|
longwayhome -> RE: Female favouritism and privilege prevails (12/16/2016 7:53:58 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: respectmen
Diffident
quote:
Violence towards and harassment of women by men is at such an unacceptably high level in our society that it is perfectly understandable for a woman to worry about the possibility of what might happen when in a vulnerable situation with a man who she doesn't know.
Who said? Men hating feminists? The problem is that there is so much exaggeration and fucking bullshit when it comes to talking about the rates of women being victims of anything. If 4 women got raped, feminists and leftists will say 40 women got raped.
For fucks sake. Just change your wording from "men" to "muslim" or "blacks" and there your anti male sexism is exposed.
Bigotry is bigotry, you can't change the meaning of the word when women are being bigots against men. Sexism is sexism, you cant change the meaning of the word when women are sexist against men.
There is no way around it. I am sick and tired of people, especially feminists and people on the left, who make excuse after excuse after excuse for sexism against men while totally not accepting such mindsets when its directed at women or minority groups.
You lot are a bunch of fucking disgusting hypocrites.
Male privilege my fucking arse. Where is our male privilege when bigotry and sexism is 100 percent socially acceptable when its directed at our gender and only our gender...such as this example? Where is the privilege in that you fucking moron?
quote:
The privilege that you and I take for granted as men to walk alone through city streets after dark, or get in to a taxi driven by an unknown man, without worrying about our personal safety or the hassle, annoyance and potential threat of unwanted attention, is an experience that many women may never enjoy.
Men are more likely to be victims of violent crime compared to women by a very long shot. The majority of homicide victims are men.
Oh but wait, you're a gynocentric fuckwit, as it seems that violence is only noteworthy when women are the victims.
Oh he we go again. The old men being victims of crime debate.
We've had that debate before and, as you like citations, I gave you a fully cited answer drawn from UK government statistics from the point of view of male violence against women and male violence against men - Signs of sanity: Australians outraged over abusive "male privilege" lessons to be taught at schools.
Violence against males is precisely taken seriously but, and here's the clincher, it is overwhelmingly carried out by men. Let's also be clear that society has been tackling violence against men and having some success. As a result of changing social attitudes, positive public policy and improved policing, it has reduced by 40% over the last ten years in the UK alone.
So I have no problem with women using women's only services if they feel safer. Statistically at least it hugely reduces the odds of bad things happening. The odds weren't that bad to start with - thankfully the vast majority of women are not attacked as they travel home - but when it does happen it's almost certainly a man who does it.
The counter argument about men's only services just doesn't work here because that wouldn't reduce the risk for men. A man would need a female taxi driver for that. Only then, based purely on statistics for male/male and male/female violence, it would be the female taxi driver who was at greater risk.
Some women's only services might represent a form of sexism where they have a significant effect on employment or access, but in this case that's just not true.
As for the barber shop thing, that's a bit extreme. Personally if I frequented a barber shop, I would raise my eyebrows if a woman wanted to spend much time in such a male environment even if she wanted a "male" haircut, but I suspect the outrage against this is a bit manufactured.
Just like you are manufacturing outrage about female only cabs.
It's just not that important mate. People are dying in Aleppo for fuck's sake and this is the best you can come up with?
|
|
|
|
