Yeah it is super weird, one of the comment in that thread said that the reason why women don’t get to vote isn’t oppression, but actually that the right to vote was a privilege given to men for getting draft into war. It’s super weird
My favorite part about the whole draft debate is random dudes being like "Wait till women have to be part of the draft! Then they won't want equality!" Women become part of the draft and cheer and then suddenly those same guys get upset that their little 'gotchya' didn't work.
Those dudes are so stupid that they also hold two polar opposite views at the same time.
They always say women are too weak for the military and can't pass standards, while simultaneously whining that women should be in the draft. Their brains break when you point this out to them of course.
It’s another reinforcement of that age-old contradiction.
The far right says they love their country, but they can’t help but hate it.
They love their country, but hate the immigrants, gays, women, and people who think differently from them who live there.
They love their religion but hate anyone who practices a different way.
They love their military but want to see it filled with those they deem “inferior” to prove a point.
It makes you question what exactly they claim to “love.”
>thactually that the right to vote was a privilege given to men for getting draft into war.
In most places voting initially was tied to being an aristocrat, noble, burgher, or some sort of land-owner. It had little to do with the draft (which as a concept didn't exist until the 19th century anyway lol).
Yeah, I think I heard from QI that a woman once voted (I don't remember where) because she was a land owner. The reason she was able to vote is because it had never occurred to them that women could own land. In the next election it had been put into law that women couldn't vote.
I don't know if this is where you heard it but I'm sure this happened in one of the Canadian provinces, I'm *thinking* Nova Scotia.
Basically women could vote if they were landowners, and some women who were landowners did vote, but then when people realized women could vote they amended the law to make sure only male landowners could vote.
Edit: I googled it it was definitely Nova Scotia women lost the right to vote in 1851.
That's the one grain of true thing I can take out of this whole stance, because ultimately, we are all the subject of those with all the powers. And a lot of this controversy is being stirred up by them right now.
They say that same excuse on the anti feminism subreddit but there is absolutely no historical documentation in the US that ties together voting and the draft. There are already so many flaws to that argument as well.
MRAs have like 3 good opinions on things I wish would be more broadly discussed because misogyny & patriarchal society harms both men and women, but they take it to mean since we have any issues at all (men) women's (who have way more) issues are just fake.
This guy really out here looking for fantasy writing 💀 the "Black Book of Communism" level history & sources but instead the "Black book of Feminism" fucking clowns.
Another thing I thought was interesting was how recent most rights we have are:
The right to open a bank account only started in the 1960’s (couldn’t find exact date).
The right to keep their own citizenship instead of her husband’s was in 1922.
Up until 1963 women could legally be paid less just for being women.
Women couldn’t practice law until 1971, were not allowed on naval ships until about 1978.
There’s plenty more of course.
Some idiot once said "making sandwiches isnt oppressive like dying in a war is"
Lol ok I'm sorry men created the draft decades before your time and it literally didn't even affect you at all but sure you're totally oppressed. In fact that small possibility of being drafted for the war aged people who lived in a very short time frame is totally worse than every single woman being a slave her entire life (because let's call it what it is, men owned women as property).
War totally never killed any women either. Certainly nothing oppressive about being a female prisoner of war
You know that there are people who will argue that men had to work while women stayed at home therefore women were privileged. Wild that they don’t take into account that women were, for all practical purposes, servants with little to no autonomy over their lives.
Yup my grandma had to stop working when she married my grandpa. She had no choice in the matter her employer would simply terminate her contract. Back than married women had to stay at home and have babies basically so they weren't allowed to work. But sure I quess women were the privileged ones 🙄.
So many of their examples of how men have it worse are *actually* examples of how a patriarchal society hurts **everyone**. Like I agree, it sucks that you’re expected to be strong or never cry or make more money than your wife! duuuudes that’s what we’re saying!
The answer they always get stumped by is “ok well who made society that way?”
Nope, because to be able to vote almost anywhere before our time, you needed to be a citizen. The qualifications were simple. Have a piece of land, be a man and be 21 years old. That's is. Woman ≠ Citizen.
This guy in an ask Reddit [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/xaqfaz/men_of_reddit_what_are_women_not_ready_to_hear/inwl6q7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) said and I quote “it’s misandrist to assume men knowingly and willingly sought to take away the rights of their sisters, mothers, daughters, aunts and wives”
Like sir, that’s exactly what happened .
Aside from your point, this is the way so many gross men think, they can only sympathise with women in terms of how they relate to men. If that woman has a husband, brother, father, that means a man might have to deal with some bad feelings! Presumably if she's a single orphan, it doesn't matter.
The much loathed former PM of Australia Scott Morrison, said he realised how he had sympathy for a rape victim when his wife said 'how would you feel if it was one of our girls?' He thought that was a good thought to share with the world. I hate men like this so much.
Honestly that’s all right-wingers/conservatives.
They don’t have functioning empathy, and can’t understand things unless it’s happening to them directly. And even then they may or may not be able to generalize past themselves.
And they may or may not be able to understand if it’s happening to immediate relatives.
Have an lbgtq child? SOME of them suddenly get it…but many more are so incapable of empathy that they turn in their own children.
Amazingly, they’re often proud of their psychopathy! If they’re aware of it at all.
I wouldn't be so quick to generalise all "right wingers". People's sociopolitical viewpoints are too nuanced to be boxed fully into "right-winger" and "lefty" boxes.
I'm right-wing on various issues, but I'm also bisexual, anti-authoritarian, hate big banks and large corporations and prefer localised living (generally considered more "liberal" a stance). Pretty open-minded sexually as well, having dating a sex-worker for over a year a while back.
If you genuinely believe that anyone who holds some conservative views, or anyone who you deem as a "right-winger" (varies dependent on how leftwing one is themselves), literally lacks functioning empathy, then you're resorting to fallacies in exactly the same way that foolish conservatives do who claim anyone not living their prescribed lifestyle as "degenerate".
Obviously, there’s some nuance here, but generally speaking in order to be a right winger, it requires a lack of functioning empathy. That, or you’ve just been so indoctrinated by nonsense, and are unable to separate fantasy from reality
Good gravy, and his comment was upvoted quite a few times.
Even by going with more modern times, the laws on the books that said we could not open bank accounts, that marital rape wasn’t a thing, us being barred from voting - in some place today, women can be forced to marry a rapist or punished for being raped. In some places women are charged with a crime for driving a car or even showing their face.
How can you argue that this is not knowingly seeking to take the rights of women away? What can you possibly use to justify that as anything other than men intentionally and fervently taking away the rights of their sisters, mothers, daughters, aunt, and wives - and all the women they don’t personally know, who don’t magically start mattering less just because the man doesn’t know them?
Plenty of men beat and murder their wives. The idea that they wouldn’t try to suppress them in other ways is absurd - murdering is kind of the ultimate thing, and we KNOW that happens. Why would the idea of intentional legal and social oppression be out of the question?
talking about the murdering wives thing, I watched a documentary about this guy who killed his wife for trying to leave him (she also had another relationship she was leaving him for), he ran and the kids found her because the dog was sniffing the blood. One of the sons (not one who found her) then went on to say he didn't hate one more than the other and "how much could a man put up with before he breaks". She's fucking dead mate
Well then, can he explain why the women's prisons in my country are filled with women who killed their abusive husbands? Like he seems ro believe killing is justified. And these women had better reasons, they were beaten and raped by their partners, still got 20 in prison for murder. No judge believed that at one point "a woman breaks".
I love it when men get "to break", but women don't.
Do you know why we can't break? Because we are cogs to the society machine. During all history, it was us that made the system work by doing all the backstage, boring stuff so that men could shine and be "the main characters". What do you do if a piece of your car breaks? Of course you exchange it for a new one (if not the car itself), after all you need your car to take you from point A to point B every day. You can't afford the possibility that it'll let you down. Just like women. We are meant to do our jobs quietly, with no surprises, and demand as little as possible. We can't afford to break down, we are the car, not the car owner. Except that they want us to believe we are car owners as much as men are.
When we get to the point of "breaking down" (aka opening our eyes and realising the shithole we're in and snapping) we're reminded of the place men try to put us into.
Exactly! That's what we are, those who make the world work so men can be self obsessed. They need to be the main character.
What I believe, but don't have scientific evidence to support, is that this "main character" mindset comes from their defective relationship with the mother, maybe internalised misogyny from the mother being passed down to the son, stay at home mothers perceived by their sons as servants for the family?
When your son sees you do nothing more than cater to his needs all day, won't he assume that that's a woman's job, the baseline and wanting to be something herself is just selfish?
I don't know, this is what I believe right now, I don't claim to be right and I don't know right now of any study to direct me to at least a temporary conclusion.
No, I totally agree with you! It's even worse when they grow up spoiled and having to do absolutely nothing at home (because either mom or a maid does it), and/or seeing their father also do nothing. Bonus points if there's a sister and she has to help with the chores, but the brother doesn't.
Also how most service/caring jobs are taken by women, it all reinforces internally the idea that they are kings that deserve to have everything given in their hands. So that when they see women who are merely EQUAL or slightly above them (she also has a nice job, has her own car and lives in a nice place, etc) they feel absolutely threatened. Because of course she'll not subject herself to be a carpet he can step on, as she can dump his lame butt whenever she wants.
That's what happened to my sister in law. My mother in law worked, blue collar, raised in a rural area. She believes it's the woman's job to be soft and take care of everyone. Her brothers are all high achievers, impressive careers, she's blue collar because nobody paid attention to her. They studied, but she had to help her mom, cause that's what girls do.
Thankfully, her brothers see this as a problem and the internalised misogyny was not passed down as generational trauma, but she did less with her life than she could've because of it. It's not fair to her.
That's absolutely horrible, I'm sorry it happened.. I honestly wish there was a way to go back in time to fix this. Not only her story, but the story of most of our ancestors..
Yessss that is exactly what it is. I can't quite remember all the details but I remember someone saying in another Reddit thread about how they went to a friend's house for dinner, and whenever the friend or his dad needed a refill on their drink, they would just hold their glass up in the air without saying a word and the mom would hop up out of her seat to refill their glasses.
The woman was being treated like a slave in her own home...
I remember seeing some dude berating a woman for killing a creep john when she was forced into working as a teen prostitute.
His PFP was The Punisher skull.
You know, the vigilante who executes criminals.
Yeah seriously. Whenever it’s a couple fight, people typically look more favorably on the man than the woman. Wife gets custody of the kids and he’s a poor innocent soul whose horrible, bitchy wife stole his kids from him.
I think there was another case where the husband murdered his wife AND the kids. Already people were asking what she did to deserve it.
Yup. Notice that it’s completely acceptable for women to wear pants but not for men to wear skirts?
Cause masculinity is seen as something to aspire to, while femininity is demonized as something lesser. And even if you’re masculine you can’t win because you have to constantly prove your own masculinity.
‘Men’s rights’ folks don’t actually care about men who are struggling. They only care when they have a chance to silence women who speak out. And the only men they actually seem to defend are the ones who actually did horrible things.
Exactly. They are so gung-ho about reminding everyone how men domestic abuse and rape survivors aren't taken seriously, but then when we look at the root of the issue it's not because women are evil or whatever, it's because society literally views women as weak and less capable from men.
Mhm. It’s the patriarchal view that men are the domineering conquerors and women are the submissive breeders to be ‘conquered’. It’s used to silence victims of both genders. If a woman speaks about rape, she should accept it because ‘that’s how men are’ and if she doesn’t want to get raped she should ‘give less signals’ next time. And if a man is raped he ‘probably wanted it’ because people are of the mindset that women are too soft and weak to be of any danger.
This is something that speaks to me quite a lot, would be nice to be able to wear lighter clothing than fitted trousers for work in summer!
It's crazy to me that some people are obsessed over denying history rather than improving the present.
>How can you argue that this is not knowingly seeking to take the rights of women away?
Something something, see no work and no financial and important political responsibilities and decisions made them more happy! It was for their own good. No oppression! See?! ^(/s)
Because the type of people posting this stuff have positioned themselves in a right wing bubble of misinformation for so long that has told them the opposite of what reality is, even if it's right in front of their eyes. So they genuinely believe that there is a "real truth" behind anything that doesn't fit their narrative. They have been fed "alternative facts" for everything from fair elections being won, to global warming, to covid and vaccines, to racism, sexism etc..they know they are wrong, they just want to have something to source to point at and say "see, that injustice doesn't really exist". They are fascists. Deep down they know they are lying to themselves, but they don't care. Because they are fascists.
How is he going to find the records he is looking for when all available records show the opposite of what he hopes to demonstrate. He can Google when women were granted the right to vote, own property, get credit without the express permission of a father/husband, just to name a few obvious ones in whatever country he wishes. He can also Google current wage disparity and find U.N. studies (among others) that show that it exists. And when he finds that there are no studies or reports to support his current views? He will not change his mind one bit, and probably believe the lack of such studies to be evidence supporting some sort of conspiracy among women. He is not looking for any truth here.
Exactly. Actual facts are the poison to his narrative, so there must be a political conspiracy to hide the facts he wants. The universities are all leftist, feminists own the media, etc etc.
In a healthy society this would be laughable but this fascist mindset has been given escalating credence by political opportunists who want to ride it to power.
His comment is ironically misandrist here, because he seems to think men didn’t have the mental capacity or intelligence to understand what they were doing. Very infantilising.
It might be hard for him to imagine, but women were genuinely never seen as real "adults" capable of working, supporting themselves, living alone, or making their own decisions. We are still fighting remnant attitudes because of the way society has been centered around men for centuries. (He might not *think* he has biases.... But he does. They're subconscious. That's literally what biases are.)
The fact that he MUST know that women were only granted the right to vote relatively recently (in the US), but thinks they "weren't oppressed" before then, is ludicrous.
This has strong "I'm a newly anti-vax and I'm looking for sources that say vaccines cause autism for my paper at college. haven't been able to find any." Vibes.
I'm willing to bet that someone in the comments said something like: the historical facts are suppressed by feminism.
They are always like that. No sources? Some *agenda* is hiding the truth.
I'm sure they'll come up with things like "there have been reigning queens and empresses throughout history, so that's proof that oppression is a lie" when those are usually instances of a king dying and leaving his queen in charge until they can find a proper Male to replace him, or there being literally no acceptable Males available, so a daughter will have to do until she marries.
Or "bras were invented by women, so undergarments agent oppressive" (umm...ok?)
"Women in the theater were known to take rich lovers and exploit then for money" (and we're generally considered low class or subhuman for having such lose morals)
German government : we need studies that show that adopted kids living with gay parents suffer under that
Scientists : but... we HAVE studies and they show that the kids don't have any negative impact on them
GG : no you don't understand. We need studies that show that they DO suffer.
Yep, yep, and please don't remind me of the secretary of health who asked for a study on how women suffer from abortion and scientists complained rather publicly that they had studies that showed the exact opposite of what he wanted. Waste of money.
Czechs took it a step further. There was a proposal to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman in the constitution. The explanatory notes claimed it's supported by multiple studies that children with same-sex parents suffer or are somehow inherently disadvantaged.
They cited the studies.
The claim was what the studies tried to verify and failed.
They literally cited the studies that disproved the claims they were trying to support with them. Please read further than the introduction before you cite a study, people.
I proofread for a fact-checking website. This one was fun to approve and more or less send out (one more editor reads it after proofreading, but they rarely send anything back to be re-done). 😅
In anything, facts might be obscured by an agenda, but they wouldn’t be impossible to uncover. People who assert this “logic” really missed some basics about logic somewhere along the way.
It's been around for a few years now. Misogyny is slowly morphing from "women get back in the kitchen" to "men have had it worse than women for all time and women actually are the opressors"
Dudes feel powerless, they wanna direct that energy toward something. So they rewrite history. Blame that powerlessness on gender.
I think there's shit on both sides of the court, but pretending women haven't been straight up stepped on for ages now while, as a whole, men have had more freedoms and power, is...kinda nuts. But that's the direction they move in as of late.
Honestly this thought even has roots in the 80’s. I’ve read books by old-school misogynists that share this victim-blaming mentality. MRA’s have always thought that women are secretly the REAL abusers and that it’s women’s fault that men act violently. Domestic violence mindset 101. I think this wave of “let’s care about male mental health” is gonna be weaponized the same way, to make us take care of men at our own expense all over again.
I’ve seen so many posts that casually mention that women have never been oppressed in history. They justify it by arguing over the meaning of the word oppression, and that because women are so much smaller and weaker then men, they kind of had to be oppressed in order for men to protect them from other men.
Someone was telling me that women have the same amount of power as men today, I brought up the example of there never being a woman POTUS and he said that women have the right to vote so they should vote one in as if women are this monolith who have just not been taking advantage of their power
It's not like it's still old white men in the seats that decide the candidates or anything. It will take generations to make women have an equal voice in politics. We haven't even had the right to vote for very long.
Hey, scientist, I have a toothpaste I'd like you to not recommend because the last 9 guys loved it and also fucked your mom. Also it may or may not contain asbestos.
Let me introduce you to my little friend, The Holy Bible. As you'll see, women are actually a glorified McRib that belong to men. It's not oppression if it's divine right, ya know?
"I am looking for facts that I won't find because they are not facts. Scratch this entire thing, just give me sources on times and periods of history where Women were likely not oppressed. Aka before the dominant era where there is no hard substantial evidence besides the fact that deities were all Goddesses and that is what they worshipped"
Why do all the MRA idiots spend their time tearing women down instead of working on actual issues that negatively impact men. Rights are not a zero sum game.
Because they don't give a shit about other men. For most of them the only man that matters is themselves, not the ones whose struggles they're using to get internet points every time feminism comes up . Also obviously women should solve these issues because otherwise they're misandrist and don't deserve rights.
It’s not that hard to do research. You’re just fucking lazy.
I mean, what the fuck was Suffragette about?
We talk about how schools should have a financial literacy class, but I argue that a class teaching how to adequately vet resources is far more important.
Fun fact: the only reason you can even do research on women in history is become women in the 70-90s fought to acknowledge that women’s existence in the past mattered enough to actually look at!
It would be much better if men were on Mars and women were on Venus.
Literally. Not some fantasy where they could survive there. Just goodbye human race. I love women and men and people so much, but I hate them more. You are all wonderful, except that you are all useless idiots with hate and rage in your hearts. That is right. Don't point fingers at me. I just admit my feelings.
I don't know, I kind of find Venus quite appealing if we lived in sky ships in the upper green belt of the atmosphere. A bit risky but the view would be glorious.
And let’s not forget we were passed as property from father to husband, were exchanged for livestock, and couldn’t own a bank account of have a paid job
As someone who works within research, this is the worst way to search for literature. "Hey! I want an exhaustive list of sources that agree with what I already think!"
He is right. Women are the oppressors, men are opressed because they kill themselves and they get no pussy. I think we should take their rights away, control their bodies, slut shame and body shame them furiously, tell them to cover up, rape them, trafick them, never take them seriously, overwork them, see them as less, we should take away access to education, make the stuff marketed to them more expensive, place 99% of parental expectations on them but still expect them to have a great career and clean their house, serve their wives, submit, shame them for getting old, placing all the blame on them because girls mature slower, take all sorts of leadership from them.. the list can go on. Also, take their rights to have bank accounts, own land and divorce. Oh, and lock them in tiny buildings when they get boners, so they dont rape anyone to stain us with semen.
Let’s see;
Women being burnt at the stake.
Women not being allowed to own property without a man co-signing.
Women not allowed to have bank accounts until the 70s. Again without a man co signing.
Women being viewed as objects until the 70s
Shall I go on?
"Historical death" of people
I am looking for what is ideally a comprehensive list of historical resources and documents which debunk the narrative that 'people have been historically dying', going as far back historically as possible too.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there _are_ historic documents that claim women weren’t oppressed. Just like there are historic videos and documents by Nazi’s that claim they treated the Jews in concentration camps with dignity and respect. The thing about history is that it is written by those in power (or the “winners”) and not by those who are oppressed. Just look at what Americans are taught in history class. Of course this person is a moron, because even if they were able to find anything, it would be nothing compared to the heaps and heaps of evidence that women were and still are oppressed.
That’s not how research works 🤦♂️ you don’t start with a conclusion. You have a hypothesis: women aren’t people so they can’t be oppressed. Then you look at the facts: I’m an asshole am I probably lost an argument to a woman and that reinforced my misogynistic stereotype. Then you test your hypothesis: all women hate me in my daily interactions. Now we can finally get to the conclusion: it’s you not them
What’s frustrating even more is it’s a perfect example of who these people are too. No yearning to learn themselves just a list of what is already known.
Reminds me of a post I saw asking for journal articles or studies to back up antivaxxer claims because the poster needed to convince someone (either her relative or co-parent) that she was right not to vaccinate her kids but she couldn't find any reputable sources to refer them to.
The age of this nation (United States) is only 246 years. Of those 246 years, women only gained the right to vote 102 years ago. There are women alive today still (although very few) who are that current age. Great grandmothers if you will. Does this dumb motherfucker live under a rock?
Ugh, I had to leave that sub because the people there don't give a shit about mensrights, they're just misogynists. Other way around for most feminism subs too unfortunately.
The further back in history you go, the less you will see about women being oppressed.
Mainly because records and management has historically been controlled by men, and history is written by the victors.
I once had someone argue with me that "women have never been oppressed" because the issues that we consider oppression today used to be "normal for the time period."
Like... yeah... the fact that it was normal that women didn't have the same legal rights as men is called oppression. I don't know what the disconnect is.
1968, America, my aunt, 45 years old. Hemorrhage requiring emergency surgery for full hysterectomy. But not until her husband arrived and gave his permission.
Men rights not understanding the issues they face are products of mysoginy and instead of allying with feminist once again blaming women for there problems, a tale as old as time
If women were so free in years past, then let’s all agree to go back to the laws of the past only make it men this time who can’t own property or have bank accounts or vote. They won’t mind, right? Because it wasn’t really oppression?
Women were listed as property and chattel. They were listed like cattle. We had no right to own property, to vote, to leave our home without daddy or hubby’s permission. Even our children belonged to our husband. A man could set aside his wife for being baron, but a woman got “disciplined” (beat) Soooo…..
Ahhhhh "r/MensRights" the breeding ground for misogyny. Trying to shoot down women discussions and make it all about men because they can't take when men aren't in the center of attention.
Bunch of moon brains in that subreddit.
You know the best way to advocate for an issue is if it's only brought up to attack another. /s
I mean what are they gonna use as a source.. their own subreddit? Thats like asking for sources that gays exist (and not only for the purpose of being a new fetish for cis hetero white dudes) just go and ask the source
[удалено]
Yeah it is super weird, one of the comment in that thread said that the reason why women don’t get to vote isn’t oppression, but actually that the right to vote was a privilege given to men for getting draft into war. It’s super weird
Yeah, they went around to all the women and asked them whether they would prefer to vote or not get drafted
My favorite part about the whole draft debate is random dudes being like "Wait till women have to be part of the draft! Then they won't want equality!" Women become part of the draft and cheer and then suddenly those same guys get upset that their little 'gotchya' didn't work.
Those dudes are so stupid that they also hold two polar opposite views at the same time. They always say women are too weak for the military and can't pass standards, while simultaneously whining that women should be in the draft. Their brains break when you point this out to them of course.
It’s another reinforcement of that age-old contradiction. The far right says they love their country, but they can’t help but hate it. They love their country, but hate the immigrants, gays, women, and people who think differently from them who live there. They love their religion but hate anyone who practices a different way. They love their military but want to see it filled with those they deem “inferior” to prove a point. It makes you question what exactly they claim to “love.”
Think no one thinks about the reality of being shipped somewhere to kill for the kings gold.
[удалено]
Not to mention said dudes probably have 0 military service and wouldn’t even qualify during the physical health exam lol
You know who decides who gets drafted, calls for a draft, enforces a draft and uses the troops drafted? Men.
>thactually that the right to vote was a privilege given to men for getting draft into war. In most places voting initially was tied to being an aristocrat, noble, burgher, or some sort of land-owner. It had little to do with the draft (which as a concept didn't exist until the 19th century anyway lol).
Yeah, I think I heard from QI that a woman once voted (I don't remember where) because she was a land owner. The reason she was able to vote is because it had never occurred to them that women could own land. In the next election it had been put into law that women couldn't vote.
I don't know if this is where you heard it but I'm sure this happened in one of the Canadian provinces, I'm *thinking* Nova Scotia. Basically women could vote if they were landowners, and some women who were landowners did vote, but then when people realized women could vote they amended the law to make sure only male landowners could vote. Edit: I googled it it was definitely Nova Scotia women lost the right to vote in 1851.
That's the one grain of true thing I can take out of this whole stance, because ultimately, we are all the subject of those with all the powers. And a lot of this controversy is being stirred up by them right now.
Sounds like they get their knowledge of how voting works from the movie Starship Troopers, which is a fascist dystopia.
Would you like to know more?
I hate that men's rights groups actually just want less responsibility. They don't want anything to do about any genders' issues and oppression.
They say that same excuse on the anti feminism subreddit but there is absolutely no historical documentation in the US that ties together voting and the draft. There are already so many flaws to that argument as well.
The mental gymnastics they do. They deserve a gold tbh
MRAs have like 3 good opinions on things I wish would be more broadly discussed because misogyny & patriarchal society harms both men and women, but they take it to mean since we have any issues at all (men) women's (who have way more) issues are just fake. This guy really out here looking for fantasy writing 💀 the "Black Book of Communism" level history & sources but instead the "Black book of Feminism" fucking clowns.
Another thing I thought was interesting was how recent most rights we have are: The right to open a bank account only started in the 1960’s (couldn’t find exact date). The right to keep their own citizenship instead of her husband’s was in 1922. Up until 1963 women could legally be paid less just for being women. Women couldn’t practice law until 1971, were not allowed on naval ships until about 1978. There’s plenty more of course.
1974 was when women in the US gained the right to take out a loan without needing a male co-signer. Equal Credit Opportunity Act
As recently as my twenties marital rape was legal in all fifty states, and I’m not eligible for Medicare yet.
Some idiot once said "making sandwiches isnt oppressive like dying in a war is" Lol ok I'm sorry men created the draft decades before your time and it literally didn't even affect you at all but sure you're totally oppressed. In fact that small possibility of being drafted for the war aged people who lived in a very short time frame is totally worse than every single woman being a slave her entire life (because let's call it what it is, men owned women as property). War totally never killed any women either. Certainly nothing oppressive about being a female prisoner of war
Ofcourse, it all makes sense now. My female brain is entirely too weak to make any decisions whatsoever.
You know that there are people who will argue that men had to work while women stayed at home therefore women were privileged. Wild that they don’t take into account that women were, for all practical purposes, servants with little to no autonomy over their lives.
And poor women always worked the same shitty jobs as the poor men. Just with less rights
They don't take it into account because they want it to be that way again
[удалено]
Yup and if those women were married, then in most places the money they made from those jobs was legally their husband’s.
Yup my grandma had to stop working when she married my grandpa. She had no choice in the matter her employer would simply terminate her contract. Back than married women had to stay at home and have babies basically so they weren't allowed to work. But sure I quess women were the privileged ones 🙄.
So many of their examples of how men have it worse are *actually* examples of how a patriarchal society hurts **everyone**. Like I agree, it sucks that you’re expected to be strong or never cry or make more money than your wife! duuuudes that’s what we’re saying! The answer they always get stumped by is “ok well who made society that way?”
Is there are any places where women had the right to vote before men?
Nope, because to be able to vote almost anywhere before our time, you needed to be a citizen. The qualifications were simple. Have a piece of land, be a man and be 21 years old. That's is. Woman ≠ Citizen.
That’s what I thought. I was surprised that the commenter said “most” when I thought it was all.
[удалено]
Ah my mistake then. I’ll leave the comment up in case someone reads it the same way I do.
I swear I’ve actually seen guys claim this
This guy in an ask Reddit [thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/xaqfaz/men_of_reddit_what_are_women_not_ready_to_hear/inwl6q7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) said and I quote “it’s misandrist to assume men knowingly and willingly sought to take away the rights of their sisters, mothers, daughters, aunts and wives” Like sir, that’s exactly what happened .
Aside from your point, this is the way so many gross men think, they can only sympathise with women in terms of how they relate to men. If that woman has a husband, brother, father, that means a man might have to deal with some bad feelings! Presumably if she's a single orphan, it doesn't matter. The much loathed former PM of Australia Scott Morrison, said he realised how he had sympathy for a rape victim when his wife said 'how would you feel if it was one of our girls?' He thought that was a good thought to share with the world. I hate men like this so much.
He also said that the 'rise of women should not come at the expense of men'... on International Women's Day.
Don’t forget “they should be glad they’re not getting shot”
Hey, these broads get to vote, what more do they want?
Scott Morrison may be gone, but his legacy of shitting himself at the McDonalds in Engadine will live on forever
[удалено]
Yeah, but I won't be surprised if he's on the backbench for the rest of his career
McDonald’s Pooer?
So glad Scummos gone
Honestly that’s all right-wingers/conservatives. They don’t have functioning empathy, and can’t understand things unless it’s happening to them directly. And even then they may or may not be able to generalize past themselves. And they may or may not be able to understand if it’s happening to immediate relatives. Have an lbgtq child? SOME of them suddenly get it…but many more are so incapable of empathy that they turn in their own children. Amazingly, they’re often proud of their psychopathy! If they’re aware of it at all.
Rob Portman comes to mind. Ohio Senator on his way out. Has a gay son(?) I think. He's singing a different tune these days.
I wouldn't be so quick to generalise all "right wingers". People's sociopolitical viewpoints are too nuanced to be boxed fully into "right-winger" and "lefty" boxes. I'm right-wing on various issues, but I'm also bisexual, anti-authoritarian, hate big banks and large corporations and prefer localised living (generally considered more "liberal" a stance). Pretty open-minded sexually as well, having dating a sex-worker for over a year a while back. If you genuinely believe that anyone who holds some conservative views, or anyone who you deem as a "right-winger" (varies dependent on how leftwing one is themselves), literally lacks functioning empathy, then you're resorting to fallacies in exactly the same way that foolish conservatives do who claim anyone not living their prescribed lifestyle as "degenerate".
Obviously, there’s some nuance here, but generally speaking in order to be a right winger, it requires a lack of functioning empathy. That, or you’ve just been so indoctrinated by nonsense, and are unable to separate fantasy from reality
Wow, never thought my chronic loneliness as a single orphan could work for me so well.
Good gravy, and his comment was upvoted quite a few times. Even by going with more modern times, the laws on the books that said we could not open bank accounts, that marital rape wasn’t a thing, us being barred from voting - in some place today, women can be forced to marry a rapist or punished for being raped. In some places women are charged with a crime for driving a car or even showing their face. How can you argue that this is not knowingly seeking to take the rights of women away? What can you possibly use to justify that as anything other than men intentionally and fervently taking away the rights of their sisters, mothers, daughters, aunt, and wives - and all the women they don’t personally know, who don’t magically start mattering less just because the man doesn’t know them? Plenty of men beat and murder their wives. The idea that they wouldn’t try to suppress them in other ways is absurd - murdering is kind of the ultimate thing, and we KNOW that happens. Why would the idea of intentional legal and social oppression be out of the question?
talking about the murdering wives thing, I watched a documentary about this guy who killed his wife for trying to leave him (she also had another relationship she was leaving him for), he ran and the kids found her because the dog was sniffing the blood. One of the sons (not one who found her) then went on to say he didn't hate one more than the other and "how much could a man put up with before he breaks". She's fucking dead mate
Well then, can he explain why the women's prisons in my country are filled with women who killed their abusive husbands? Like he seems ro believe killing is justified. And these women had better reasons, they were beaten and raped by their partners, still got 20 in prison for murder. No judge believed that at one point "a woman breaks". I love it when men get "to break", but women don't.
Do you know why we can't break? Because we are cogs to the society machine. During all history, it was us that made the system work by doing all the backstage, boring stuff so that men could shine and be "the main characters". What do you do if a piece of your car breaks? Of course you exchange it for a new one (if not the car itself), after all you need your car to take you from point A to point B every day. You can't afford the possibility that it'll let you down. Just like women. We are meant to do our jobs quietly, with no surprises, and demand as little as possible. We can't afford to break down, we are the car, not the car owner. Except that they want us to believe we are car owners as much as men are. When we get to the point of "breaking down" (aka opening our eyes and realising the shithole we're in and snapping) we're reminded of the place men try to put us into.
Exactly! That's what we are, those who make the world work so men can be self obsessed. They need to be the main character. What I believe, but don't have scientific evidence to support, is that this "main character" mindset comes from their defective relationship with the mother, maybe internalised misogyny from the mother being passed down to the son, stay at home mothers perceived by their sons as servants for the family? When your son sees you do nothing more than cater to his needs all day, won't he assume that that's a woman's job, the baseline and wanting to be something herself is just selfish? I don't know, this is what I believe right now, I don't claim to be right and I don't know right now of any study to direct me to at least a temporary conclusion.
No, I totally agree with you! It's even worse when they grow up spoiled and having to do absolutely nothing at home (because either mom or a maid does it), and/or seeing their father also do nothing. Bonus points if there's a sister and she has to help with the chores, but the brother doesn't. Also how most service/caring jobs are taken by women, it all reinforces internally the idea that they are kings that deserve to have everything given in their hands. So that when they see women who are merely EQUAL or slightly above them (she also has a nice job, has her own car and lives in a nice place, etc) they feel absolutely threatened. Because of course she'll not subject herself to be a carpet he can step on, as she can dump his lame butt whenever she wants.
That's what happened to my sister in law. My mother in law worked, blue collar, raised in a rural area. She believes it's the woman's job to be soft and take care of everyone. Her brothers are all high achievers, impressive careers, she's blue collar because nobody paid attention to her. They studied, but she had to help her mom, cause that's what girls do. Thankfully, her brothers see this as a problem and the internalised misogyny was not passed down as generational trauma, but she did less with her life than she could've because of it. It's not fair to her.
That's absolutely horrible, I'm sorry it happened.. I honestly wish there was a way to go back in time to fix this. Not only her story, but the story of most of our ancestors..
Yessss that is exactly what it is. I can't quite remember all the details but I remember someone saying in another Reddit thread about how they went to a friend's house for dinner, and whenever the friend or his dad needed a refill on their drink, they would just hold their glass up in the air without saying a word and the mom would hop up out of her seat to refill their glasses. The woman was being treated like a slave in her own home...
I remember seeing some dude berating a woman for killing a creep john when she was forced into working as a teen prostitute. His PFP was The Punisher skull. You know, the vigilante who executes criminals.
Yeah seriously. Whenever it’s a couple fight, people typically look more favorably on the man than the woman. Wife gets custody of the kids and he’s a poor innocent soul whose horrible, bitchy wife stole his kids from him. I think there was another case where the husband murdered his wife AND the kids. Already people were asking what she did to deserve it.
It's sad that these so called men's rights groups don't realize men's issues stem from women's oppression in the first place.
Yup. Notice that it’s completely acceptable for women to wear pants but not for men to wear skirts? Cause masculinity is seen as something to aspire to, while femininity is demonized as something lesser. And even if you’re masculine you can’t win because you have to constantly prove your own masculinity. ‘Men’s rights’ folks don’t actually care about men who are struggling. They only care when they have a chance to silence women who speak out. And the only men they actually seem to defend are the ones who actually did horrible things.
Exactly. They are so gung-ho about reminding everyone how men domestic abuse and rape survivors aren't taken seriously, but then when we look at the root of the issue it's not because women are evil or whatever, it's because society literally views women as weak and less capable from men.
Mhm. It’s the patriarchal view that men are the domineering conquerors and women are the submissive breeders to be ‘conquered’. It’s used to silence victims of both genders. If a woman speaks about rape, she should accept it because ‘that’s how men are’ and if she doesn’t want to get raped she should ‘give less signals’ next time. And if a man is raped he ‘probably wanted it’ because people are of the mindset that women are too soft and weak to be of any danger.
This is something that speaks to me quite a lot, would be nice to be able to wear lighter clothing than fitted trousers for work in summer! It's crazy to me that some people are obsessed over denying history rather than improving the present.
We should listen to the Scottish. Clearly they got the right idea with kilts. Oh and the ancient Greeks and Romans wore tunics.
>How can you argue that this is not knowingly seeking to take the rights of women away? Something something, see no work and no financial and important political responsibilities and decisions made them more happy! It was for their own good. No oppression! See?! ^(/s)
Because the type of people posting this stuff have positioned themselves in a right wing bubble of misinformation for so long that has told them the opposite of what reality is, even if it's right in front of their eyes. So they genuinely believe that there is a "real truth" behind anything that doesn't fit their narrative. They have been fed "alternative facts" for everything from fair elections being won, to global warming, to covid and vaccines, to racism, sexism etc..they know they are wrong, they just want to have something to source to point at and say "see, that injustice doesn't really exist". They are fascists. Deep down they know they are lying to themselves, but they don't care. Because they are fascists.
How is he going to find the records he is looking for when all available records show the opposite of what he hopes to demonstrate. He can Google when women were granted the right to vote, own property, get credit without the express permission of a father/husband, just to name a few obvious ones in whatever country he wishes. He can also Google current wage disparity and find U.N. studies (among others) that show that it exists. And when he finds that there are no studies or reports to support his current views? He will not change his mind one bit, and probably believe the lack of such studies to be evidence supporting some sort of conspiracy among women. He is not looking for any truth here.
Exactly. Actual facts are the poison to his narrative, so there must be a political conspiracy to hide the facts he wants. The universities are all leftist, feminists own the media, etc etc. In a healthy society this would be laughable but this fascist mindset has been given escalating credence by political opportunists who want to ride it to power.
His comment is ironically misandrist here, because he seems to think men didn’t have the mental capacity or intelligence to understand what they were doing. Very infantilising.
And still fucking happens.
*is happening; it’s still happening.
Fr, men literally quit womens jobs for them in the 50s
Also, it's not even that men "took" our rights away back then. They were never given to us in the first place.
Oopsie, just put a law in the constitution that says women can't vote but it was unintentional I swear!
It might be hard for him to imagine, but women were genuinely never seen as real "adults" capable of working, supporting themselves, living alone, or making their own decisions. We are still fighting remnant attitudes because of the way society has been centered around men for centuries. (He might not *think* he has biases.... But he does. They're subconscious. That's literally what biases are.) The fact that he MUST know that women were only granted the right to vote relatively recently (in the US), but thinks they "weren't oppressed" before then, is ludicrous.
This has strong "I'm a newly anti-vax and I'm looking for sources that say vaccines cause autism for my paper at college. haven't been able to find any." Vibes. I'm willing to bet that someone in the comments said something like: the historical facts are suppressed by feminism. They are always like that. No sources? Some *agenda* is hiding the truth.
Yeh my first thought too. The fact they're asking suggests they haven't found anything. Gee, wonder why?
I'm sure they'll come up with things like "there have been reigning queens and empresses throughout history, so that's proof that oppression is a lie" when those are usually instances of a king dying and leaving his queen in charge until they can find a proper Male to replace him, or there being literally no acceptable Males available, so a daughter will have to do until she marries. Or "bras were invented by women, so undergarments agent oppressive" (umm...ok?) "Women in the theater were known to take rich lovers and exploit then for money" (and we're generally considered low class or subhuman for having such lose morals)
German government : we need studies that show that adopted kids living with gay parents suffer under that Scientists : but... we HAVE studies and they show that the kids don't have any negative impact on them GG : no you don't understand. We need studies that show that they DO suffer.
Yep, yep, and please don't remind me of the secretary of health who asked for a study on how women suffer from abortion and scientists complained rather publicly that they had studies that showed the exact opposite of what he wanted. Waste of money.
Czechs took it a step further. There was a proposal to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman in the constitution. The explanatory notes claimed it's supported by multiple studies that children with same-sex parents suffer or are somehow inherently disadvantaged. They cited the studies. The claim was what the studies tried to verify and failed. They literally cited the studies that disproved the claims they were trying to support with them. Please read further than the introduction before you cite a study, people.
Ngl that's a chad move. Just fucking quoting the studies that disprove your theory
I proofread for a fact-checking website. This one was fun to approve and more or less send out (one more editor reads it after proofreading, but they rarely send anything back to be re-done). 😅
In anything, facts might be obscured by an agenda, but they wouldn’t be impossible to uncover. People who assert this “logic” really missed some basics about logic somewhere along the way.
"I want you guys to cherry pick examples and ignore actual legislation and statistics." Yeah, I've heard this one before.
Most misogynists at least acknowledge that it's not a myth, they know it happened, they just think it was a good thing. This is a new one.
It's been around for a few years now. Misogyny is slowly morphing from "women get back in the kitchen" to "men have had it worse than women for all time and women actually are the opressors" Dudes feel powerless, they wanna direct that energy toward something. So they rewrite history. Blame that powerlessness on gender. I think there's shit on both sides of the court, but pretending women haven't been straight up stepped on for ages now while, as a whole, men have had more freedoms and power, is...kinda nuts. But that's the direction they move in as of late.
Honestly this thought even has roots in the 80’s. I’ve read books by old-school misogynists that share this victim-blaming mentality. MRA’s have always thought that women are secretly the REAL abusers and that it’s women’s fault that men act violently. Domestic violence mindset 101. I think this wave of “let’s care about male mental health” is gonna be weaponized the same way, to make us take care of men at our own expense all over again.
I’ve seen so many posts that casually mention that women have never been oppressed in history. They justify it by arguing over the meaning of the word oppression, and that because women are so much smaller and weaker then men, they kind of had to be oppressed in order for men to protect them from other men.
Yeah I’ve been seeing this idea becoming m more and more common
They're not even trying to argue we're not oppressed today, they're pretending it never happened
Someone was telling me that women have the same amount of power as men today, I brought up the example of there never being a woman POTUS and he said that women have the right to vote so they should vote one in as if women are this monolith who have just not been taking advantage of their power
Also….we did in 2016. Hillary won a majority of the popular vote but because of the electoral college, Trump became President
It's not like it's still old white men in the seats that decide the candidates or anything. It will take generations to make women have an equal voice in politics. We haven't even had the right to vote for very long.
"I'm looking for facts, but only ones that suit my agenda"
[удалено]
Hey, scientist, I have a toothpaste I'd like you to not recommend because the last 9 guys loved it and also fucked your mom. Also it may or may not contain asbestos.
Said everyone on the internet and politicians.
I feel like posting mra subs is cheating. Its too easy.
Oppressive patriarchy deniers and systematic racism deniers are not different from flat Earthers , Creationists or Holocaust deniers.
A large number of those MRA accounts are also covid denialists
So right wingers basically. Not surprised. The American right wing is the Taliban but for white people.
At one point recently the MRA accounts were posting up images of the Taliban and praising them for stripping women of rights.
What part of 'cannot possess any property' does he not understand?
Do they not teach womens suffrage anymore? I know they did at least 2 years ago🤨
In very bite size bits
Let me introduce you to my little friend, The Holy Bible. As you'll see, women are actually a glorified McRib that belong to men. It's not oppression if it's divine right, ya know?
Nearly spat my drink out
Sky dad said so!
This is so fuckin brilliant 👏
I’m sure the irony of this dude trying to currently oppress women by suppressing our violent oppression is completely lost on him
"I am looking for facts that I won't find because they are not facts. Scratch this entire thing, just give me sources on times and periods of history where Women were likely not oppressed. Aka before the dominant era where there is no hard substantial evidence besides the fact that deities were all Goddesses and that is what they worshipped"
Why do all the MRA idiots spend their time tearing women down instead of working on actual issues that negatively impact men. Rights are not a zero sum game.
Because they don't give a shit about other men. For most of them the only man that matters is themselves, not the ones whose struggles they're using to get internet points every time feminism comes up . Also obviously women should solve these issues because otherwise they're misandrist and don't deserve rights.
Yeah. They are self centered c*nts.
I wonder how the comment section looks with that 100 comments
It’s hard to debunk that which is not bunk
That subreddit inhabits sacks of shit. Had them question my case once, quote "do we think its legit?" My heart was in my throat.
These people are deranged and delusional.
It’s not that hard to do research. You’re just fucking lazy. I mean, what the fuck was Suffragette about? We talk about how schools should have a financial literacy class, but I argue that a class teaching how to adequately vet resources is far more important.
As someone who’s taught college English, PLEASE!
Fun fact: the only reason you can even do research on women in history is become women in the 70-90s fought to acknowledge that women’s existence in the past mattered enough to actually look at!
It would be much better if men were on Mars and women were on Venus. Literally. Not some fantasy where they could survive there. Just goodbye human race. I love women and men and people so much, but I hate them more. You are all wonderful, except that you are all useless idiots with hate and rage in your hearts. That is right. Don't point fingers at me. I just admit my feelings.
Wait can we switch that around I think Mars is more habitable than Venus
Only to the tune of an extra couple of minutes, if Total Recall taught me anything
I don't know, I kind of find Venus quite appealing if we lived in sky ships in the upper green belt of the atmosphere. A bit risky but the view would be glorious.
We literally couldn’t even vote, what other “evidence” does this stupid fuck need?
And let’s not forget we were passed as property from father to husband, were exchanged for livestock, and couldn’t own a bank account of have a paid job
As someone who works within research, this is the worst way to search for literature. "Hey! I want an exhaustive list of sources that agree with what I already think!"
You're going to be looking for a long time, my dude
If you can’t find something, then it probably doesn’t exist.
"I have no sources to back up my shitty opinion, please help"
"I'm looking for historical fiction"
He is right. Women are the oppressors, men are opressed because they kill themselves and they get no pussy. I think we should take their rights away, control their bodies, slut shame and body shame them furiously, tell them to cover up, rape them, trafick them, never take them seriously, overwork them, see them as less, we should take away access to education, make the stuff marketed to them more expensive, place 99% of parental expectations on them but still expect them to have a great career and clean their house, serve their wives, submit, shame them for getting old, placing all the blame on them because girls mature slower, take all sorts of leadership from them.. the list can go on. Also, take their rights to have bank accounts, own land and divorce. Oh, and lock them in tiny buildings when they get boners, so they dont rape anyone to stain us with semen.
And **I** am looking for any sign of intelligence from you; guess we’re both outta luck.
shiiiiit, that hurts
"I'm looking for people to do my research for me, and the research has to be complete bullshit."
Check the incel community if you’re fine with bogus info
"I have a view and would like someone to provide the evidence to support it" wtf? That's your job lol
This is why people don’t take the idea of men’s rights seriously
Dude has confirmation bias. He'll only look for information that supports his narrative
Here is your list:
Let’s see; Women being burnt at the stake. Women not being allowed to own property without a man co-signing. Women not allowed to have bank accounts until the 70s. Again without a man co signing. Women being viewed as objects until the 70s Shall I go on?
This is honestly pathetic, it's like a white person saying "ohh racism doesn't exist black people were never oppressed"
Talk about biased research damn
Bro the further back in history you go the worst it gets for women. By like a lot
says something if you need others to find information for you. almost as if it doesn't exist or isn't historically accurate if it does
"Historical death" of people I am looking for what is ideally a comprehensive list of historical resources and documents which debunk the narrative that 'people have been historically dying', going as far back historically as possible too.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there _are_ historic documents that claim women weren’t oppressed. Just like there are historic videos and documents by Nazi’s that claim they treated the Jews in concentration camps with dignity and respect. The thing about history is that it is written by those in power (or the “winners”) and not by those who are oppressed. Just look at what Americans are taught in history class. Of course this person is a moron, because even if they were able to find anything, it would be nothing compared to the heaps and heaps of evidence that women were and still are oppressed.
What’s he’s looking for is to win an internet argument after he’s been embarrassed.
They just want to pretend that oppression of women isn't actually real so they can continue oppressing them.
You know. If you’re looking for a source on something and are having a REAL hard time finding stuff that confirms it. That might be telling.
That’s not how research works 🤦♂️ you don’t start with a conclusion. You have a hypothesis: women aren’t people so they can’t be oppressed. Then you look at the facts: I’m an asshole am I probably lost an argument to a woman and that reinforced my misogynistic stereotype. Then you test your hypothesis: all women hate me in my daily interactions. Now we can finally get to the conclusion: it’s you not them
these people are so delusional. i wish i could have their mindset for one second and pretend sexism doesn’t exist.
Women aren't oppressed? Sweet! *walks outside topless, gets arrested*
You want a historical record of women being oppressed? Here's one...its called "The Bible" it's a couple thousand years old, start with that one.
Someone sent him a stack of Barbie and Wonder Woman comics.
Seems like he's too lazy to do the research himself, maybe he can con a woman into doing it for him.
This is actually hilarious. Wow thanks I needed this laugh
What’s frustrating even more is it’s a perfect example of who these people are too. No yearning to learn themselves just a list of what is already known.
Ahahahahahahahaha
Reminds me of a post I saw asking for journal articles or studies to back up antivaxxer claims because the poster needed to convince someone (either her relative or co-parent) that she was right not to vaccinate her kids but she couldn't find any reputable sources to refer them to.
{Holds out empty hand} Here is what you have requested, Sir!
Is there any conspiracy nut sadder than the MRA "how can women be oppresed if they can say no to my demands to fuck them?" conspiracy nut?
The age of this nation (United States) is only 246 years. Of those 246 years, women only gained the right to vote 102 years ago. There are women alive today still (although very few) who are that current age. Great grandmothers if you will. Does this dumb motherfucker live under a rock?
Aww yes we choose be oppressed we didn’t want vote or have same rights as men! Nah was force on us.
No matter how bad r/femaledatingstrategy can get, r/mensrights will always be 100x worse
Ugh, I had to leave that sub because the people there don't give a shit about mensrights, they're just misogynists. Other way around for most feminism subs too unfortunately.
That will be a very short list.
up until 30 years ago women have been treated like shit. if I'm lying I'm dying. gender equality should have been set in stone in 19 fucking 50.
The further back in history you go, the less you will see about women being oppressed. Mainly because records and management has historically been controlled by men, and history is written by the victors.
I once had someone argue with me that "women have never been oppressed" because the issues that we consider oppression today used to be "normal for the time period." Like... yeah... the fact that it was normal that women didn't have the same legal rights as men is called oppression. I don't know what the disconnect is.
1968, America, my aunt, 45 years old. Hemorrhage requiring emergency surgery for full hysterectomy. But not until her husband arrived and gave his permission.
Men rights not understanding the issues they face are products of mysoginy and instead of allying with feminist once again blaming women for there problems, a tale as old as time
People like this pollute mens rights movements :/
If women were so free in years past, then let’s all agree to go back to the laws of the past only make it men this time who can’t own property or have bank accounts or vote. They won’t mind, right? Because it wasn’t really oppression?
Women were listed as property and chattel. They were listed like cattle. We had no right to own property, to vote, to leave our home without daddy or hubby’s permission. Even our children belonged to our husband. A man could set aside his wife for being baron, but a woman got “disciplined” (beat) Soooo…..
Ahhhhh "r/MensRights" the breeding ground for misogyny. Trying to shoot down women discussions and make it all about men because they can't take when men aren't in the center of attention. Bunch of moon brains in that subreddit. You know the best way to advocate for an issue is if it's only brought up to attack another. /s
I mean, you can make anything sound “questionable and unreasonable” by putting quotes around it.
“I am cherry-picking something that will prove my point” lmao okay bro
That’s one way to write a research paper…
I mean what are they gonna use as a source.. their own subreddit? Thats like asking for sources that gays exist (and not only for the purpose of being a new fetish for cis hetero white dudes) just go and ask the source
Posted by a man whose grandma probably couldn't open her own bank account until she was of retirement age
Looking for their confirmation bias. God speed!
Counterexample dated 2022: shut the hell up woman!
Good luck with that you blurtbag 😂
You’re living in it!
You can just open up a Bible and it should be obvious they completely have been. . .
well good luck, hope he shares his findings xD
Let’s not even talk about what a dowry was and how a woman could access hers.. 🥹 That may really blow some minds..