Don't men have it easier than women?

[Anonymous]

Women can't have kids over 40. This means her dating prospects will go significantly downhill once she turns 40. A man can have kids anytime in life- which makes dating a it EASIER at an older age.

An ugly man can make up for his lack of looks if he has a lot of money or if he is funny. An ugly woman would never be able to make up for it, even if she does make a lot of money.

A woman has to go through the torture of pregnancy and RISK HER LIFE to give birth. (Women wreck their bodies to give birth to children). A man sits back and does nothing to have children. He gets to reap the rewards with her suffering and labor

Once the baby is born, the woman does 80-90% of the child care, calls out of work cuz the baby is sick. The man's life is largely unchanged. Studies show that men make more money after having kids while women make less money.

Then the woman spends the next 30 years of her life, working a full time job then coming home to do 90% of the housework and childcare. While being expected to look thin, young, hot, sexy for her husband.

Meanwhile the husband is only expected to work a job then come home, drink a beer in front of the tv, while his wife cooks dinner. He is overweight, looks like a slob, doesn't put on any anti aging creams. While is wife is trying to lose her "post pregnancy weight" spending thousands of dollars on anti aging creams and makeup. .

Plus, women need to fear about being sex trafficked, used for sex, played by sexual predators, robbed due to being the "WEAKER SEX"

Don't men have it much easier than women?

Once dad leaves, the single mom is left all alone to raise all of the children while he gets to live a carefree single life

[melssvdv]

"Women can't have kids over 40. This means her dating prospects will go significantly downhill once she turns 40. A man can have kids anytime in life- which makes dating a it EASIER at an older age."

That claim has nothing to do with having easier/harder.

"An ugly man can make up for his lack of looks if he has a lot of money or if he is funny. An ugly woman would never be able to make up for it, even if she does make a lot of money."

It is more common for women to be decent looking than a man having a lot of money.

"A woman has to go through the torture of pregnancy and RISK HER LIFE to give birth. (Women wreck their bodies to give birth to children)"

Pregnancy is not torture. And no, on average a woman does not 'risk her life' to gestate a child. Only 0.14% of women die from childbirth. Stop spreading this nonsense narrative.

"A man sits back and does nothing to have children. He gets to reap the rewards with her suffering and labor"

An average man works harder and provides and pressures more to feed, protect and provide both his wife and his unborn child. You are turning an extreme exception (man leaving behind) into a general rule. Which does not correlate to reality.

"Once the baby is born, the woman does 80-90% of the child care, calls out of work cuz the baby is sick. The man's life is largely unchanged. Studies show that men make more money after having kids while women make less money."

You are out of touch from reality. Your average man does even more wife AND child care. And the reason why men make more money after having kids is because men have to work more to sustain and feed both of his wife and children. This is logical.

"Then the woman spends the next 30 years of her life, working a full time job then coming home to do 90% of the housework and childcare. While being expected to look thin, young, hot, sexy for her husband."

You are over exaggerating. Most women (like me) do part time job and go home mostly at noon. Most children nowadays go to child care. Men still do full time jobs. And their jobs are harder than ours. But that is normal because men are stronger than us. They are more capable to contribute more than us. I am not ashamed to say this.

"Meanwhile the husband is only expected to work a job then come home, drink a beer in front of the tv, while his wife cooks dinner. He is overweight, looks like a slob, doesn't put on any anti aging creams. While is wife is trying to lose her "post pregnancy weight" spending thousands of dollars on anti aging creams and makeup."

You are delusional. You need to stop watching tv or indulge in any kind of feminist agenda and go outside for a while. You are trying to turn an extreme exception into a general rule.

"Plus, women need to fear about being sex trafficked, used for sex, played by sexual predators, robbed due to being the "WEAKER SEX""

And yet, men on average face more danger, incidents, etc. overall. We might be weaker sex but that does not make men more aggressive in general. Men are more hesitant to hit a woman than the other way round.

"Don't men have it much easier than women?"

No because men die more in any kind of danger, risks, accidents, wars, etc. than women. This has been going on for generations by generations. Most women are safe at home with the children.

"Once dad leaves, the single mom is left all alone to raise all of the children while he gets to live a carefree single life"

It is the court forcing to push the children to the mother even though she is evil who started the divorce.

STOP PUSHING YOUR EVIL AGENDA WHOEVER YOU ARE.

- Sincerely, a wife with a child and a wonderful husband.

[Snakeyes7]

Couldn't have said better myself

[melssvdv]

@Snakeyes7 I swear, it just takes a small reality check and realize what she said is just a mere over exaggeration or just not true.

[Snakeyes7]

@melssvdv exactly, simply taking a sex Ed class debunks the entire fundamental premise of this worldview. If one sex (especially women since they are the ones who birth children) have been oppressed as brutally as we have been told, humanity would have been done for in a couple generations if they're lucky.

People often don't make that connection right away though, but it often begins with realizing the wage gap is a lie and down the rabbithole you go.

[melssvdv]

@Snakeyes7 So do men birth children.

It takes two. Every human being is also born of man. We women do have the bearing however.

[Snakeyes7]

@melssvdv I mention that because the fact that women can only give birth once a year, killing women does more damage to the prosperity to a society than killing men. The more women in a society you kill, the maximum number of children being born per year goes down with them.

With men, that number only changes when all of them are killed and it goes straight to zero. If even one man remains he *could* do the work for the rest of them if need be because they regenerate sperm quickly.

So when you consider the narrative that women have faced at least several centuries of oppression, where men are actively encouraged to beat, enslave and abandon women as much as they please, it just doesn't add up.

[melssvdv]

@Snakeyes7 Less men means more chance on genetic diseases.

[Snakeyes7]

Sure but at least the society survives.

[melssvdv]

@Snakeyes7 Barely maybe. If you have more men than women, the society is better protected and evolve faster. Sure the reproduction will be bit less but better stability, protection and evolution > faster reproduction.

A country with a way more women than men leads to collapse or takeover XD

[Snakeyes7]

I did not think of that. My point is, the sexes need to get along in order for a society to survive. Western culture, as a result of feminism, thinks that sex is no different than race, where one can completely erase the other and there would be no negative consequences. As much as feminism wants us to think so, men and women have no inherent hatred for each other, otherwise there would be no need for the propaganda.

[melssvdv]

@Snakeyes7 I am pretty sure that those who control the mainstream narrative want to turn the world upside down: turning children against adults and parents, and women against men. Based on the many sources, articles, and information I’ve encountered online, and by recognizing recurring patterns, the only conclusion I can draw is that the goal is to pervert and demoralize humanity as a whole, as if that were the intention all along.

[Snakeyes7]

I think they only aim to demoralize those who they have placed in their "black categories." Whites, men, straights, non-trans, Christians, capitalists, you name it. Other than that, I completely agree.

[Asker]

@melssvdv

[If you have more men than women, the society is better protected and evolve faster. Sure the reproduction will be bit less but better stability, protection and evolution > faster reproduction.]

better protected? how?

more men so that they can start more wars?

protect children? says who? so far, its women that do the protecting children. Men ABANDONING their own kids for single moms to raise and protect

[Asker]

@Snakeyes7

[If one sex (especially women since they are the ones who birth children) have been oppressed as brutally as we have been told, humanity would have been done for in a couple generations if they're lucky.]

Opressing women is the only way for generations to continue.

because if women weren't locked at home, confined to taking care of kids... how will society continue to procreate?

the reason why women aren't having any more children is because they are WAKING UP to the fact that having a career and freedom and financial power and independence is way better than being locked at home cooking and cleaning under her slave master husband.

[Snakeyes7]

@asker I will rip the bandaid off right now: you are being lied to and women were never "oppressed" in any capacity. If they were, even by your own definition, feminism never would have been invented (the "patriarchy" would have never allowed it) and humanity would have went extinct a long time ago.

There was nothing grassroots about feminism and it wanted the sexes divided from the beginning, with the destruction of the family being the goal. There is no easier way to do it than to promote the idea that one is somehow more "privileged" over the other. That's how the Nazis got the native Germans to hate the Jews and that's how the KKK got the whites to hate the blacks (sounds silly now but all you need to do is look at the Jim Crow propaganda posters from the time). Both the Jews and the blacks were depicted as brutes, rapists and murderers.

I hope you are seeing a pattern here...

Women didn't "wake up" they were fed lies about human nature. Everything that "oppressed" women either never existed in the first place, were over-exaggerated or designed to protect them because women were the key to a thriving society back when women's survival when giving birth was a complete toss-up, when diseases that are eradicated today were present, how dangerous most occupations were, and how incredibly likely it was for children to die before reaching adulthood. Feminists just called these measures "oppression" because they don't make any sense anymore thanks to technological and medical improvements and updated safety standards.

Now men are "waking up" in a similar fashion because they are tried the lies and realizing that they are not the monsters feminists are making them out to be. Now they look for women abroad because they haven't been fed the lies you believed all your life, because all they want is a wife sees them as a partner and not an oppressor.

[Asker]

@Snakeyes7

[I will rip the bandaid off right now: you are being lied to and women were never "oppressed" in any capacity.]

women were never oppressed? so why aren't more women getting married and having kids?

why are they PREFERRING to not have kids, birth rates dropping?

how is not forcing a woman to give up her independence to make money and just lock her in the house all day a form of abuse?

[Asker]

@Snakeyes7

if getting married and having kids was such a great deal, then why aren't more women doing it?

cuz its not a great deal. it sucks.

when a man decides to divorce his wife, who has no career, no skills, she cannot support her 3 kids on a minimum wage job.

more and more women are waking up to the fact that kids take a greater toll on women than men.

this is why married men live longer lives than single men. but married women live shorter lives than single women

[Snakeyes7]

> women were never oppressed?

Yes. The sexes are not like race. One cannot commit a genocide on the other and then live on like nothing happened. The sexes need to get along in order for humanity to thrive. Children also need proper parents in order to become civilized and proper members of society.

I think humanity would have long collapsed if the men of the world suddenly and collectively decided to form a cabal of mustache twirlers and treat the women of the world like Jews in Nazi Germany.

>so why aren't more women getting married and having kids?

Because they are convinced that marriage is an oppressive system even though the courts are so slanted in the woman's favor (thanks to the Tender Years Doctrine and No Fault Divorce) that they can be some of the most monstrous individuals and still get the kids, even if the father has done no wrong. There is no point to marriage if there is penalty for disloyalty.

There is nothing grassroots about this feeling either. The loss of families ruins people's desire to self-govern, and we will be slaves to a tyrannical regime if we don't stop it. That's why communism was so powerful in the Soviet Union. Soviets were taught that their true parents were (Mother) Russia and Stalin (whoever the leader was at the time).

[Snakeyes7]

>why are they PREFERRING to not have kids, birth rates dropping?

The reasons I always hear are some of the most self-centered reasons I have ever heard, like being able to sleep in. I do not have kids yet but I think the point of having children is an incentive to not leave behind a mess when we die.

Look where this lack of motivation to have kids led us. The world is an even bigger shithole than it was when we arrived and I intend to fix it or even improve upon it for the sake of those who come after me, however few there might be.

>how is not forcing a woman to give up her independence to make money and just lock her in the house all day a form of abuse?

I never said that it was, nor did I say that it happened.

> if getting married and having kids was such a great deal, then why aren't more women doing it?

Because they drank the "us vs them" kool aid.

>when a man decides to divorce his wife, who has no career, no skills, she cannot support her 3 kids on a minimum wage job.

You say that as if it is an inevitability, yet approximately two-thirds to 70% of divorces in the U. S. are initiated by wives.

It's almost as if it is being used as a weapon for abuse by the wives, but feminism is not ready for that conversation because, as far as the Duluth Model is concerned, abuse is only something a man can do and if a woman were to strike her husband, it is *always* done in response to the *man's* abuse.

There is also something to be said about lesbian divorce rates being at least double that of gay marriages, so I don't think men are the problem here.

>more and more women are waking up to the fact that kids take a greater toll on women than men.

Define "greater toll." The whole point of the marriage is for the kids to be raised by a mother and a father. If the mother is doing it alone (which is likely because of the rise of single mothers due to how easy it is to get a divorce), then no shit it has a "greater toll" on them.

[Snakeyes7]

>but married women live shorter lives than single women

Wrong. Multiple studies confirm that married women have the lowest age-adjusted death rates and the highest life expectancy compared to unmarried women.

For example: "Similarly, at 65 years, TLE [total life expectancy] for married women was 21.1 years, 1.5 years longer than unmarried women, and ALE [active life expectancy] for married women was 13.0 years, 2.0 years longer than unmarried women."

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7452000/

It's almost as if being with someone you love and who loves you back gives you a will to live.

[Asker]

@Snakeyes7

According to The Guardian, Paul Dolan, professor of behavioral science at the London School of Economics, cites data from the American Time Use Survey in his book Happy Ever After: A Radical New Approach to Living Well. His conclusion? The happiest and healthiest demographic is unmarried women without children.

www.theguardian.com/.../women-happier-without-children-or-a-spouse-happiness-expert

[Asker]

@Snakeyes7
[You say that as if it is an inevitability, yet approximately two-thirds to 70% of divorces in the U. S. are initiated by wives.]
[Define "greater toll." The whole point of the marriage is for the kids to be raised by a mother and a father. If the mother is doing it alone (which is likely because of the rise of single mothers due to how easy it is to get a divorce), then no shit it has a "greater toll" on them.]

greater toll on women because women need to give birth, work full time jobs, only to come home to do 90% of the housework and childcare.

Ever heard of the term "married single mom"? Just because you are married, it does not mean you can't be a single mom. Men never pull their own weight.

this explains why women initiate 70% of all divorces.
______________________________________________________________________

[>how is not forcing a woman to give up her independence to make money and just lock her in the house all day a form of abuse?
I never said that it was, nor did I say that it happened.]

so you are admitting right now that it IS a form of abuse... haha

[, as far as the Duluth Model is concerned, abuse is only something a man can do and if a woman were to strike her husband, it is *always* done in response to the *man's* abuse.]

men are more aggressive, stronger, bigger and taller than women, which makes women more likely to be victims of death and abuse by their husbands. That is one of the reasons why women are no longer getting married.

[There is also something to be said about lesbian divorce rates being at least double that of gay marriages, so I don't think men are the problem here.]

well there are studies that prove that kids born to lesbian or gay parents tend to outperform kids born to heterosexual parents. kinda defeating the notion that kids need both parents to succeed.

New study indicates children raised by same-sex parents perform better at school

people.com/.../

[Asker]

@Snakeyes7

[Because they are convinced that marriage is an oppressive system even though the courts are so slanted in the woman's favor (]

ok. if courts were so slanted in women's favor, then why aren't more women having kids?

you're contradicting yourself.

if women were so "better off" having kids, then why aren't they having more?

BECAUSE WOMEN WERE NEVER BETTER OFF HAVING KIDS.

thats why they aren't having kids anymore today.

Women when offered a baby and a job...

they picked THE JOB...

there you go...

i don't know why you are arguing so hard for.

[Asker]

@snakeyes7

A number of studies report that single women tend to be healthier and less depressed, living longer than married women. Single women generally experience fewer stresses and compromises than married women. Furthermore, single women feel more empowered, enjoying greater personal autonomy and freedoms than married women largely because they don’t juggle challenging multiple roles at work and home.

archive-yaleglobal.yale.edu/.../should-women-stay-single

[Snakeyes7]

Well of course they are "happier" because they have been led to see purpose or devotion to anyone other than themselves as a burden. I don't mean to be rude, but these women act like children who don't give a damn what legacy they leave behind.

Men have always wanted someone to devote themselves to, which is why they want families with a loving wife and kids. Men see their entire life as an investment toward the future of making their future wife and kids happy. Without this promise, what point is there to improve anything if there will be no one left to enjoy it?

>greater toll on women because women need to give birth, work full time jobs, only to come home to do 90% of the housework and childcare.

You know women never HAD to work full time back then, most women just chose not to because they'd rather not if they had the choice. The reason more women are working now is because we elected clowns who were too stupid or evil to operate by the law of supply and demand for far too long and now everything is more expensive. Don't elect retards next time and maybe women won't have to work full time anymore.

The 90% of the housework is bullshit and I explain why later.

>Men never pull their own weight.

If he is the one making the money, he is doing enough. As I explain later, the chores women do around the house are among the easiest ones and a decent chunk of them are completely automated.

[Snakeyes7]

>this explains why women initiate 70% of all divorces.

Actually, it doesn't. Thanks to No Fault Divorce where, as the name implies, fault is never needed, we will never know why the divorce rate is so high. Just so you know, abuse and adultery were always valid reasons to get one, so if you ask me, anyone who supports no fault just wants to use it a weapon.

>so you are admitting right now that it IS a form of abuse... haha

"Forcing a woman to give up her independence to make money and just lock her in the house all day " IS a form of abuse, but that was never what marriage entailed. As I said a million times, humanity wouldn't last long if that really was how marriage operated.

[Snakeyes7]

>men are more aggressive, stronger, bigger and taller than women, which makes women more likely to be victims of death and abuse by their husbands.

Oh boy where do I begin?

1. Those qualities don't prove shit when it comes to one's likelihood to abuse, it just determines the damage it will do.
2. Abuse does not take the amount of physical damage into account, just whether the intent to hurt was there.
3. Aggression is not the same as evil. Aggression can be pointed towards positive things like protection.
4. The University of Zurich actually found that testosterone does not cause aggression but the contrary. It makes them more fair. www.sciencedaily.com/.../091208132241.htm

Which would explain surveys like this.

expression.fire.org/.../male-students-show-more-tolerance

5. " In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases." and "Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women, but not men."

ajph.aphapublications.org/.../AJPH.2005.079020

6. Even if everything I said is wrong and the majority of abuse is indeed perpetrated by the man, the Duluth Model operates on the hasty generalization fallacy and the creator, Ellen Pence, admitted that it is based on confirmation bias.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duluth_model

[Snakeyes7]

>New study indicates children raised by same-sex parents perform better at school

You just gave me another article of the same cope that not having responsibilities towards anyone else in your personal life makes women happier long term. Sorry, but I don't buy that. I personally don't think that would be a fulfilling life for me, but again that's just me.

>ok. if courts were so slanted in women's favor, then why aren't more women having kids?

This isn't necessarily about kids, divorce over nothing is the underlying issue when it comes to the courts. Personally, if I was a woman and decided to leave my husband for... fuck I dunno... the way he slurps his soup and not over any actual breach of contract, I should expect him to owe me jack shit including the kids because me leaving over something as silly as that does not set a good example to my kids about loyalty.

Marriage is not "til death do us part" it is "til I am bored of you do us part."

[Snakeyes7]

>they picked THE JOB...

Because women have no choice but to work thanks to the dipshits we have elected which leaves less time for kids. Trust me, as someone who works full time, I don't think I would entirely hate it if the roles were reversed. You mean to tell me I get to spend time with the ones I love more often, and in exchange I only do tasks that are far easier than most full time positions? That sounds good to me. But i am not a woman so it doesn't scratch the itch quite right in my head.

The premise of the Yale study is complete crap. It gives credence to the wage gap which makes no economic sense and "unpaid" labor which is also retarded because even if you are a stay-at-home, you share your husband's salary. If you really love your spouse and your kids, none of what you do for them will feel like work. If you have ever been in love, you'd understand what I mean. While I don't have kids, I have had numerous men and women tell me that having them is more fulfilling than they thought.

Juggling work and home is a fact of life and you have to do it no matter if you are single or married. I know this sounds like blasphemy to you but men have their own jobs with the house too. Mowing the lawn, fixing electronics, building things, almost anything outdoors, any of the more dangerous tasks such as things that involve ladders and that is ON TOP of their job. As far as I know, at least half of the chores women stereotypically do involve putting stuff in a machine and pressing "start," others involve using some piece of technology designed to make the task easier and maybe like 10-20% are more manual but does not need to be done every day. You also don't do it because the man goes "me man, you woman and you slave," you do it because you don't want to attract pests, unless you WANT to live in a cockroach infested home.

[melssvdv]

@asker you must be one of the following:
- A Jew trying to bring up pot-stir agenda with sensational lies for more divide and conquer
- Or a feminist indoctrinated by the feminist mainstream media (controlled by Jews) full of lies for example 'men oppress women'. You need to touch grass.

[melssvdv]

Pretty much everything you said is just feminist Jewslop that does not correlate to reality. I think you are upset because men have more biological power than us women.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

So the idea that women can’t have kids after 40 is straight up a myth. While the original information was based on actual data, it was based on data collected from rural french towns over 200 years ago. It no longer applies to a society with a completely different standard of living. Also, if you’re basing dating prospects off of one’s ability to procreate I genuinely don’t think you’ve ever actually gone on an irl date.

[MrOracle]

Journalist Norah Vincent thought so. So much so that she decided to live as a man for 18 months to gather evidence that this was true, for a book she was writing. The result? She was shocked to discover how hard men had it, how isolated men were, how the advantages she presumed men had were not true for the vast majority (certainly, elite men enjoy many advantages, but that's not most men), and she was so disturbed by her experiences (including how awfully women treated men) that it sent her into a mental health crisis that resulted in several hospitalizations and her eventual suicide.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ip7kP_dd6LUhttps://www.youtube.com/embed/ZTImCb9Co2U

This is not the first example of a woman living as a man and discovering that it's a lot harder than they imagined - though few remained "undercover" for as long and most didn't take their own lives. Instead, they just came to have a better appreciation for the struggles of men.

The truth is that both men and women have their own struggles, and those struggles are DIFFERENT from each other, but neither really has it better or worse. Instead, each needs to understand the expectations of society and their own limitations and adjust the trajectory of their life and their priorities accordingly. Both are going to have advantages in some areas and disadvantages in others.

But it's disingenuous to only compare one person's advantages to another's disadvantages and declare the first to "have it easier" - you have to look at the whole picture.

[Asker]

you haven't listed any reasons on why men have it harder.

because you can't think of any.

[Asker]

realistically, the only expectations for men is to just work a job and make money. THAT'S IT.

They don't have to give birth. Don't have to look good. Don't have to take care of their kids. Don't have to do housework.

[MrOracle]

If any of that was true, why couldn't Norah see it? It was, after all, her assumption that men had it easy. Why was she so disturbed by her experience, and why did she conclude that men had it rough and that women completely failed to understand what men go through?

This is a woman we're talking about - shouldn't she have been able to tell us all the reasons men have it so easy? How do you explain why she couldn't?

[lightbulb27]

awsome real life story, wow! Men and women are different w different roles. the man is a sacrifice for the woman to enable her to make offspring. some basic undertanding and spiritual maturity would have avoided all that disaster.

He noted it above: Men are more emotionally isolated and have to get used to feeling ok with that. They also have to learn to be vulnerable to the woman yet strong enough. Then they get called up to "war" and have to kill people or be killed. They have their issues...

But my answer is woman have it harder. More vulnerable, hormonally variable, physically vulnerable at various stages while the risks of being bonded to an offspring and losing them... theyd feel the impact of that more. It's harder for them to feel secure.

Emotionally, their range is much wider and thus higher highs and lows.

[Miristheiss]

Having babies is the bioligical reason women exist.

Otherwise 100% of the species would just be big, muscular, builder, problem solver bodies.

Men and women exist to have babies and families.

If you KNOW your ceiling is 40... why spend 18-30 partying, college, casual sex on a pill. Why not focus on family.

Wisdom would dictate focus on family when young and it is the easiest to find a mate if you require commitment before sex and then focus on jobs when the kids are in school and family is just about done.

Things are backwards.

[melssvdv]

"Having babies is the bioligical reason women exist."

There is more to it than just pushing a baby our of our vagina -.-

[Chazmatazz269]

Not even close.
You know why the majority of gender transitioning is male to female? Because being male sucks the vast majority of the time and being a female is easy by comparison. You know why the vast majority of detransitioning is reassigned males back to biological females? Same reason as above.
Read “Self Made Man” by Norah Vincent. She’s a martyr, as far as i’m concerned. Most women couldn’t last a month as a man. She committed to a year and had to bail before the year was up because it was too much. She made some great friends in the process though, and a whole lot of fans.


SPOILER ALERT!!!


She set out to prove how easy men have it, but came away with a whole new respect for what the average man goes through from one day to the next.

[Asker]

gender transitioning to female doesn't make their life harder. because being trans doesn't mean you need to actually give birth.

[melssvdv]

Asker, it is so obvious you are trying to push this narrative about childbirth as if it the most brutal thing ever.

No it is not. There are hundreds of things more painful than childbirth. Besides, an average woman experience childbirth only 2-3 times in her whole lifetime. I have a son. Yes it was brutal but after two days I was back on my feet. This 'childbirth fear agenda propaganda' just like COVID 'fear agenda' just to destroy small businesses doesn't work. Just stop it.

You are just being over sensitive because you hold a grudge and resentment that men are more powerful, stronger, that biology is so biased against us women. Hence why you tend to over exaggerate things about women. You are living in an illusion. Stop consuming mainstream media.

[FreyaRed]

Depends. Both sexes have advantages and disadvantages statistically but life isn't a statistic. Life is very subjective and only visible from individual reference point.
If you ask 1000 people for their personal opinion about this topic you get likely 1000 different replies, event thought you can make a statistic.

[melssvdv]

She is trying to push some agenda that childbirth is something that cripples us women for the rest of our lives... I have a son and yes of course it was brutal but after 2-3 days I was back on my feet. I could even go back home de day after delivery but the Asker is over exaggerating pretty much.

[Sal_Monella]

Under 30, probably. After that it gets worse for men. 80% of divorces are filed by women Men don't look for revenge in court. They just want to start over. Women want to destroy careers, reputations and children. It is better for men to never marry. Remember that many "single mothers" choose that.

[Summeroflove]

The grass is always greener on the other side. Trust me….. Men and women have their own issues.

[BadApple69]

From 18 to 38 (let’s say) is 20 years to find a partner. I think that’s a far amount of time.

[Asker]

men have more than that

[jahaims]

If you can't find a partner by 30 you are a failure

[msc545]

Well, I think women have it easier. They get to whine like deranged three-year-olds when things don't go their way. Men just take it.

[slatyb]

Yes, and men don't get pregnant.

[Anonymous]

Yes, you do dude

[jjdn423]

Women have unlimited options, even obese women

[BarryLiverstone]

Sure