TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Trump signs laws to promote women in STEM, wants to address "barriers" faced by female entrepreneurs and those in STEM fields. No word yet on getting more men into female dominated fields.

TBP22

March 1, 2017
62 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.cnet.com/news/trump-women-in-stem-tech-laws/
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Trump signs laws to promote women in STEM, wants to address "barriers" faced by female entrepreneurs and those in STEM fields. No word yet on getting more men into female dominated fields.
Author

TBP22

Upvotes 62
Comments 28
Date March 1, 2017 3:04 AM UTC
(9 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/5wsn9n/trump_signs_laws_to_promote_women_in_stem_wants/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/trump-signs-laws-to-promote-women-in-stem-wants-to.930815
https://theredarchive.com/post/930815

Comments

[–]420weedscopes 13 points14 points15 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wtf is this. Health sciences part of the stem is already female dominated. I'm not an American but damn I was hoping to move down south for work cause prospects were much better in my field of molecular biology and biochemistry.

[–]Spoonwood 10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Meet the new feminist boss. He sounds like the old feminist boss. And yes, I mean feminist boss (or Time or Ivanka were lying): http://time.com/4392409/ivanka-trump-donald-trump-feminist/

[–]Consilio_et_Animis 16 points17 points18 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Note how to this pro-woman news was barely covered in the media, because it goes against the "Trump hates woman" narrative.

[–]FreddyDeus 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, I was just about to make that point. Where are all the marching women praising him for this legislation?

[–]roharareddit 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

If he thinks that this is going to placate the feminists he is dead wrong. They will do what they always do, ask for more more more more.

For the past two or three decades a whole lot of legislation has been written and a whole lot of money has been spent in order to do one simple thing: get more women educated and working in STEM fields in the U.S. It hasn't worked.

Why?

Because women have different tastes, values and, yes, aptitudes for different things than men do. Blaming the lack of women in STEM fields on discrimination is like blaming the lack of women in coal mines on discrimination. Or, blaming the fact that women like to find a man who is a good provider, get married to him, have babies and breastfeed them while he is out working for her on sexism.

If he thinks that he can play the placation game with feminists he is making a big big mistake. They will hold his feet to the fire for it and they have a plan to do just that. They always do.

Then there is the, now looming, chance that he is a nothing more than a gynocentric tradcon after all. In which case the recall of the Dear Colleague letter and VAWA reform are in serious jeopardy.

I didn't vote for Trump and have been relatively ambivalent about him until now. I have defended him but only when calling rabid leftists Hillary supporters out on their bullshit. However, after watching the speech last night I am doubtful that he is anything other than an 80s style drug warrior who has a hard time dealing with feminists.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh, dear. Et tu, Donaldius?

[–]Claireah 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

And I saw people that said they were voting for him because he would do the exact opposite of this. Seemed to have worked out well, huh?

[–]Deansdale 15 points16 points17 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I bet Hillary would have been better. /s

People voted for him because he was the better option, not because they thought he was an MRA.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I supported him because he said he would axe the TPP and implied that he would be far less likely than Psycho Granny to start another Iraq. So far, one out of two ain't bad.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Different person, same feminist shit

[–]galtthedestroyer 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or about women getting into dirty dangerous jobs.

[–]Rasalom72 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Let's look at this from the other side. Perhaps he is promoting this because the health sciences is already female dominated, so they can't really do any harm by addressing barriers/ blah blah blah. We all know that when women enter a sector, overall wages drop... and really, men have no trouble getting into female dominated fields (mostly because men are generally better then the women doing the jobs).. it's just that most men don't choose to enter them for a variety of reasons.

He needs the help of the senate to make actual changes, so if he gives them something that won't really make much difference (like this), then perhaps he will have them on side when he does something that will make a difference.

[–]StuckInTheNothingnes 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

he is a tradcon what did you expect ?

[–]The1KrisRoB 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

See this is why this sub gets a rep as being anti women.

More women in STEM is a good thing, more people in STEM full stop is a good thing.

As an MRA you can't look at every positive thing for women as a negative for men, otherwise you just become just like those misandrist women who claim "oppression" while having every right a man does.

[–]Machnow 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (10 children) | Copy Link

I see your point, and taken. But true equality is a two way street, and equality means equality all the time, not just when it's convenient or beneficial.

The issue my friends are trying to express is the complete lack of govt sponsored programs to get more women into, Mining, Logging, Sanitation, Roofing, etc.

people will always die on some jobs, and men are +90% of workplace deaths in these industries. what we don't see is a big "push" to get women into those fields, and share the burden of dying. because it is inevitable that some will die.

you see...the "push" is on to get women into the nice, comfy executive corporate office positions, but not the truly dangerous jobs.

It's the same sort of argument we see when some, not all but many feminists decrying women in front line combat.

it's pure hypocrisy...any way you slice it.

where is the big push to get men into nursing, early education, social services, etc.

I would absolutey love to be married to a woman who makes way, way more than me while I go teach kindergarten..

I have no problem with that at all, and if she should piss me off...looking forward to keeping the house, the kids and a nice fat alimony check each month.

you see now?

[–]The1KrisRoB 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Don't get me wrong I totally see the reasoning, I just think too often in this sub it becomes more about "women bad, men good".

If you always try and find the bad in something good (which you can't argue this post isn't doing) then you just become a movement of bitterness.

Just stop and think about the person who has never thought about feminism or men's rights, someone completely neutral. They would look at this post and wonder why these men are seemingly angry about something good happening for women.

I'm also a member of /r/childfree, but I'm seriously thinking about unsubbing that that subreddit too because it's stopped being about celebrating those who choose to not have kids, and is turning into a sub that should probably be renamed to /r/childhate. (which is of course a thing)

The way this sub is going, it's not going to be long before it's no better than 3rd wave feminists who constantly play the victim and always show such vileness towards men. I don't want MRA's to become like that.

[–]Spoonwood 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Don't get me wrong I totally see the reasoning, I just think too often in this sub it becomes more about "women bad, men good".

This post isn't about "women bad, men good." It's about policy and what has gotten signed by the legislature and the executive branch, not some sort of statement about women and men.

Also, I don't agree that this is good. One-way gender policy is not good, and the Trump administration shows a tendency of going only one way. Trump is a feminist: http://time.com/4392409/ivanka-trump-donald-trump-feminist/ and thus there is no reason to suspect that he will have policy that goes both ways. If it is appropriate to have gendered policy like the above, then it has to work both ways. We need policies to help both men and women, not just women.

And such gendered policy might just not be good ever even if it goes both ways. Gender doesn't affect how rockets work. Gravity won't care if it's a man or a woman trying to do something. So, why even consider that as a factor in the first place when trying to promote the advancement of science and technology?

The relevance of having a sex balance in the sciences and technology isn't clear at all. Sex doesn't affect the advance of those fields, does it? But, the sex of a psychological counselor or an elementary school teacher might affect students, since such matters involve human psychology. Though where is the legislation for men in those fields?

[–]The1KrisRoB 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

One reason feminists believe there's a "gender pay gap" is because there's less women in STEM related jobs which generally tend to pay well.

How is having more people in STEM not a good thing?

It's like during Trump's speech when he would say he's going to create more jobs and everyone got up and applauded because that's actually a good thing, yet 90% of the dems just sat there on their hands. They so belligerently hate Trump that they wouldn't even acknowledge when he said something good.

This smacks of that kind of tunnel vision.

I mean this is a MRA sub, there are no men's rights at threat here

[–]Spoonwood 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

How is having more people in STEM not a good thing?

It's not good if you value one sex over another. It is also not good if you have preferential treatment towards one sex. This sort of policy bears a certain sort of resemblance towards affirmative action which makes gender relevant when it doesn't have any bearing on the job that gets done.

They so belligerently hate Trump that they wouldn't even acknowledge when he said something good.

I don't agree that such programs are good in the first place necessarily. Creating more jobs is good necessarily. So, no, your comparison is not correct here.

I mean this is a MRA sub, there are no men's rights at threat here

Men pay most of the taxes. You're saying that should pay most of the taxes to promote women when they are in the minority, but there is no promoting of men when they are in the minority statistically speaking such as in elementary education or psychological counseling or dietetics is there?

[–]The1KrisRoB 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It's not good if you value one sex over another.

How is trying to make things equal, putting one sex over the other? Your argument would make sense if there were as many women as men in STEM at the moment, but there aren't. This is about helping women get into STEM and making things equal.

Your argument just sounds like this horrible victim mentality that becoming more and more prevalent in today's society.

I don't agree that such programs are good in the first place necessarily. Creating more jobs is good necessarily. So, no, your comparison is not correct here.

So you're against people becoming employed, gaining jobs, better infrastructure and tax cuts that benefit the middle class? POTUS said he wants to work with the dems to make the country better and they sat on their hands, that's very much like the attitude shown by some on here, anything that promotes women in anyway becomes an anti men rhetoric and it's sad.

You're saying that should pay most of the taxes to promote women when they are in the minority, but there is no promoting of men when they are in the minority statistically speaking such as in elementary education or psychological counseling or dietetics is there?

I'm saying that taxes going to help promote equality in STEM is not a negative towards men, and I have no problem with it, in the same way I wouldn't expect people to have a problem with taxes going to help underprivileged black kids.

Stop living in a world where one person getting something positive is automatically a negative for someone else.

[–]Spoonwood 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

How is trying to make things equal, putting one sex over the other?

It puts the opportunities of women over those of men. It is NOT trying to make things equal in terms of equality of opportunity.

Your argument would make sense if there were as many women as men in STEM at the moment, but there aren't.

STEM actually consists of a vague term that doesn't have consistent agreement among academics as to what it means. Do you include psychology? Do you include fields like nursing? Do you include social sciences?

This is about helping women get into STEM and making things equal.

The bills are more specific than "STEM", whatever that means. It's actually too specific to have a significant effect on STEM numbers overall, since the fields addressed are not numerous enough relative to all STEM fields... at least under most definitions of STEM.

So you're against people becoming employed, gaining jobs, better infrastructure and tax cuts that benefit the middle class?

Alright, you've engaged in the fallacy of a misleading question, because I didn't say any such thing.

I find it sad how quickly you have devolved into talking about a "horrible victim mentality" as if discrimination in policy can't be relevant.

Stop living in a world where one person getting something positive is automatically a negative for someone else.

I'll do as I please, thank you. And again, there don't exist similar programs promoting men when they are minorities in some area, does there?

[–]The1KrisRoB 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

And again, there don't exist similar programs promoting men when they are minorities in some area, does there?

Well complain about that, rather than focusing on where someone else has got some help.

So much of this sub is focused on women. Not mens rights. The actual smart feminists are slowly learning you don't promote/get equality by constantly complaining about "the patriarchy" and running down men.

Some men could stand to learn a little from that.

[–]Spoonwood 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So much of this sub is focused on women.

This post is focused on policy by the Trump administration. Not women. Trump is not a woman. Nor are most members of Congress who put forth and signed the laws. They are gynocentrist men whose policies we have criticized.

[+]ZzardozZ -12 points-11 points-10 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Men and all that they do is great. Masculinity is all. Women are shit and all that is feminine is inferior as evidenced by women's desire to have and be all that is male.

[–]ShitlordRessurect 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Great rant based on hatred driven generalization. Perhaps you should be better off having a dick shoved down your throat if you love masculinity so much lol.

[+]andy921 points 9 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

This thread is just full of high-minded debate isn't it?

[–]ShitlordRessurect -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

ZzardozZ should explore his gay side if he loves all that is masculinity so much lol.

[–]ZzardozZ -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

that felt weird saying women are shit but seriously, we used to honor and reflect the feminine as a cultural norm and it was a time of art and reflection. The renaissance and the 80's? The modern age is way too butch for its own good. I think we all have our heads up our asses.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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