’re often told that they’re being “selfish, a drama queen or hysterical.” Eventually, “women believed it.” That’s patriarchy.

Sociologist Sylvia Walby has composed six overlapping structures that define patriarchy and take different forms in different cultures and different times:

The state: Oppressed gender is unlikely to have formal power and representation.
The household: Oppressed gender is more likely to do the housework and raise children.
Violence: Oppressed gender is more prone to being abused.
Paid work: Oppressed gender is likely to be paid less.
Sexuality: Oppressed gender sexuality is more likely to be treated negatively.
Culture: Representation of oppressed gender in media, and popular culture is “within a patriarchal gaze”.

[Cubus]

"women make 77 cents to every man’s dollar " because you take the averaged amount. If you take into detailed stats, like working hours, overtime hours, job seniority etc. then the gap evaporates.

"occupy just 15% of upper management positions and less than 4% of CEO positions in Fortune 500 companies." - because CEO positions are extremely competitive, and women are on average less competitite than men, because men produce more testosterone (a hormone that increases competitiveness, liekely to risk, and rivalry). That's the same reason why men more often participaate in extreme sports.

"The state: Oppressed gender is unlikely to have formal power and representation." - you still fail to point how the second gender is oppressed.

"The household: Oppressed gender is more likely to do the housework and raise children." - Women are more likely to do housework, because stats show women on average work less hours, than men, ergo they have more time to do houseworks than men. And women are more likely to raise children, because there are undisputed physiological differences that make women more fitting to take care of little children. For example - breastfeeding.

"Violence: Oppressed gender is more prone to being abused" - That's right. Excpet research shows that men in USA are more likely to be victims of domestic abuse than women. endtodv.org/.../...-Truths-Falsehoods-and-Lies.pdf

"Paid work: Oppressed gender is likely to be paid less." - Already covered that.

You still failed to prove that patriarchy exists :)

[Subarugirl]

@Cubus I have more than proven it but you aren't able to see if you keep your eyes closed hon.

[Subarugirl]

Women who work in the SAME industry and the SAME hours still make 77 cents to the dollar men make.
Even in households where men and women work the same hours, women still do most of the domestic labor.

[Cubus]

Nope, the data you talk about is the AVERAGED incomes of all men and the AVERAGED incomes of all women.

Studies show opposite. The gender pay gap for men and women, with the same jobs, and qualifications is non-existing. Women earn 99 cents for every dollar earned by a man

www.payscale.com/.../

And it's only for men and women with the same job and same qualifications, and doesn;t take many other aspects into consideration. Like: the fact that women are more conciliatory than men and because of that may be less stern in negotiations for a payrise.

[Anonymous]

I seriously hate playing the "opressors and opressed" game but these issues definitely exist and can be done without dividing the sexes like feminism does.

[Anonymous]

Women support each other - men don’t support one another, something the men should do.

[Xovr3]

Men also support women, it's not just women only supporting women. that's the problem, NOBODY supports men enough. Women should start supporting men, but that will never happen.

It's starts at home, how many parents ever say anything nice about boys to their daughters? Almost never, parents are always telling their daughters that boys/men are bad. While on the other had parents are ALWAYS telling their sons to be kind to girls.

[Opinion Owner]

Men supporting women, and women supporting men have a different support value than women support women and men supporting men.

[Xovr3]

What you just said didn't answer anything. Why is it that TONS of men are fine with supporting women, but TONS of women don't support men? It's like MODERN women have never been taught to be kind, loving, and respectful to men. Don't you think one massive point of happiness is us is for men to support and put women first and for women to support and put men first? Also, If men were so evil to women then why is it that TONS of good men will support and protect women?

[Asad1ONE1]

Women support each other 🤡

[Asad1ONE1]

Women do support men. Just not the misandrists on this site. And many women don't support other women. They tear each other down. There are probably just as many female misogynists as male.

[Asad1ONE1]

Also, there are just as many (if not more) lonely women as men. And many compete with one another. Bottom line is this: we are all alone when the dust settles.

Born alone.

Think alone.

Die alone.

There are really no such thing as "groups"

[Tamera952]

No don’t be retarded.

[KostasKouvalis]

That's actually kind of true

[Anonymous]

Nope

[LimitedBenefits101]

Pretty much

[Anonymous]

Other

[Anonymous]

Sure seems like it