6 ms·

Studies have shown... that you are probably a white male. For sure I am, yet your attitude, particularly your apparent denial of genuine disadvantages experienc

Studies have shown... that you are probably a white male. For sure I am, yet your attitude, particularly your apparent denial of genuine disadvantages experienced by women, or more generally, by none-white males, is appalling. We are not coming after you, don't be afraid. Here's some homework material that I liked: https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_kimmel_why_gender_equality_is_good_for_everyone_men_included https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_kimmel_why_gender_equality... It's not because someone wants to help women or minorities, that they're trying to take (equal) opportunity away from you.

crytrubin 9y ago
Studies have shown that you're a smug, sanctimonious asshole.
cabalamat 9y ago
> particularly your apparent denial of genuine disadvantages experienced by women Yes, women do get worse outcomes than men, on average, for some measures. For example men earn more. It is also true that women get better outcomes than men, on average, for other measures. For example women live longer. (It is apposite that feminists/SJWs think the first issue is something that needs to be solved, but the second issue isn't). However, the thing we are talking about is homelessness. Men are more likely to be homeless than women. Men have, in your words, a "genuine disadvantage" in this measure. > We are not coming after you, don't be afraid. You personally might not be, but SJWs in general want a world where white men heve less rights than people who do not have these characteristics. This needs to be fought against.
- geofft 9y ago
  Can you explain what feminists or SJWs have to do with this conversation? I don't believe Amazon's effort is a feminist effort. (If you're defining "feminism" so broadly as "anything that benefits women," you can't turn around and define it so narrowly as "a cause that wants white men to have less rights".)
  - cabalamat 9y ago
    I'm defining feminist to mean anyone who calls themselves that. I've read plenty of feminists argue that society needs to solve the problem of women earning less, but never read a feminist argue that society needs to solve the problem of men living shorter. This is, on the face of it, odd, given that one of these issues is a matter of life and death and the other one is not.
    - MaxfordAndSons 9y ago
      > one of these issues is a matter of life and death and the other one is not Saying the wage gap isn't a matter of life and death is dishonest. It absolutely is. The worldwide life expectancy gap between the sexes is about 5 years; the life expectancy gap between the richest and poorest Americans is 15 years[1]. [1]http://news.mit.edu/2016/study-rich-poor-huge-mortality-gap-us-0411 http://news.mit.edu/2016/study-rich-poor-huge-mortality-gap-...
  - staticelf 9y ago
    I am not the author of the comment, but I can perfectly explain. Feminists and SJWs is a category of people that more often than not want to give power to women at the expense of men and specifically white men. This organisation helps literally everyone except single men, even when it's obvious that men suffer more often from the problem they're trying to fix, thus this is an organisation that is sexist against men. This fits the feminist/SJW agenda perfectly and one can suspect that this is a feminist effort and supporting it should also be considered the same.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- gjm11 9y ago
  > [...] men earn more [...] women live longer [...] It is apposite that feminists/SJWs think the first issue is something that needs to be solved, but the second issue isn't. It's not perfectly clear what your objection is, but if it's the sort of thing I guess then I think you're wrong, for two reasons. Reason 1 Here are some more things "feminists/SJWs" mostly don't see as problems to be solved: Men are taller. Men are stronger. Men score better in mental-rotation speed tests. These are all advantages men have over women (you might disagree about the first, but all else equal it generally seems to be an advantage to be taller). So why are "feminists/SJWs" not trying to change them? Because, at least so it seems, they are fairly direct consequences of biology and are not going to be changed by any plausible sort of social action; especially not if you want them changed by making things better for women rather than by making them worse for men. I suggest that this is also a reason why "feminists/SJWs" are not making noise about men having shorter lifespans than women. It seems like a biological rather than a social thing -- it's not like men have shorter lifespans because women keep shooting them -- and so the sort of activism that defines "feminists/SJWs" isn't likely to make a difference to it. (I bet there are some people who would describe themselves as, or at least assent when others describe them as, "feminist/SJW", and who are working on improving men's lifespans. Those people would be doctors, biologists, and medical researchers. But they aren't doing that work as "feminists/SJWs"; why should they be?) Reason 2* Let's suppose, arguendo, that reason 1 doesn't work out somehow; let's in fact pretend that women's longer lifespans are as plausibly the result of discrimination as men's higher pay. Would that mean that "feminists/SJWs" are being inconsistent or insincere if they focus on making things better for women, even though there are things that could be made better for men as well? Of course not. People specialize, and there's nothing wrong with that. And part of what it means to call someone a "feminist/SJW" is that they have chosen to give their attention to problems faced by traditionally-marginalized groups in general, or women in particular. What's the problem with that?
  - belorn 9y ago
    > men having shorter lifespans than women. It seems like a biological rather than a social thing There is plenty of signs from research that point it towards a social thing and not biological. 1# Society values men for their ability to earn money. Women are valued for their social network. Successful aging is correlated to having a strong social network since it reduces stress. 2# Dating success for men is correlated to successful risk taking in maximizing earning potential. For women it is correlated to maximize personal health. 3# Studies on the health care system has shown to tendency to underdiagnose health issues for men while the opposite for women. Suicide is still the primary cause of death for men until around age 60.
- gjm11 9y ago
  > SJWs in general want a world where white men heve less rights than people who do not have these characteristics. I do not believe you. (Not unless you define "SJW" to mean this, in which case instead I say: OK, but there are so few of those people and they have so little influence that I don't see why we should care very much.) So far as I can tell, "SJWs in general" think that in the world as it presently is, white men have it better than other groups, and they are trying to make things better for those other groups, and as long as white men have it better they don't mind if the things they do to help the other groups make things worse for white men. Now, there are plenty of ways in which that might be wrong. For instance: it might be wrong to think that white men have it better; or it might not be reasonable to try to improve other people's situation at the cost of white men's, even if the latter are better off on average. But this is not at all the same as saying that "SJWs in general" want a world where white men have less rights than non-(white men), and if you want to make that accusation then I think you should be presenting evidence for it.
staticelf 9y ago
I don't understand why americans are so obsessed about race, because I like you assume stuff and I assume you're american. It doesn't matter what my skin color is since this is simply about gender and equality. I visited america recently and I've never been in a more diverse city in my life. You should know this by now. And it's obvious that I am a male since I disclosed it in my first post. > It's not because someone wants to help women or minorities, that they're trying to take (equal) opportunity away from you. Look at my home country Sweden, probably the most "feministic" country on earth, here there are several laws that only applies for women. 3/4 of university opportunities goes to women. Men lose 9/10 of all parental disputes when it goes to court. Recently there was suggestions to the government to pay for womens university education in IT. etc. etc. etc. etc. Yeah, I do not believe you since the facts in my country is the exact opposite. Don't tell me you're for equality if you acts tell another story. I am very tired of that kind of shit. There is NO REASON for the organization to exclude single men. This is why I would never support the organisation or any other organisation that has the similar sexist and toxic goals.
- Steer 9y ago
  Please provide sources for your statement that "3/4 of university opportunities goes to women". I did a quick check at SCB which keep these kinds of statistics for Sweden and I can't find any support for it. I also tried to find support for your statement on parental disputes, but the numbers I could find differs from yours there as well. There have been many discussions on trying to even the gender-gap for certain professions, for example getting more men to be teachers (or getting more women interested in IT). I do not know how successful they are or if they are worthwhile, but I don't see a clear gender bias.
  - staticelf 9y ago
    Sorry, you are correct. It seems my numbers were pretty skewed. But it is still a majority with 60% women at Swedens universities (Source: http://www.scb.se/sv_/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/utbildning-och-forskning/befolkningens-utbildning/utbildningsstatistisk-arsbok/64475/64482/behallare-for-press/379597/ http://www.scb.se/sv_/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/u...) But on YH (Polytechnic schools) and alike there is even a bigger majority on 69%: http://www.metro.se/artikel/s%C3%A5-stor-%C3%A4r-kvinnornas-dominans-p%C3%A5-h%C3%B6gskolornas-yrkeslinjer-xr http://www.metro.se/artikel/s%C3%A5-stor-%C3%A4r-kvinnornas-... Still with those facts, the swedish government employs an extreme feministic group to suggest stuff that can empower more women in academia: https://www.svt.se/opinion/article2925614.svt https://www.svt.se/opinion/article2925614.svt Sure, all the numbers weren't really correct but the trend is still clear. Feminists only cares about women and really want to diminish men in every way possible.

crytrubin 9y ago

Studies have shown that you're a smug, sanctimonious asshole.

cabalamat 9y ago

> particularly your apparent denial of genuine disadvantages experienced by women Yes, women do get worse outcomes than men, on average, for some measures. For example men earn more. It is also true that women get better outcomes than men, on average, for other measures. For example women live longer. (It is apposite that feminists/SJWs think the first issue is something that needs to be solved, but the second issue isn't). However, the thing we are talking about is homelessness. Men are more likely to be homeless than women. Men have, in your words, a "genuine disadvantage" in this measure. > We are not coming after you, don't be afraid. You personally might not be, but SJWs in general want a world where white men heve less rights than people who do not have these characteristics. This needs to be fought against.

geofft 9y ago
Can you explain what feminists or SJWs have to do with this conversation? I don't believe Amazon's effort is a feminist effort. (If you're defining "feminism" so broadly as "anything that benefits women," you can't turn around and define it so narrowly as "a cause that wants white men to have less rights".)
- cabalamat 9y ago
  I'm defining feminist to mean anyone who calls themselves that. I've read plenty of feminists argue that society needs to solve the problem of women earning less, but never read a feminist argue that society needs to solve the problem of men living shorter. This is, on the face of it, odd, given that one of these issues is a matter of life and death and the other one is not.
  - MaxfordAndSons 9y ago
    > one of these issues is a matter of life and death and the other one is not Saying the wage gap isn't a matter of life and death is dishonest. It absolutely is. The worldwide life expectancy gap between the sexes is about 5 years; the life expectancy gap between the richest and poorest Americans is 15 years[1]. [1]http://news.mit.edu/2016/study-rich-poor-huge-mortality-gap-us-0411 http://news.mit.edu/2016/study-rich-poor-huge-mortality-gap-...
- staticelf 9y ago
  I am not the author of the comment, but I can perfectly explain. Feminists and SJWs is a category of people that more often than not want to give power to women at the expense of men and specifically white men. This organisation helps literally everyone except single men, even when it's obvious that men suffer more often from the problem they're trying to fix, thus this is an organisation that is sexist against men. This fits the feminist/SJW agenda perfectly and one can suspect that this is a feminist effort and supporting it should also be considered the same.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
gjm11 9y ago
> [...] men earn more [...] women live longer [...] It is apposite that feminists/SJWs think the first issue is something that needs to be solved, but the second issue isn't. It's not perfectly clear what your objection is, but if it's the sort of thing I guess then I think you're wrong, for two reasons. Reason 1 Here are some more things "feminists/SJWs" mostly don't see as problems to be solved: Men are taller. Men are stronger. Men score better in mental-rotation speed tests. These are all advantages men have over women (you might disagree about the first, but all else equal it generally seems to be an advantage to be taller). So why are "feminists/SJWs" not trying to change them? Because, at least so it seems, they are fairly direct consequences of biology and are not going to be changed by any plausible sort of social action; especially not if you want them changed by making things better for women rather than by making them worse for men. I suggest that this is also a reason why "feminists/SJWs" are not making noise about men having shorter lifespans than women. It seems like a biological rather than a social thing -- it's not like men have shorter lifespans because women keep shooting them -- and so the sort of activism that defines "feminists/SJWs" isn't likely to make a difference to it. (I bet there are some people who would describe themselves as, or at least assent when others describe them as, "feminist/SJW", and who are working on improving men's lifespans. Those people would be doctors, biologists, and medical researchers. But they aren't doing that work as "feminists/SJWs"; why should they be?) Reason 2* Let's suppose, arguendo, that reason 1 doesn't work out somehow; let's in fact pretend that women's longer lifespans are as plausibly the result of discrimination as men's higher pay. Would that mean that "feminists/SJWs" are being inconsistent or insincere if they focus on making things better for women, even though there are things that could be made better for men as well? Of course not. People specialize, and there's nothing wrong with that. And part of what it means to call someone a "feminist/SJW" is that they have chosen to give their attention to problems faced by traditionally-marginalized groups in general, or women in particular. What's the problem with that?
- belorn 9y ago
  > men having shorter lifespans than women. It seems like a biological rather than a social thing There is plenty of signs from research that point it towards a social thing and not biological. 1# Society values men for their ability to earn money. Women are valued for their social network. Successful aging is correlated to having a strong social network since it reduces stress. 2# Dating success for men is correlated to successful risk taking in maximizing earning potential. For women it is correlated to maximize personal health. 3# Studies on the health care system has shown to tendency to underdiagnose health issues for men while the opposite for women. Suicide is still the primary cause of death for men until around age 60.
gjm11 9y ago
> SJWs in general want a world where white men heve less rights than people who do not have these characteristics. I do not believe you. (Not unless you define "SJW" to mean this, in which case instead I say: OK, but there are so few of those people and they have so little influence that I don't see why we should care very much.) So far as I can tell, "SJWs in general" think that in the world as it presently is, white men have it better than other groups, and they are trying to make things better for those other groups, and as long as white men have it better they don't mind if the things they do to help the other groups make things worse for white men. Now, there are plenty of ways in which that might be wrong. For instance: it might be wrong to think that white men have it better; or it might not be reasonable to try to improve other people's situation at the cost of white men's, even if the latter are better off on average. But this is not at all the same as saying that "SJWs in general" want a world where white men have less rights than non-(white men), and if you want to make that accusation then I think you should be presenting evidence for it.

staticelf 9y ago

I don't understand why americans are so obsessed about race, because I like you assume stuff and I assume you're american. It doesn't matter what my skin color is since this is simply about gender and equality. I visited america recently and I've never been in a more diverse city in my life. You should know this by now. And it's obvious that I am a male since I disclosed it in my first post. > It's not because someone wants to help women or minorities, that they're trying to take (equal) opportunity away from you. Look at my home country Sweden, probably the most "feministic" country on earth, here there are several laws that only applies for women. 3/4 of university opportunities goes to women. Men lose 9/10 of all parental disputes when it goes to court. Recently there was suggestions to the government to pay for womens university education in IT. etc. etc. etc. etc. Yeah, I do not believe you since the facts in my country is the exact opposite. Don't tell me you're for equality if you acts tell another story. I am very tired of that kind of shit. There is NO REASON for the organization to exclude single men. This is why I would never support the organisation or any other organisation that has the similar sexist and toxic goals.

Steer 9y ago
Please provide sources for your statement that "3/4 of university opportunities goes to women". I did a quick check at SCB which keep these kinds of statistics for Sweden and I can't find any support for it. I also tried to find support for your statement on parental disputes, but the numbers I could find differs from yours there as well. There have been many discussions on trying to even the gender-gap for certain professions, for example getting more men to be teachers (or getting more women interested in IT). I do not know how successful they are or if they are worthwhile, but I don't see a clear gender bias.
- staticelf 9y ago
  Sorry, you are correct. It seems my numbers were pretty skewed. But it is still a majority with 60% women at Swedens universities (Source: http://www.scb.se/sv_/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/utbildning-och-forskning/befolkningens-utbildning/utbildningsstatistisk-arsbok/64475/64482/behallare-for-press/379597/ http://www.scb.se/sv_/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter-amne/u...) But on YH (Polytechnic schools) and alike there is even a bigger majority on 69%: http://www.metro.se/artikel/s%C3%A5-stor-%C3%A4r-kvinnornas-dominans-p%C3%A5-h%C3%B6gskolornas-yrkeslinjer-xr http://www.metro.se/artikel/s%C3%A5-stor-%C3%A4r-kvinnornas-... Still with those facts, the swedish government employs an extreme feministic group to suggest stuff that can empower more women in academia: https://www.svt.se/opinion/article2925614.svt https://www.svt.se/opinion/article2925614.svt Sure, all the numbers weren't really correct but the trend is still clear. Feminists only cares about women and really want to diminish men in every way possible.