Men pay 70% of all taxes and yet not only do most benefits go to women, increasingly many of the top jobs are open to women on preferential terms. From a current article in The Spectator:
" If you’re a bloke in a suit who’d like to apply for the governorship of the Bank of England (deadline 5 June), I suggest you browse the website of Sapphire Partners, the headhunters appointed by Philip Hammond to conduct the search. Run by ex-JPMorgan banker Kate Grussing with an all-female team plus Cherie Booth and Lady (Barbara) Judge on its board, the firm declares: ‘We are trailblazers [as] advocated for women in business.’ You’ll probably already have read the job spec on the Cabinet Office website, which refers to candidates as ‘she/he’. "
Add to this the fact that less is spent on men's health than women's (and this has been the case since at least the late 80s), the fact that boys are discriminated against in education and you start to see that there is already a patriarchy tax.
We're paying it now and it's only going to get steeper until we collectively start saying "no".
The patriarchy tax is called the feminist welfare state. Male tax payers disproportionately fund it, women disproportionately benefit from it financially. Feminists have already largely succeeded in creating a patriarchy Tax, and have also succeeded in covering up that fact by calling it something egalitarian sounding like the welfare state/progressive tax, despite the fact that male needs have been largely neglected by progressive western states at the benefit of women. It is the pride and joy of all feminist statists and a powerful pillar of feminist policy. Its why you dont hear the politically powerful and studious radical types champion a patriarchy Tax, since theyve already achieved that goal in much of the west, especially W/N Europe, and would much rather let ignorance prevail, just in case "reactionaries" start calling for more egalitarian welfare reform that meets the needs of men, not just women and children. Most of these activist feminists are now on the socialism with a feminist bent train, since theyve realized you can only Tax the average man to a certain limit through progressive Tax policies, now profitable enterprises must pay more so women can enjoy more privileges and their shitty choices can be further subsidized.
I saw that there. I didn't get the impression that the OP believed the proposition of a "patriarchy tax" was a good idea. It seemed more like a thought experiment, not a genuine proposal. Thankfully, there was some sanity there and the idea was mostly dismissed outright.
The OP also wants to tax men to help women when the shelter gap already favors women in regular (men are 75 - 90% of the homeless depending on how you calculate it) and DV shelters. Look at the focus on women's health when research shows that money (ie the level of healthcare) impacts life expectancy and the life expectancy gap favors women. If they're going to tax men, shouldn't they at least address some of the gaps men actually face before they invent gaps that women don't face?
[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Men pay 70% of all taxes and yet not only do most benefits go to women, increasingly many of the top jobs are open to women on preferential terms. From a current article in The Spectator:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/05/why-women-make-better-senior-bankers-than-men/
Add to this the fact that less is spent on men's health than women's (and this has been the case since at least the late 80s), the fact that boys are discriminated against in education and you start to see that there is already a patriarchy tax.
We're paying it now and it's only going to get steeper until we collectively start saying "no".
[–]1LegendaryWombat 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
And yet women spend 80% of the money in the world....hmmm.
[–]tenchineuro 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
| Would you support a "patriarchy tax"?
We already have a man tax.
[–]wazzoz99 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
The patriarchy tax is called the feminist welfare state. Male tax payers disproportionately fund it, women disproportionately benefit from it financially. Feminists have already largely succeeded in creating a patriarchy Tax, and have also succeeded in covering up that fact by calling it something egalitarian sounding like the welfare state/progressive tax, despite the fact that male needs have been largely neglected by progressive western states at the benefit of women. It is the pride and joy of all feminist statists and a powerful pillar of feminist policy. Its why you dont hear the politically powerful and studious radical types champion a patriarchy Tax, since theyve already achieved that goal in much of the west, especially W/N Europe, and would much rather let ignorance prevail, just in case "reactionaries" start calling for more egalitarian welfare reform that meets the needs of men, not just women and children. Most of these activist feminists are now on the socialism with a feminist bent train, since theyve realized you can only Tax the average man to a certain limit through progressive Tax policies, now profitable enterprises must pay more so women can enjoy more privileges and their shitty choices can be further subsidized.
[–]trumpolina 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I love it when they bingo the comments with suggestions of communism.
[–]NAWALT_VADER 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
I saw that there. I didn't get the impression that the OP believed the proposition of a "patriarchy tax" was a good idea. It seemed more like a thought experiment, not a genuine proposal. Thankfully, there was some sanity there and the idea was mostly dismissed outright.
[–]KilltheK 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
Cant believe people STILL believe in the pay gap
[–]andejoh 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
The OP also wants to tax men to help women when the shelter gap already favors women in regular (men are 75 - 90% of the homeless depending on how you calculate it) and DV shelters. Look at the focus on women's health when research shows that money (ie the level of healthcare) impacts life expectancy and the life expectancy gap favors women. If they're going to tax men, shouldn't they at least address some of the gaps men actually face before they invent gaps that women don't face?