TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Antovigo Archive

View 1 post and 98 comments by Antovigo on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
93

Social IssuesAntovigo/r/MensRights22/02/20 11:21 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

I checked the author's Google Scholar page and here is what I found: On men being shamed by their spouse: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11013-018-9592-9 This is a study on Sri-Lankan Tamil refugees. If this is indeed the study in question, the author should have mentioned it somewhere. I don't think these results can be generalized that easily (though I'm ready to believe it's the same elsewhere). And here is the one on the portrayal of mental illness in the media: https://link.springer.com/article/1…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/07/20 06:45 PM
4

That was interesting, but why doesn't he link the studies he cites? "Instead of receiving sympathy and support, some participants reported that their spouses would attempt to ‘shame’ them into greater achievement by constantly reminding them of their ‘failures’." "Similarly, some studies indicate that the state and society may act in an empathic manner towards women with mental illness, while responding more punitively towards men with mental illness" "In another study, I found that the media te…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/20 11:28 PM
8

Non-american here, is the SAT graded anonymously?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates27/05/20 10:26 AM
2

That sounds like finding grand patterns in random fluctuations at this point.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 07:13 PM
3

This sounds like a mirrored version of something I heard from feminists, is it on purpose? I don't think it's an healthy point of view. There is discrimination happening in both directions, discrimination is bad and should be eliminated, that's enough for me.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 10:11 AM
2

I was walking down the street & came across a person It's funny because in my native language (which is highly gendered), "person" is a feminine word ("people" as well). Same goes for our equivalent of "chicken", "cow" and "bee". All the examples you gave are feminine in my language. So, even if your point might apply to English, it's completely conditional on the language you use and stops working in the neighbor's occidental society. And even in English, I'm not sure it works. A "cat" is a she…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates22/05/20 10:07 AM
82

You're going to love this one: https://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Kaatz-R01-text-analysis-15.pdf They looked at the texts written by the judges for NIH grants attribution, to see if applications by women were judged more harshly. Here is what they found: more positive descriptors, praise, and acclamation for funded applications from all types of female investigators; greater reference to competence and ability for funded applications from female experienced investigators, particul…
/r/MensRights17/05/20 04:33 PM
9

Starr's study and the other studies you cited are using real-life crime data and doing statistics on them to find if there is discrimination. This is all good and important, but your teacher can always find a way to deny it by claiming these studies are comparing apple to oranges (which is already what she's doing in her reply). if you want to make it absolutely clear that discrimination is real, you should add data from "mock juror trials". These are studies where researchers write a text descr…
/r/MensRights20/04/20 11:05 PM
4

They all find a residual gap far below the 3-5% stated by OP's article, sometimes one order of magnitude below. And the more explanatory factors you account for, the closer to zero the residuals get.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/04/20 12:43 PM
5

Articles that make claims about "the consensus of economic studies" should be required to provide link to aforementioned economic studies. Otherwise, we are still on the "mythical" side. In the meantime, I'd recommend reading these: http://info.haygroupupdate.com/rs/494-VUC-482/images/KFHG_Gender%20Pay%20Gap_Technical%20Report.pdf https://www.payscale.com/data/gender-pay-gap https://web.stanford.edu/~diamondr/UberPayGap.pdf https://mises.org/library/what%E2%80%99s-behind-gender-wage-gap
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/04/20 11:07 AM
10

A study in the New England Journal of Medicine shows that about a third of surgical trainees in the U.S. experience gender discrimination or verbal and physical abuse. The study was not linked and does not appear on the NEJM's frontpage (or any of this month's issues), but I think I found it. Unfortunately, it is self-reported discrimination, which is a terrible way to measure discrimination (I remember a study from the 80s, where a third of African-Americans used to believe discrimination again…
/r/MensRights30/03/20 05:43 PM
1

That's a super-interesting study. Thanks for finding it!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/20 08:26 PM
10

Lately, housing discrimination. Last month I was looking for a place to rent, and a lot of them explicitly said they wanted women. In many other cases, when I messaged them, I got told "sorry, we give priority to women". It's well-reported that there is systemic discrimination against men and ethnic minorities in housing, but do black people also get messages saying "sorry, we give priority to white people"? What the fuck.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/20 03:36 PM
2

Good point. The articles I posted only talk about physical aggression, unfortunately.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates15/03/20 03:22 PM
7

That's the idea of my argument, but it's a lot of speculation. Have a look at Table 1 from the paper I cited: https://imgur.com/SjYkgD3 In almost all studies, men are more variable than women in aggression, but they are also more aggressive on average (positive d). It's possible that the higher variance compensates the higher mean so that the least aggressive people are indeed men, however we can't conclude that from this data alone (and, to be fair, it's unlikely). Also, I'm not sure if "pacifi…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/03/20 08:11 PM
3

That would definitely be interesting. I'm summoning the reminding bot in case you find it. RemindMe! 6 days
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/03/20 06:57 PM
16

I think it boils down to the so-called "apex fallacy": the most extreme individuals are not representative of the whole population. Most mass murderers, billionaires, fields medalists and homeless people are men, therefore, according to the apex fallacy, the average man is a violent billionaire homeless mathematician. The fact that most violent criminals are men does not mean that men are on average more violent, it could also be that men are more variable in violence, so men would be more likel…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates14/03/20 06:47 PM
4

Gynocentrism is the reason why they make papers about the effects of pregnancy on hiring in the first place.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 10:01 PM
18

In section 5: While for females, the unconditional probability of receiving a callback is 19.62%, it is only 11.53% for males. When these numbers are disaggregated by occupation, men's callback rate for secretarial jobs declines to 7.11% whereas the female rate becomes 16.45%. In accounting jobs, men receive a callback 16.72% of the time, whereas the female callback rate is 23.58%. The same pattern of female advantage is found at the country level. These sex differences in callback rates resonat…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 10:57 AM
16

See this large meta-analysis. Overall, they only find a systematic effect (favoring men) in male-dominated jobs, but the effect size is negligibly small (0.1 standard deviations). Of course there is a push to favor women in STEM (I experienced it myself), but there is absolutely no push to get more women in construction, sewage work and whatnot, so if you look at all the jobs you don't find an overall effect. My point is that discrimination in hiring is much more complicated than "one gender is …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 10:52 AM
14

It's funny how this finding is hidden in the result part, with no mention in the abstract or intro. As they say in the article, the target jobs were female-dominated jobs (like accounting), and it is already known that there is discrimination against men for those jobs. IIRC the opposite happens in male-dominated jobs.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates12/03/20 10:02 AM
1

I'm on it.
/r/MensRights23/02/20 11:05 AM
1

Great work and writing style! One little point: For example, the lack of women in positions of political authority is part of defining patriarchy, however the reason for women for not being in those positions is due to patriarchy. One may argue that these two uses of patriarchy feed into themselves, in an almost circular way. I don't think it's circular. Women (supposedly) don't seek positions of political authority because the politicians of previous generation were mostly men. It's a feedback …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/02/20 12:26 AM
2

Here you go: https://economics.sas.upenn.edu/system/files/working-papers/18-016%20PIER%20Paper%20Submission.pdf Basically, that's what they are saying. If I understood their reasoning correctly, they suppose that for newcomers, belief-based discrimination is dominant, but once they have gained some reputation, preference-based discrimination becomes more important.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 07:52 PM
6

If you want to read a thorough review examining the effects of discrimination, cultural factors and biological factors, I recommend looking at this one. The authors tried to look at all the available evidence on discrimination, so it's a good overview. I think a big issue with this debate is that people often conflate discrimination based on belief (this gender is better than that gender at doing science) and based on preference (they'd just rather hire someone from a given gender). For instance…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/01/20 01:58 PM
15

The Pay Equity Act requires employers to pay female jobs at least the same as male jobs if they are of comparable value. Is this really written in the law? That sounds too outspokenly sexist to be true.
/r/MensRights07/01/20 05:59 PM
6

That's quite a specific request, but it seems that there is a lot of material about infant crying referenced on Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=gender%20infant%20crying Have fun digging through all of that! Edit: I skimmed through a few abstracts, and this might be a match: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.12.008
/r/MensRights11/12/19 08:16 PM
2

That sounds unbelievable and likely at the same time.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates06/12/19 08:12 AM
18

One side of the coin is that men are more likely to be sentenced when they're the alleged perpetrator. But there is another side: men are also discriminated against when they are the victim. Mock juror trials have shown that men suffer for more victim blaming when they are victims of rape or domestic violence, and they are less likely to win the trial than when the victim is female. In part because of this, men are much less likely to report domestic violence to the police. But the one thing tha…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/12/19 01:09 PM
3

That's genius! I've never thought of using TVtropes for anything serious, but it's actually a good mirror of the world as seen by pop culture.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/19 09:30 PM
7

It's quite robust, and well replicated so far. I remember reading someone calling it "the most robust effect in psychology", or something similar, but couldn't find the citation. Here are a few studies of interest: Here is the original Women-are-wonderful study: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14792779543000002 WAW still exists among right-wing authoritarian people: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb00295.x WAW is present among children and college st…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/12/19 12:47 AM
2

RemindMe! 2 days
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/12/19 12:05 AM
14

I can see two major reasons for this. One of them is gender norms, which tell you that women are vulnerable and precious creatures who need help and protection. This makes people care more about problems faced by women, and ignore problems faced by men. A salient example of that is called the missing white woman syndrome: when a girl is missing, there is much more media coverage than when it's a boy. The result is that studies that defend women are more likely to get published, receive more cita…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/12/19 02:16 PM
4

There is a formulation of gender stereotypes that I like: « men do, women are ». This comes with a lot of positives and negatives for both sexes.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/12/19 01:39 PM
2

Also male privilege does exist, and so does female privilege, it's just that male privilege helps with males getting into positions of power over other people, and female privilege helps with vulnerability and sympathy. That sounds reasonable, if that's really what you think. However, it is not the common feminist view. Go to the NYT website and look up "male privilege": https://www.nytimes.com/search/?query=%2522male%2520privilege%2522&srchst=cse then "female privilege": https://www.nytimes.com…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/11/19 09:09 AM
2

Good point, do you know of any specific study that calculates like that? I'd be nice to have a real estimate of the size this effect.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 12:06 PM
1

This sounds like a motte and bailey's strategy. It's great if they really, consistently, believe that, but it's moot if the rest of the time they talk about male privilege or dismiss MRAs as a hate group.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/11/19 12:05 PM
15

It's only true if you pick a specific definition for a suicide attempt. In this study, for instance, they categorize attempts as "serious" (meaning the person actually intends to die), or "parasuicidal attempts" and "parasuicidal pauses" (where the person enacts a suicide attempt, in order to get help, but does not want to die at any point): https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1398-8 Men far outnumber women in the "serious" category. So it is not just that they use more "efficient" methods, their…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates03/11/19 06:22 PM
10

Never, ever in my life I heard this phrase from a woman. And very rarely so from a man.
/r/MensRights20/10/19 11:28 AM
1

Single-mother families are not the most common situation: https://www.statista.com/statistics/242302/percentage-of-single-mother-households-in-the-us-by-state/ In most US states it's in the 5-10% range, far from "every single uppity woman". I don't think this is enough to explain the gap shown in the graph.
/r/MensRights15/10/19 09:52 AM
2

On top of the hateful tone, it is pretty inaccurate. This gap in "fiscal impact" can be, in large part, explained by the fact that on average women are paid less than men, which itself comes in large part from motherhood. In other words, lots of women decide to stop working or work less to take care of the children, while the father keeps working. One could say that the man "pays for the woman to exist", but that does not mean that the father isn't satisfied with this situation: it's a collectiv…
/r/MensRights14/10/19 04:22 PM
1

Thanks for the sources, that's better. However, when looking at the sources of the wikipedia articles, I could not find any support for the « 70%+ » claim. After doing some digging, I eventually found some statistics that support this idea: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2517012 There is something interesting that I did not expect, though: boys are killed by their parents more often than girls: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44679396_Infanticide_and_Neonaticide_A_Review_of_40_Years_of_Resea…
/r/MensRights02/10/19 06:43 PM
5

Nobody's going to believe you if you don't provide a source.
/r/MensRights02/10/19 12:56 PM
3

the Middle-East, Northern Africa and South Asia Of course, it's hard to tell for sure as there are not many statistics and studies from these countries. But a country where, for example, a woman needs her guardian's approval to go to university probably needs some first-wave feminism.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/08/19 08:18 PM
1

For starters you could look at whether the law is different for men and women. A handy document for that is the report from the World Bank: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/31327/WBL2019.pdf Not surprising, countries from Western Europe have the highest scores, many of them with a perfect 100% score. The worst are Saudi Arabia, UAE and Sudan. Overall, the Middle-East, Northern Africa and South Asia score pretty bad. Now this only looks at the law as it is, and does not …
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/08/19 05:31 PM
6

Good work. I think you put the wrong link for the article « Sexual violence against men and international law – criminalising the unmentionable », here the link points to the same article as the previous item.
/r/MensRights10/08/19 12:44 PM
1

In my view, extremists are the ones playing oppression Olympics and fighting over which genital mutilation is worse while reasonable peoples are the one who simply think both of them should be banned and thus don't need to find out which one is worse.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates04/08/19 10:43 AM
10

It's funny that they say "this reaction was driven in part by a belief in male privilege". While this is not unexpected, I am now wondering about the causality of it. Maybe the belief in male privilege itself makes people biased against men, or maybe people who are inherently biased in the first place are more likely to discard studies disproving male privilege, and end up believing it exists in spite of the contradictory evidence.
/r/MensRights31/07/19 01:43 PM
5

I don't know what her arguments are, but it sounds a bit dubious. I'm not sure to understand why they would do that. Why would anyone want to ban heterosexuality?
/r/MensRights24/07/19 11:37 PM
2

What don't you get exactly? It just says that what men use violence against their partner, it is more likely to result in an injury than when women use violence, which is not very surprising given the difference in physical strength. d=.15 is Cohen's effect size, a concept in statistics that compares the variation between the two populations to the variation within each population. 0.15 is a rather small difference.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/19 05:32 PM
5

Here are a few large studies or meta-analyses: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-013-9194-1 « This annotated bibliography describes 343 scholarly investigations (270 empirical studies and 73 reviews) demonstrating that women are as physically aggressive as men (or more) in their relationships with their spouses or opposite-sex partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 440,850 people. » https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.5.651 « Meta-analyses of sex differences in physic…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/07/19 01:13 PM
2

>Could you show me some of that evidence? Sure. There is a pretty neat study by Standford researchers using data from the Uber taxi service. It turns out Uber has a 7% pay gap between male and female drivers. However, as it's Uber, they have a complete record on who did what at what time for all their employees, so they could figure out exactly were the pay comes from. They found no discrimination, but all kind of different choices that lead to different earnings at the end of the day. Very subt…
/r/MensRights09/07/19 12:05 AM
4

I see two problems with that. The first one is that feminism is a multi-faced movement encompassing many different opinions, some of them not compatible with others (e.g. you could defend equality of opportunity, or equality of outcome, and claim to be a feminist in both case). I've even heard people say stuff like "I'm not a feminist because I support gender equality", which says a lot about how confusing and heterogeneous feminism has become. In my personal view, the MRM is a subset of radical…
/r/MensRights08/07/19 11:04 PM
3

Maybe I read the article wrong, but it does not seem that anybody in the experiment was more willing to sacrifice a man than a woman. In Figure 3, you see that overall all groups get a score of 2 for sacrificing men, and also around 2 for sacrificing women. What changes is the effect of the subliminal images on this choice, but that's unrelated to the general tendency to sacrifice people.
/r/MensRights05/07/19 05:17 PM
8

Here is the full text for the "foodie call" article. http://sci-hub.tw/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550619856308?journalCode=sppa The focus of the study was to find the characteristic of women who would engage in such behavior, not to find the prevalence. People were recruited on the Amazon Mechanical Turk, which is not representative of the general population. Maybe people on AMT are more likely to do weird things for money, who knows. So it's quite misleading from the NYPos…
/r/MensRights23/06/19 12:30 PM
-4

Don't mind me, just posting the superior version: https://imgur.com/DRQJk
/r/MensRights21/06/19 10:57 PM
1

"For a project", mmmmm.
/r/MensRights17/06/19 12:53 AM
2

They should ban advertisement altogether.
/r/MensRights16/06/19 12:30 AM
1

In my experience, IRL people (including die-hard feminists) are totally fine with discussing men's rights and, most of the time, they are very supportive. It's useful to bring up gender stereotypes and the patriarchy as the root of the problem, e.g. « the patriarchy wants you to believe women are always innocent victims ». Most feminists would agree on that, and this way you make sure they understand that both of you are fighting against a common problem (gender roles), and that you are not tryi…
/r/MensRights11/06/19 01:57 PM
3

« 70% of job ads for Google use statistically gendered language like: “thrive on” » I must have missed something here. What is statistically gendered language ?
/r/MensRights05/06/19 04:39 PM
1

Sorry it took so long. Here are some references: Pain management https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00100.x (there might be more literature available on other types of pain) Speech interruptions https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci6010029 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018802521676 https://doi.org/10.2307/2095614 (the effect size is not crazy) Teacher's evaluation https://doi.org/10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-EDU.AETBZC.v1 https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvx057 (they do spooky things like using 0.1 as a si…
/r/MensRights03/06/19 03:05 PM
5

From what I remember, there is good evidence that women get interrupted more when they speak, their pain gets taken less seriously by doctors, and female teachers get rated lower by their students.
/r/MensRights30/05/19 11:50 PM
1

Totally agree with that. On a side note, I find it great that you come here to bring your viewpoint. The sad bit is that merely posting on this sub gets you auto-banned from many other subs, which does not really incentivize discussion.
/r/MensRights30/05/19 11:44 AM
4

The view that women give and men receive is very pervasive in feminist discourse, as far as I can tell. For example, what do you think of the women going on a "sex strike" in response to abortion laws?
/r/MensRights29/05/19 01:22 PM
18

"According to reports, the boy’s mom had p**********, his stepmom didn’t treat him well and she left with all his father’s money." I'm not sure I can guess what the stars stand for. Psychokinesis? Pancakes? Philosophy?
/r/MensRights29/05/19 10:54 AM
3

https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/31327/WBL2019.pdf The World Bank makes this report were they examine the legal differences between genders. My country has a perfect 100% score, as the law was made gender-neutral a few years back. It also includes things like laws to prevent workers from losing their job due to a pregnancy, I think that's a common reason for sub-100% scores in developed countries.
/r/MensRights24/05/19 12:38 PM
17

They have sick usernames tho.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 12:31 PM
1

Thanks for this post. This should have been in the OP.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 10:34 AM
5

So what's this document? They appear to have sources (i, ii and iii) to back up their claims, I'd be happy to see where it's from and what data they quote.
/r/MensRights23/05/19 07:43 AM
0

That's bullshit. There are many reasons why men commit suicide more than women, but I don't think being « told to hate their own gender » is one of them. The gender difference in suicide exists in pretty much every country, even countries with poor gender equality. Also, it's not a new trend, and probably predates modern feminism, let alone the kind of angry twitter-feminism that the pictures seems to be referring to. You could talk about domestic violence or the empathy gap instead, there is qu…
/r/MensRights04/05/19 09:01 AM
1

Good news, this is a fake tweet. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sarah-jeong-leukemia-tweet/
/r/MensRights28/04/19 04:42 PM
8

"Children most often killed by mothers" "mothers were responsible for 45 per cent of children killed by domestic violence" Maybe I did not read carefully enough, but this does not make sense.
/r/MensRights24/04/19 08:21 PM
1

Regarding the 2:1 statistics, I assume you're refering to this study: https://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360 It's specifically about tenure track in STEM-related academia, it's dangerous to generalize it. For instance that other study (same journal btw) says something very different: https://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474 Overall, hiring discrimination is very common, but varies in direction and magnitude depending on the exact circumstances. Here are a few interesting studies you could ref…
/r/MensRights24/04/19 04:59 PM
2

Couldn't agree more. Anecdotes are not informative, they are not useful and they are often distorted by the journalist, so we don't even know the full story. The Menslib subreddit has a rule they says « no "outrage porn"-type articles » and I think it is very good for the quality of the sub.
/r/MensRights14/04/19 12:29 AM
6

From the Washington Post article : « While Bouman’s contributions were crucial to processing the image of the black hole, the breakthrough was the result of an international collaboration involving more than 300 scientists, many of whom are women who have not gained similar traction for their contributions. » Made me laugh.
/r/MensRights14/04/19 12:17 AM
1

There are, and they have measurable consequences on behaviour. But to my knowledge there is no evidence that such biological differences would make queens more likely to start a war. That's a strong claim, you should back it up with proofs instead of making baseless assertions. Leave these tactics to the feminists.
/r/MensRights27/03/19 06:44 PM
1

It's a matter of concentration, intra-testicular testosterone concentration is much higher than plasmatic (as that is where it is produced). If I got this right, by using an oral analogue, the concentration in the testis would be the same as in the rest of the body, and that would not be enough to stimulate spermatogenesis. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/j.1939-4640.2004.tb03164.x Sorry for the confusion.
/r/MensRights26/03/19 11:17 AM
10

This drug was designed to bind to all testosterone receptors in the body, except the ones that mediate sperm production. In principle, it should just stop sperm cell production will mimicking the effects of testosterone on the other organs, so the common effects of lowering testosterone should not happen with that drug. Human clinical trials will allow to check whether this is the case. Now what I'd like to see is a report on the possible environmental effects of this. Female hormonal contracept…
/r/MensRights25/03/19 09:45 PM
-1

I'm not sure declaring a war is something you do spontaneously upon emotional impulse. I'm not sure either women are more impulsive, and even less that this is because of biology.
/r/MensRights25/03/19 02:39 PM
1

Link to the study: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878929318301245?via%3Dihub As usual, the headlines are overstating the findings. ​
/r/MensRights25/03/19 02:29 PM
4

Have you actually listened to the podcast, before deciding you would boycott the company?
/r/MensRights17/03/19 12:47 AM
3

It's great that they break it down by age. I would have suspected that a good part of this figure is due to the gap in life expectancy, but it turns out it is the opposite (men over 75 are more likely to own a home than women).
/r/MensRights10/03/19 10:32 AM
1

What's the source of the table in your first screenshot (about the stereotype threat experiment and its replication)?
/r/MensRights24/02/19 11:15 PM
1

Except they don't provide any support for a biological explanation. They even mention playing video games as a possible explanation, that sounds pretty environmental to me.
/r/MensRights26/01/19 02:40 PM
6

Where are these numbers from?
/r/MensRights15/01/19 09:37 AM
1

Do they count century-old widows as single ?
/r/MensRights09/01/19 10:39 PM
16

This study states the opposite: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247745141_Police_Officer_Characteristics_and_the_Likelihood_of_Using_Deadly_Force
/r/MensRights06/01/19 01:09 PM
18

I'm not convinced that looking at life expectancy is a good way to know about health inequality. A gap in life expectancy is potentially the result of many factors, some biological (maybe women just live longer) or linked to different choices (risk-taking behavior, more dangerous jobs with a better pay... ). Essentially the BIGI is measuring equal outcome, not equal treatment. I'm aware there is unequal treatment regarding health in western countries and that it is a problem, but that is not mea…
/r/MensRights05/01/19 05:04 PM
0

I think I found the source of these statistics: https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/07/study-men-interrupt-women-more-in-tech-workplaces-but-high-ranking-women-learn-to-interrupt.html If it really is the right source, then whoever made OP's slide added a big layer of dishonesty (e.g. 2/3 of the interruptions were from men in the study, but there were also more men in the room). Also, it appears that the more senior someone is, the more likely they are to interrupt someone else. As there were m…
/r/MensRights16/12/18 03:40 PM
1

Ok. That was a sneaky one. I guess I will move it from the "discrimination against women" folder to the "ideological pseudo-science" folder then.
/r/MensRights30/11/18 09:33 AM
2

Link to the study that the professor cites: https://www.scienceopen.com/document_file/25ff22be-8a1b-4c97-9d88-084c8d98187a/ScienceOpen/3507_XE6680747344554310733.pdf To know whether the difference in ratings is due to gender bias or to a different ability to teach, they look at the grades of the students in final exams. If female teachers were indeed worse at teaching than male teachers, you would expect female teacher's students to score lower in finals. However it is not the case: even for tea…
/r/MensRights29/11/18 06:45 PM
4

There is quite a lot of data on this in many different countries. It seems to be a common problem. United Kingdom: https://flora.insead.edu/fichiersti_wp/inseadwp2013/2013-66.pdf United States: https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/education_seminar_series/Mustard.pdf Israel: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/vlavy/lavy_j.public.e_10.2008_gender_steriotypes.pdf OECD countries: https://internationalednews.com/2015/03/05/whats-new-oecd-report-gender-equality-in-educati…
/r/MensRights29/11/18 06:22 PM
1

While we don't have so many technical details on why this happens, my guess is the following: it looks like they trained a machine learning model to emulate the choices of real human interviewers, by feeding the algorithm with data about who was hired or not in the past. If the training set was perfect and unbiased, the model would only give weight to factors that are directly relevant to the job, and the gender bias would arise from these factors being over-represented among men. The fact that …
/r/MensRights10/10/18 07:32 PM
3

Really? I want the source on that story.
/r/MensRights10/10/18 07:22 PM
3

That's a possibility, but not what the author claim. Their point is that feminist journals would publish anything as long as it fits their ideology. However, their experiment of sending nonsense feminist papers is not sufficient to back that claim, as they should also have included articles that don't fit feminist views to see if those get rejected. Otherwise, there's no way we can tell whether these journals accept only feminist-leaning bullshit, or whether they accept any kind of bullshit that…
/r/MensRights04/10/18 12:53 PM
2

Real rape victims are unquestionably harmed by false rape accusations. I suppose you are talking about people who believe that speaking up against false accusations is making actual rape victims less believable. I agree that this reasoning is flawed, but I don't agree with your rebuttal. Focusing on how false accusations affect people who're falsely accused is not going to convince rape victims support groups, it is much more effective to have them understand that the high prevalence of false ac…
/r/MensRights24/09/18 11:23 AM
3

Interesting, thank you. The mathematical model presented in the paper is pretty straightforward (Fig. 1 makes it self-explanatory), I don't think there are any grounds for rebuttal of this article on a scientific basis. The most puzzling thing about this story is that this paper was just a model to explain how the GMV comes about – if anything, the diversity advocates might feel threatened by the GMV hypothesis itself, not by the mathematical model to explain its causes. On that account, there i…
/r/MensRights15/09/18 10:15 PM
4

Why do you say feminists tried to make this paper disappear? Any source on that? Which feminists are you talking about exactly?
/r/MensRights15/09/18 04:27 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter