2 ms·

"What does that have to do with anything?" You'd expect women to be worse off than men if they are being suppressed. That's the relation. You know, stuff you c

"What does that have to do with anything?" You'd expect women to be worse off than men if they are being suppressed. That's the relation. You know, stuff you can verify. Honestly, I think you are using the word "science" too loosely. You can't just go "because... science". That's exactly not science. Good bye.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
pron 11y ago
> You'd expect women to be worse off than men if they are being suppressed. That's the relation. You know, stuff you can verify. Women are worse off in nearly every culture on earth (that, of course, doesn't mean that men don't suffer too). And don't worry, it's been verified over and over. You can, of course, look at the vast collected body of research, but you won't so you'll continue to deny reality with conviction kept strong by your gut feeling and anecdotes. The measure that concerns the feminist struggle in Western societies is called power. You can read about it, but you won't.
- facepalm 11y ago
  Let's stick to the Western world. I'd love to see Feminists travel to other parts of the world to help with REAL issues, though. I'd be curious how they measure power in your papers. But it's a common tactic of (western) feminism to pick arbitrary aspects which make women look bad seen out of context. For example why measure the wage gap, and not the family gap (time spent with loved ones), or the real income (which is usually split among married couples) and spending power? And also not measure income per hour worked and so on. Maybe you can find a measure of power in which women are worse off. So what? You can also define other measurements in which men are worse off, including "power to reproduce". And you have no idea what I did and didn't read about feminism. You are just living in your own little bubble.

2 ms·

"What does that have to do with anything?" You'd expect women to be worse off than men if they are being suppressed. That's the relation. You know, stuff you c

by facepalm 11y ago

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
pron 11y ago
> You'd expect women to be worse off than men if they are being suppressed. That's the relation. You know, stuff you can verify. Women are worse off in nearly every culture on earth (that, of course, doesn't mean that men don't suffer too). And don't worry, it's been verified over and over. You can, of course, look at the vast collected body of research, but you won't so you'll continue to deny reality with conviction kept strong by your gut feeling and anecdotes. The measure that concerns the feminist struggle in Western societies is called power. You can read about it, but you won't.
- facepalm 11y ago
  Let's stick to the Western world. I'd love to see Feminists travel to other parts of the world to help with REAL issues, though. I'd be curious how they measure power in your papers. But it's a common tactic of (western) feminism to pick arbitrary aspects which make women look bad seen out of context. For example why measure the wage gap, and not the family gap (time spent with loved ones), or the real income (which is usually split among married couples) and spending power? And also not measure income per hour worked and so on. Maybe you can find a measure of power in which women are worse off. So what? You can also define other measurements in which men are worse off, including "power to reproduce". And you have no idea what I did and didn't read about feminism. You are just living in your own little bubble.