Support NeoGAF

[Koodo]

I will not ignore the imbalance in ability at logic and mathematics that I see anecdotally at my school until you present me with evidence otherwise.

I'm not sure you've noticed the large frying pan of irony that's currently residing over your tender scalp, so I'll point it out for you: that a "scientist" is using anecdotal evidence as anything but a mere musing is hysterical and bordering on embarrassing, for you and the institution that didn't teach you to never make hard claims using anecdotal evidence.

Anecdotally speaking, the top engineering student at my school was a female, as were most of the brilliant minds in that department. See how that works, cupcake?

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

They'll have to be black presidents, because you'll need to enslave a few generations of white people in the name of equality. Then you can explain to the kids born into a lifetime of slavery how the discrimination all evens out when you average it over 500 years.

...I really should never have returned to check on this thread. Some of these arguments (on both sides) just make me angry.

You're the one comparing the idea of us publicly electing 40 straight women presidents to enslaving white people as revenge fantasy. No one is suggesting we should mandate it. I'm mentioning how it's a weird idea so people have perspective on how we've normalized men being in power.

I get what you're trying to say, but we're smart humans and can understand the nuances in these situations without needing to make every idea a binary operation.

 

[Seeds]

Isn't that what they do say? That's always been my understanding of it. The idea they have to defend men is pretty dumb

Equality for all suggests that they would have to defend men too.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Equality for all suggests that they would have to defend men too.

They do.

 

[Mars]

I'm not sure you've noticed the large frying pan of irony that's currently residing over your tender scalp, so I'll point it out for you: that a "scientist" is using anecdotal evidence as anything but a mere musing is hysterical and bordering on embarrassing, for you and the institution that didn't teach you to never make hard claims using anecdotal evidence.

Anecdotally speaking, the top engineering student at my school was a female, as were most of the brilliant minds in that department. See how that works, cupcake?

How is that irony? I am saying that their anecdotes are not superior to my anecdotes, and I should not be forced to convert from my unsupported facts to their unsupported facts.

You mirror perfectly the subhumans that berated me in my sociology class for asking questions like this, though. You are the carbon copy of every religious idiot in history that called for the burning of witches and heretics, and you probably even think you're ever so without religious bias. Fuck you, do not call me cupcake, and do not support the teaching of what are potentially lies to myself and my generation.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

How is that irony? I am saying that their anecdotes are not superior to my anecdotes, and I should not be forced to convert from my unsupported facts to their unsupported facts.

You mirror perfectly the subhumans that berated me in my sociology class for asking questions like this, though. You are the carbon copy of every religious idiot in history that called for the burning of witches and heretics, and you probably even think you're ever so without religious bias. Fuck you, do not call me cupcake, and do not support the teaching of what are potentially lies to myself and my generation.

haha, this happened.

 

[TCRS]

When did we appoint nine women judges serving at the same time?

What makes you think men and women are any different when it comes to being a justice to where you'd say it isn't "geared towards female judges"?

Typo, I obviously meant against. Other than that I don't understand what you're trying to say. There can come a time when nine female judges are presiding, but until that has happened there is inequality and we need quotas and laws? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The point of feminism, as far as I know (and can support), is to create an equal playing field. When that already exists what is the point of quotas and why do there HAVE to be nine female judges?

 

[Tim the Wiz]

Guys why is it okay for racial minorities to have "pride" but when I go on a White Pride march everyone gets upset??

Historical context.

 

[Necromanti]

Anecdotally speaking, the top engineering student at my school was a female, as were most of the brilliant minds in that department. See how that works, cupcake?

To be entirely fair, he was drunk at the time, which would impact any logical and rational reasoning at the time of him writing the post. Basing an argument upon emotions on top of that is seldom a solid foundation, anyhow.

 

[Slavik81]

You're the one comparing the idea of us publicly electing 40 straight women presidents to enslaving white people as revenge fantasy. I get what you're trying to say, but we're smart humans and can understand the nuances in these situations without needing to make every idea a binary operation.

I used a larger injustice to highlight the ridiculousness of perpetuating injustice in the name of equality. Unless you think it was not an injustice that no women were president in the past, the difference is irrelevant.

The women who might have deserved to be president back in the 1800s, 1800s and early 1900s are dead. You cannot make it up to them. The only thing that can be done is to be fair to those who live today.

There's an argument to be made for quotas that ensure equality, but there is none for those that enforce injustice.

Yeah, but if you'd never clicked on this thread, then you would never have made me laugh by conflating electing female presidents with enslaving white people.

It's reductio ad absurdum.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Typo, I obviously meant against. Other than that I don't understand what you're trying to say. There can come a time when nine female judges are presiding, but until that has happened there is inequality and we need quotas and laws? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The point of feminism, as far as I know (and can support), is to create an equal playing field. When that already exists what is the point of quotas and why do there HAVE to be nine female judges?

Well you're coming at this from a flawed starting place. I'm not aware of feminism being concerned with laws over making sure we understand and acknowledge privileges.

 

[Surreal]

That is what they say.

But according to this definition on the first page (which may or may not be correct, it seems the true definition of feminism is a bit illusive) feminism is first and foremost:

1.the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

...which seems to be reflective of the claims promoting feminism that I've heard in my experience.

If you're going to support that definition, then you're kind of promising that you're against a male's "political, economic, and social" inequalities too. Which feminists ARE, but the problem is because feminists take little action about it, people ask, "You support me in theory, but you're not really doing anything. Do you really support me?"

I'm just trying to provide a perspective here, so sorry if I'm totally off.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Fuck femenists. I hate femenists they are the most PC crowd of all time. All right ladies I'm all for equal pay and equal rights but be able to take a fucking joke withouth calling me a mysoginist

You sound like my roommate who annoys the shit out of me when it comes to anything regarding discussing women. You have no right to dictate what is and isn't allowed to offend someone.

 

[Rhomega Beta]

I'm for it, as long as it doesn't turn them into a bunch of man-haters.

 

[Seeds]

They do.

Unfortunately, many feel they do so as an afterthought. Like focusing on breast cancer and ignoring prostate cancer.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Equality for all suggests that they would have to defend men too.

Men are disproportionately favored in most meaningful aspects of society. Until that's not the case, there is no need for us men to be "defended". These are petty excuses used by people who are afraid of relinquishing privilege in favor of fairness.

 

[Mars]

And... just like in real life, my points get ignored and I get laughed at. Perfect. Well, to answer the thread title, the happenings in this thread illustrate my thoughts on feminism. Bring up rational argument, take a personal insult, fight back and get laughed at.

 

[Vermillion]

And... just like in real life, my points get ignored and I get laughed at. Perfect. Well, to answer the thread title, the happenings in this thread illustrate my thoughts on feminism. Bring up rational argument, take a personal insult, fight back and get laughed at.

You oughta calm down, mang. Step back a second, let the topic flow for a bit, and then respond.

 

[Necromanti]

And... just like in real life, my points get ignored and I get laughed at. Perfect. Well, to answer the thread title, the happenings in this thread illustrate my thoughts on feminism. Bring up rational argument, take a personal insult, fight back and get laughed at.

To be fair, I believe that only one person used the term "subhuman" to refer to a group that they disagreed with ideologically. It's easy to get heated up, but it is never conducive to effective dialogue. Your argument could have used more cogency.

 

[Real Hero]

Men are disproportionately favored in most meaningful aspects of society. Until that's not the case, there is no need for us men to be "defended". These are petty excuses used by people who are afraid of relinquishing privilege in favor of fairness.

Exactly this

 

[Mars]

To be fair, I believe that only one person used the term "subhuman" to refer to a group that they disagreed with ideologically. It's easy to get heated up, but it is never conducive to effective dialogue. Your argument could have used more cogency.

I identify humans as creatures with the capability of rational thought. These people were not capable of rational thought, they instinctively attacked my carefully and tactfully-made question as though I was committing a crime.

Anyway yes, I should calm down and step away, but I hope you can understand the anger of a logic-based person in these situations. University is supposed to be a place where people like me can feel free to express their opinions and engage in rational conversation, and I like to think that NeoGAF is as well. Anyway, bed time I suppose...

 

[captainnapalm]

To be fair, I believe that only one person used the term "subhuman" to refer to a group that they disagreed with ideologically. It's easy to get heated up, but it is never conducive to effective dialogue. Your argument could have used more cogency.

He freely admitted his evidence was anecdotal, then got attacked by a ludicrously patronizing post that berated him for trying to pass it off as hard evidence, which he never did.

 

[Seeds]

Men are disproportionately favored in most meaningful aspects of society. Until that's not the case, there is no need for us men to be "defended". These are petty excuses used by people who are afraid of relinquishing privilege in favor of fairness.

Men with foreign/black sounding names struggle to get job interviews because of their names. Why should they care about feminism, who are fighting about equal pay for equal work, when they can't even get a job in the first place, and as you mention there's no need to help them, because they're men?

If you're fighting for equality for all, you can't pick and choose the issues that primarily effects one minority group while ignoring others.

 

[jimi_dini]

What's "lol" about this? For example, if America can have over 40 straight male presidents but can't presumably handle 40 straight female presidents, doesn't that prove that we're not actually concerned with fixing our patriarchal society?

So much about cherry picking. The American president is a puppet anyway. It's just a face. They could use Lady Gaga instead, it wouldn't really matter. The general populace would be irritated though. You have to be one of the 1% (be filthy rich as fuck), everything else doesn't matter. If the people in charge actually implemented such laws for that position, then you would get your straight female face, but nothing else would change. Maybe you would feel happy, idk. Other countries do have females in such positions, if that makes you feel better.

Maybe you want to tell me that such laws would have to be valid for at least 280 years so that females could "keep up".

Wait, I just checked your patriachry theory. It's supposed to be valid since years after the Pleistocene epoch. Which ended 11.700 years ago. Okay, at least that is something. So I guess "keeping up" would require those laws to be valid for at least 11.000 years.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Men with foreign/black sounding names struggle to get job interviews because of their names. Why should they care about feminism, who are fighting about equal pay for equal work, when they can't even get a job in the first place, and as you mention there's no need to help them, because they're men?

If you're fighting for equality for all, you can't pick and choose the issues that primarily effects one minority group while ignoring others.

It's a good thing that feminism cares about this, then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality

 

[Seeds]

It's a good thing that feminism cares about this, then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality

It's good that they care... But what are they actually doing about it, say, in comparison to how much they're fighting for equal pay for equal work?

 

[Mr Touche]

I'm for it, but like any type of movement it suffers from exclusionary practices when it involves privileged white people who lack any type of foresight.

It's a good thing that feminism cares about this, then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality

WRONG.

Such as this incident here.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Men with foreign/black sounding names struggle to get job interviews because of their names. Why should they care about feminism, who are fighting about equal pay for equal work, when they can't even get a job in the first place, and as you mention there's no need to help them, because they're men?

If you're fighting for equality for all, you can't pick and choose the issues that primarily effects one minority group while ignoring others.

In both instances, the problem is rooted in a fundamental belief in the "other". An us versus them mentality. To acknowledge one as an issue is to acknowledge the other because they stem from the same irrational belief. I am in no way ignoring the discrimination faced by many non-white persons in our country by acknowledging that women, because of their gender, are also discriminated.

However, you're making the issue overly complex by suggesting that they need help on the basis of being men. False false false false false. They need help on the basis that decades upon decades of political campaigns and mass media have indoctrinated our country into believing that foreigners and black people are dangerous, inferior and prone to criminality. It is not their gender, but the perception of their race and culture that hinders them. So, while they are indeed men, they do not need assistance on the basis of being such.

 

[Mumei]

What are my thoughts on feminism? 'Sokay, I guess.

It's good that they care... But what are they actually doing about it, say, in comparison to how much they're fighting for equal pay for equal work?

They aren't analogous issues in terms of how they should be addressed. Equal pay for equal work is something that is at least somewhat amenable to legal remedies; the problem of men with foreign or black-sounding names not getting called back for interviews is something that can't really be prevented on a society-wide basis in the same way. There is no way to "do something" about the latter issue in the same way as feminists try to fight for the former. I think the most it is possible to do is to raise awareness and make people more conscious of these unconsidered biases.

If you're interested in black feminist thought:

 

[freddy]

I don't want to live in the world where my daughter can be a high court judge but my son can't, no more than if my son can and my daughter cant. I'd prefer them to be there side by side, if they each deserve it.

It's a shame the loudest voices are often the most irrational.

 

[CornBurrito]

we are looking at this too much from a Western point of view.

Truth of the matter is that many women are still treated like shit around the world and do not have equal rights or equal opportunities as men.

The least we can do in the west is ''equal pay for equal work'' as a starting point

I'm not sure what the point of this statement is. Are you suggesting women in the West should take what they've got and be happy because people elsewhere have it worse?

 

[Slavik81]

No one is suggesting we should mandate it. I'm mentioning how it's a weird idea so people have perspective on how we've normalized men being in power.

That is vastly more reasonable than how I originally understood your position. I can agree with that.

 

[Vermillion]

I'm for it, but like any type of movement it suffers from exclusionary practices when it involves privileged white people who lack any type of foresight.



WRONG.

Such as this incident here.

Intriguing - thanks for the article. But I should also note that there are some feminists - white feminists - who have noted the predominantly white focus of feminism. I can't remember names off the top of my head, but I know I've referenced it here in the past.

 

[Surreal]

Men are disproportionately favored in most meaningful aspects of society. Until that's not the case, there is no need for us men to be "defended". These are petty excuses used by people who are afraid of relinquishing privilege in favor of fairness.

I don't think it's about "defending" instead of "helping". Being a male in American culture is toxic. It's all about macho bravado, violence, and stoicism...

I'm sorry that I don't have solid sources, the following is just what I've read here and there so I will concede points if I am mistaken:

• The disparity between females and males in higher education is growing. It's already a 60/40 split. Many boys are being left behind by the education system.
• Men commit suicide in greater numbers.
• Men live shorter lives due to social stigmas behind seeking proper preventative medical attention.

I mean, these are just a few, and those points are really meaningful to me. I mean, proper education of a nation's youth is probably the most meaningful aspect of society because it sets the tone and precedent for the future of the society itself. Wouldn't you agree that it's a big problem that needs to be addressed?

I would imagine that if our young women weren't getting the educations they needed that would be the first issue on the agenda. Over reproductive rights. Over equal pay. Because it's our youth that's truly important. But when young men start falling by the wayside, people aren't taking notice. And that's kind of sad to see.

So I don't think these are just petty excuses I make up to mask weird issues I have. I think they're real problems. I don't really expect feminism to go up to bat for men, despite their philosophy, their resources are limited. I was just a bit taken aback by your assertion that men don't have any "meaningful issues."

 

[Seeds]

In both instances, the problem is rooted in a fundamental belief in the "other". An us versus them mentality. To acknowledge one as an issue is to acknowledge the other because they stem from the same irrational belief. I am in no way ignoring the discrimination faced by many non-white persons in our country by acknowledging that women, because of their gender, are also discriminated.

However, you're making the issue overly complex by suggesting that they need help on the basis of being men. False false false false false. They need help on the basis that decades upon decades of political campaigns and mass media have indoctrinated our country into believing that foreigners and black people are dangerous, inferior and prone to criminality. It is not their gender, but the perception of their race and culture that hinders them. So, while they are indeed men, they do not need assistance on the basis of being such.

I never suggested that they needed help because they're men. I was arguing against the idea that men don't need to be "defended" as if all men are privileged.

The issue is, as you pointed out, related to race. Still, my point stands. How can a minority group who struggles to get work (be it men or women), relate with a group whos main work in regards to work equality is about pay.

Although not the same issue, I think this is what Mr Touches article talks about.

 

[captainnapalm]

I don't think it's about "defending" instead of "helping". Being a male in American culture is toxic. It's all about macho bravado, violence, and stoicism...

I'm sorry that I don't have solid sources, the following is just what I've read here and there so I will concede points if I am mistaken:

• The disparity between females and males in higher education is growing. It's already a 60/40 split. Many boys are being left behind by the education system.
• Men commit suicide in greater numbers.
• Men live shorter lives due to social stigmas behind seeking proper preventative medical attention.

I mean, these are just a few, and those points are really meaningful to me. I mean, proper education of a nation's youth is probably the most meaningful aspect of society because it sets the tone and precedent for the future of the society itself. Wouldn't you agree that it's a big problem that needs to be addressed?

I would imagine that if our young women weren't getting the educations they needed that would be the first issue on the agenda. Over reproductive rights. Over equal pay. Because it's our youth that's truly important. But when young men start falling by the wayside, people aren't taking notice. And that's kind of sad to see.

So I don't think these are just petty excuses I make up to mask weird issues I have. I think they're real problems. I don't really expect feminism to go up to bat for men, despite their philosophy, their resources are limited. I was just a bit taken aback by your assertion that men don't have any "meaningful issues."

You could add to your list that more than 90% of military casualties are male. Or how most homeless people are male. Quite an ineffective patriarchal system in many respects.

 

[Mr Touche]

Intriguing - thanks for the article. But I should also note that there are some feminists - white feminists - who have noted the predominantly white focus of feminism. I can't remember names off the top of my head, but I know I've referenced it here in the past.

They seemed to be quite silent when that incident occurred. I followed it closely and all I saw were rousing defenses of why white women should be allowed to say nigger and compare themelves as such, even saying "Well Yoko Ono and John Lennon used it in a song" as if they lent credence to their ridiculous stance. No prominent white feminists came to the aid of the black and brown women who were strongly offended, and quite a few defended the organizers who co-signed the poster.

 

[Vermillion]

They seemed to be quite silent when that incident occurred. I followed it closely and all I saw were rousing defenses of why white women should be allowed to say nigger and compare themelves as such, even saying "Well Yoko Ono and John Lennon used it in a song" as if they lent credence to their ridiculous stance. No prominent white feminists came to the aid of the black and brown women who were strongly offended, and quite a few defended the organizers who co-signed the poster.

Interesting. I take it that the mainstream still has a way to go with regards to paying attention to other minorities, and not just white females. I don't believe I was aware of the events at the time, so I'll defer to you there. Just know that there are feminists who note the uneven focus of feminism to the white, straight, middle class woman.

And duly noted for the future.

 

[jimi_dini]

You could add to your list that more than 90% of military casualties are male. Or how most homeless people are male. Quite an ineffective patriarchal system in many respects.

And that workers in high risk (as in quite easily dead) jobs are almost (if not always) male. As well as most construction workers.

I guess their patriarchy is actually just the 1%. But I doubt that those 1% care about genders. Why should they? Their primary goal is to stay in power and that's the only thing that matters to them.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

I don't think it's about "defending" instead of "helping". Being a male in American culture is toxic. It's all about macho bravado, violence, and stoicism...

I'm sorry that I don't have solid sources, the following is just what I've read here and there so I will concede points if I am mistaken:

• The disparity between females and males in higher education is growing. It's already a 60/40 split. Many boys are being left behind by the education system.
• Men commit suicide in greater numbers.
• Men live shorter lives due to social stigmas behind seeking proper preventative medical attention.

I mean, these are just a few, and those points are really meaningful to me. I mean, proper education of a nation's youth is probably the most meaningful aspect of society because it sets the tone and precedent for the future of the society itself. Wouldn't you agree that it's a big problem that needs to be addressed?

I would imagine that if our young women weren't getting the educations they needed that would be the first issue on the agenda. Over reproductive rights. Over equal pay. Because it's our youth that's truly important. But when young men start falling by the wayside, people aren't taking notice. And that's kind of sad to see.

So I don't think these are just petty excuses I make up to mask weird issues I have. I think they're real problems. I don't really expect feminism to go up to bat for men, despite their philosophy, their resources are limited. I was just a bit taken aback by your assertion that men don't have any "meaningful issues."

Many of these issues are addressed by feminism. The reason men don't seek preventative care is because of the societal expectation that men should be the bread winners, the stronger of the genders, the provider, etc. If we accept that both genders are capable of providing for a family in equal capacity and that a man is not less of a man for accepting that he has weakness, which is currently a "female" trait, then the predilection for avoiding medical care falls to the wayside.

I would suspect that similar expectations to be the provider contribute to suicide statistics although I haven't researched that myself, admittedly.

As for higher education, that is largely explained by testosterone-filled adolescent years in males leading to disciplinary problems in pre-college schooling that hinder college acceptance in ways which females are simply biologically immune to, as well as a recent cultural acceptance to marry/have kids later in life on behalf of females which allows for women to focus more predominantly on careers. Also, and this is just conjecture from me, I would imagine that joining the military as opposed to college is a more enticing option for men after high school than it is for women. Especially considering that women are currently unable to serve in combat positions, thereby limiting the roles they can serve in our armed forces.


edit- as I checked my info, it seems that women -can- serve in combat positions in the military now, although the ban was lifted only earlier this year.

 

[Fudgepuppy]

What scares me about feminism, is that I don't fully understand if the die-hard feminists want complete homogenization of both genders.

I would definitely call myself a feminist, even more today than a couple of months ago. But, I really like there being differences between us because of our genders, and I don't really want to see a world where we treat those differences as something horrible and disgusting.

Most important for me, is that we all have equal rights, equal opportunities and that we treat each other with respect. From respect, true equality and love can grow.

 

[captainnapalm]

And that workers in high risk (as in quite easily dead) jobs are almost (if not always) male. As well as most construction workers.

I guess their patriarchy is actually just the 1%. But I doubt that those 1% care about genders. Why should they? They only care that they are in power.

Yup.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

You could add to your list that more than 90% of military casualties are male. Or how most homeless people are male. Quite an ineffective patriarchal system in many respects.

Many homeless people are military veterans and the ban on combat positions for women was only lifted earlier this year. That's a pretty clear explanation for both issues which are rooted in discriminatory policies against women in the military. The idea that providing equality to women can not alleviate "male issues" isn't rooted in reality.

 

[Roastbeef]

for me identifying as a feminist is just a logical consequence of identifying as a secular humanist. I think all people should have equal rights and opportunities, so that obviously includes all human beings.

What that entails is also judging all forms of injustice and hypocrisy the same way. This means i also acknowledge that there are a few subsets/currents of feminist thinking (just as there are of pretty much every ideology, I'm only mentioning feminism here, because that's the topic of the thread) that really do hold appalling positions. These groups often get downplayed or their very existence outright dismissed as "straw feminists" by moderate feminists, in a misguided "us vs. them" mentality, where conceding any opposing argouments is seen as akin to "losing". i think those groups are as much at fault for many misunderstandings about the whole movement as MRA-extremists.

Who are those people? I'm talking about anti-pornogaphy-feminists, gender-separatists and misandrists. The actual man-hating, Valerie-Solanas-reading extremists are a reality, and they can poison the well for all of us moderates, if we don't take care to actively distance ourselves from them. Sure, there aren't that many, but they exist and many feminists shy away from calling them on their hateful bullshit, thus letting them get away with pretending to speak for all women. Way more prevalent is the puritanical current of feminism, that sees sexuality as a negative, and screams "objectification" and "oppression" at sexually explicit content. I strongly oppose this way of thinking, as it seems to me like a continuation of the same religious, reactionary and sexist ideals that gender inequality is based on. This also applies for those who call for censorship of "sexist" media.

 

[Synth_floyd]

It's all about power. The traditional male/female roles in society give the vast majority of the power to men. Some women who can take advantage of this (gold diggers, models, etc.) are fine with it but other women who are not want to make the social balance of power more equitable, and that is feminism basically.

 

[Into]

1. Do you identify as a feminist

If feminist means equal rights for men and women, then yes. If not, or it means something else now, then no. Think we should have a new term, "humanist", everyone should get equal treatment.

2. If not, what aspect(s) of feminism do you not like?

Extremists, you have that small minority in every group who will take it too far, who have misunderstood the whole point. The entire movement/group/social class/religion/etc is hurt by this extreme minority, and there are extreme feminists who do just that.


Why find one of the billion normal muslims in this world who have similar values that a average American does, the normal person who gets up, drinks his coffee and goes to work just like Johnny Americano does, when you can find a raging lunatic with bombs strapped to himself yelling "Death to America!"?

Why find a normal black person, who does the same stuff you do, when you can find one weirdo out there who wants his own black nation and hates white people?

Similar but not quite as drastic is done with feminists, they find the worst of the worst and that undermines the majority of them.

 

[captainnapalm]

Many homeless people are military veterans and the ban on combat positions for women was only lifted earlier this year. That's a pretty clear explanation for both issues which are rooted in discriminatory policies against women in the military. The idea that providing equality to women can not alleviate "male issues" isn't rooted in reality.

I'm not sure that allowing women to take part in combat would somehow magically even out the homeless gender representation levels. Seems a bit of a leap. Many countries that do not engage in relentless warfare also have mostly male homeless populations.

 

[The Librarian]

I believe in equality between the sexes, so yeah, I'm a feminist.

 

[jimi_dini]

Many of these issues are addressed by feminism. The reason men don't seek preventative care is because of the societal expectation that men should be the bread winners, the stronger of the genders, the provider, etc.

One of the differences between males and females is that in case a male is badly hurt or expects major pain, he wants to be alone. A female on the other hand wants to be with people.

Nowadays that doesn't make sense if you think about it - because we are all humans, right? But people still behave that way. And back in the days that actually made sense. Males were expendable. Females weren't. Which means if a male died, it didn't matter as much. Which then means that a badly hurt male is more of a burden and maybe even too much of a burden. And following that logic, the typical male behaviour makes sense. Maybe that's also where the preventative care behaviour comes from. I doubt that it's "bread winners".

Same for suicide. I think the chemical changes in the brain are actually some type of self destruct mechanism to was meant to protect the rest of the group. Like someone else already said - the majority of people that commit suicide are males.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

I'm not sure that allowing women to take part in combat would somehow magically even out the homeless gender representation levels. Seems a bit of a leap. Many countries that do not engage in relentless warfare also have mostly male homeless populations.

It is undeniably a contributing factor, though.

I also think many women who would otherwise be homeless are taken in by men who have some place for them to stay. In some cases I'm sure that works out fine and in other cases I'd imagine the woman is exploited in pretty awful ways. The reverse doesn't happen very often for men, obviously. I think it would be rather silly to suggest that any systematic machination of our society is producing an uneven amount of male homeless people, though. There's pretty clearly no active agenda to make that so unless you consider the expectation that a woman must be taken care of and a man must provide to subconsciously affect which people among our homeless population, based on gender, are most likely to receive assistance which removes them from that situation.