What types of inequality do men face?

Question

ps. I know you are going to say in the court room and all that... but it was men who started this women being the weaker s*x thing and it is men who continue it. It's men who thought that a women's position is a housewife and childbearer, and it's men that continue it.

Answer 1

Sometimes men get royally shafted when it comes to divorces and child custody.  There is such a heavy bias over in the US(Australia has had this too) and no reason why it can't be fairer.

Genuine cases of fathers not being able to see their children or even being left penniless.  Some fathers commit suicide over this.  This is not fair at all.  We all have fathers, brothers, uncles, etc........Why not care about their rights?  

That is just one example but the point is, holding a grudge against men today  because of inequality of women in the past is not going to move things forward, it will just create greater division between the sexes.  That is not good for society as a whole.  

A fair few men do not have a good opinion of western women anymore and to look at the long-term effect, that wouldn't be good.  If anything, society will go backwards.  Cause and effect.

Women shouldn't have to be submissive anymore or lose human rights, just make things more balanced by caring about men's rights as well as our own.

Edit- The male circumcision issue really bugs me too.  Feminists care so much about FGM and rightly so, but thousands of boy babies are being painfully mutilated every year and no-one cares.

Answer 2

Cocaine's a helluv a drug.

Answer 3

It's a power struggle - pure and simple. People who don't like any kind of power taken away will do things that are sometimes extreme to make sure it isn't.

Until we learn to stop the arm-wrestling c**p about who is better and whatnot and realize we are all doing the best we can with what we got, we'll be able to get along. A little.

Answer 4

"""but it was men who started this women being the weaker s*x thing and it is men who continue it. It's men who thought that a women's position is a housewife and childbearer, and it's men that continue it."""

It wasn't men who started it, it was survival.   Time were difficult back then,  survival depended on the roles that were assigned to men and women.

Answer 5

Men worked and women stayed home because someone needed to take care of the kids.   A couple generations ago,  many jobs were dangerous and required a lot of upper body strength & there was no PC nonsense pretending women could perform at the same level.

It just made sense that men worked and women didn't.  Men weren't "keeping women down."

The market dictated the workforce.

Stop listening to the "victimhood" crowd.  You're getting an extremely slanted take on history.

Here's some inequalities men face.

-Women can legally opt out of parenthood... Men can't.

-Women can have "women-only" scholarships and school programs... Men can't.

-Women have affirmative action.

-Women have easier admittance tests in the military and some firefighting/police tests.

-Women win child custody the majority of cases.

-Men get hammered in divorce cases.

-Women get lighter jail sentences for the same crimes.

-More government funding is spent on women's health than on men's health.

-VAWA and the sexist notion that only men abuse.  (the title alone sends a very sexist message for "domestic violence."  That was no accident.)

-Feminist assaults on the male image covering everything from false DV/rape stats to fear of male power (the dreaded "patriarchy.")

Answer 6

LOL, men did NOT start this "women are weaker" thing, it was physiology. A man can lift greater weights than females, can run faster, swim quicker, and withstand worse poisons.

This is simply physiology.

Now, go back to the Bad Old Days, and you would see a whole lot of women with Early Onset Osteoporosis, caused  by a really bad diet, low in things like calcium and iodine salts (iodine helps the thyroid, which, in turn, helps the bones receive their correct dose of calcium, or so it seems)  

Osteoporosis can be reviewed here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteoporosi...

Anyone - male or female - with brittle bones had better NOT do much in terms of hard physical activity, or they really will break bones.

Look here for the risk factors contributing to osteoporosis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteoporosi...

One of these risk factors for osteoporosis is moderate-to-excessive alcohol consumption. Couple any level of alcohol intake with a calcium-poor diet, and you have a recipe for having bones that look like Swiss Cheese. Remember how women were (once) frowned upon if they drank alcoholic drinks? NOW do you understand why?

So, the idea of "women being weaker" was not some horrible sexist ideology, but really was a reflection of life as it was, before modern "male-based" medicine.

So, what areas are men unequal? Try medicine.

In the average Western Country (like the US, for example) the Feminists regularly fulminate that "only" 20% of the health budget is devoted exclusively to female health problems. How DARE MEN allow such a LOW LEVEL of funding !!!!

Then, we find out in the SMALL PRINT that the amount of money spent on MEN'S health exclusively is less than 5% of the overall and dropping. In some Western Countries that spending is dropping towards 1% of overall medical budgets. The rest, if you haven't guessed, is on GENERIC medicine, as both genders get some common diseases - skin cancers, soft tissue injury that sort of thing.

NOW, imagine it was revealed that men had 20 TIMES more money spent on them, in terms of the overall health budget. WHY, the outcry would be heard on the Moon! "Discrimination against women! Sexism!"

Yet, when it is revealed that the Feminists protests at being offended that women "merely" get between 5 to 20 TIMES the amount of health budgets that is spent on men, this is seen as OK. Well, men don't think about their own health, therefore they deserve less spending on themselves, HUH!

But look at it the other way - in spite of such a wretchedly low level of funding,  most men attain a level of functional healthiness. Not, perhaps, the best of health, but enough to allow them to continue day-to-day tasks. They attain this level of health for 1/20th the cost of a female.

What about the domestic division of work? Well, both men and women worked VERY close to the home, until the suburbanisation after the Second World War. Most men worked within walking distance of their homes - that expensive crummy time-consuming frustrating commute did not start until the 1950's and the late 1950's at that.  Before, if men had to travel far from the home, they went by something called a "trolley car" or an "interurban" (electric train).

But , when the "division of labour" statistics are drawn up, consistently, the studies do NOT take into account that commute, which is mostly faced by men. Thus we see that the men (supposedly) do less work than a woman to support a family. If we take into account the commute, then men do MORE work than women, to support a family. Once again, the studies are skilfully shifted and certain vital bits of data are left out to make sure that women can use these studies to bash men with.

So, whose idea WAS it that women stay in the house and be the "housewife" and childbearer?

Um, it was physiology. Once again, it has only been recently that more people have lived in cities than in rural areas. So, too, with industry - until VERY recently, there were more "blue collar" (heavy industrial) jobs than white-collar (office-based) jobs. Because a woman's propensity to osteoporosis, among many other health complaints, heavy lifting was not advisable for them.

So, along come the Politically Correct and insist that the *job* be changed. For example, cement, a heavy substance, used to be packaged in 40 kilogram bags in Australia. Women found they could not lift the bags, because they were too heavy. But rather than admit this, the "authorities" made the cement manufacturers re-package the cement in 20 kilogram bags, thus halving the weight, while doubling the amount of packaging needed, doubling the handling (a person using the cement needs to get two bags, not one, to do the same job), doubling the waste (two bags thrown away instead of one) and doubling the costs of bagging the cement.

In this age of reducing waste, this is a prime example of reality (waste reduction,  by having 40 kilogram bags of cement) coming second best to Feminist-inspired Political Correctness.

So, given that the needs of the few female brick layers and female builders outweighed the needs of the planet, it shows how females have to alter the reality by intimidating men - so why did women end up in the home?

For the same reason that we ended up with 20 kilogram sacks of cement - because that was the way females were most comfortable with.

When females STOPPED being comfortable with it, then Society was dragged through the long process of ignoring the reality (of osteoporosis, among MANY other things that made women vastly unsuited to heavy industry, for example). Instead we have this game of charades, these days, where women are treated with kid gloves instead of being made to do equal things with men - like lifting the heavy weights that men are required to lift.

THAT'S equality. No wonder so many women reject it. Because it's difficult.

Answer 7

You're not open minded at all.

Answer 8

Boys education. It has been asked for years whether the teaching method is targeted towards girls more than boys. About 30% of boys are under achieving and are just being the blame and labelled with ADHD or the new craze - bipolar.

Boys upbringing. Although this would be extremley hard to resolve, boys are expected to not cry and bottle up emotions. As well as not to hit women under any circumstances. The stereotypes that they are raised with deeply affect the ubringing of the child. This all depends on the surroundings though.

Circumsision. No health beneift and it is the male form of female genital mutiliation. It must really cause the baby pain and they can't speak for themselves. Most cases are performed without anistetic.

I'll edit this when i think of more.

Answer 9

Lifespan. We get some shoddy life expectancies.

If this is your idea of being open minded, you've got a long ways to go. I somehow doubt your sincerity based off of your first piece of writing.

Answer 10

You're at least partially right that men created the whole idea of the "weaker" s*x.  Patriarchy is a h**l of a drug.  However, patriarchy doesn't only limit women's opportunities (and I'd argue that it is advanced by women as well as men, as strange as that sounds - not fighting it is supporting it, and not all women are feminists).  

Your example of the family court system is an excellent example.  Patriarchy often negatively affects individual men's rights.  

Other examples would be in the world of sport.  Certain sports are traditionally restricted to women.  Think about gymnastics - we see ribbon events for women, but not men.  Another case is synchronized swimming - Bill May was named U.S. Synchronized Swimming Athlete of the Year in 1998 and 1999, but was barred from competing in international events by FINA (the international swimming federation).

In the press we see all sorts of inequality too, capitalizing on stereotypes of masculinity (yes, again, borne from this patriarchal superstructure).  s*x abuse at schools - women having s*x with boys is often laughed at; men having s*x with girls is immediately considered rape (ignoring the "statutory" nature of them both for a minute) - this conundrum was even the basis for an episode of South Park.