~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Stephen_Morgan
[–]raptorrage 24 points25 points26 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
"The sisterhood"? Are you kidding me? Women are brutal to each other. MRA have some great points, but this is tripe.
[–]noprotein 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
The list is reaching, many points are valid, but this got me as well.
[–]raptorrage -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Having it all"? I don't even have a bidet man, I don't have it all.
[–]Number357 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, I feel like adding extra things like that just weaken it altogether. Better to have a few strong points than a few strong and weak ones.
[–]kaesylvri 85 points86 points87 points 12 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link
Things like 'less likely to drop out', 'expected to choose easier career' and 'higher suicide rates' aren't privilege.
A good what... half of that list just screams grasping-at-straws.
[+][deleted] 12 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]kaesylvri 39 points40 points41 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
So, because they stoop to shit tactics, 'we' have to?
Sorry but there are better ways to get our point across. If bad information is presented as reinforcing arguments, it just marginalizes the message we're trying to send.
If I dismissed it as bullshit because of the bad terms included within the graphic, no doubt others have as well.
All in all, sticking to actual privileged facts would wind up better. Shorter list? Maybe, better end result? Positively.
[–]notaveryhappycamper 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I took it more as mirroring their idiocy to prove the point about their idiocy, not necessarily trying to prove the opposing point. The concept of "x privilege" in general seems pretty silly to me.
[–]Non_Social 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yelling at people by just mirroring their own terrible arguments isn't a very solid way to get a point across to them. They tend to just see that as a personal attack and then shut down, or worse, see it as validation for their own beliefs.
[–]Lightfiend 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It is if your mirror is meant to poke fun at their own irrationalities.
It's no different than everyone here who does "gender reversals" to point out hypocrisy.
[–]kaesylvri 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You can be better than that.
We can be better than that.
We laugh at them when they try to squirrel stack bad information, how do you think it makes a minority movement look?
[–]rapscallionx 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
How do manage to convince an individual of a fact, using logic and reason as tools, if that individual does not value logic and reason?
[+][deleted] 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]kaesylvri 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
That makes no sense.
If someone decides to take this item out of context and post it elsewhere, the bad points in it would just cause more damage than good.
The better the message is controlled, the more clear the message. Why produce something that can be used to debunk actual important matters, and additionally why produce something to counter-act bad information to begin with.
It just... doesn't make sense. .-.
[+][deleted] 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]wanna_dance 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
suicide rate,
Men traditionally seek help at a much lower rate. Encouraging men to be more aware of their feelings rather than to 'toughen up' is a men's issue (although this oppression is done to men by both men and women).
work-related injury.
By allowing opening "men's jobs" to women, injury actually becomes lower for both men and women in the role. For instance, when women started serving on submarines, because they did not have as much upper body strength, heavy lifting became a 2-person job, and men suffered less back injury as a result.
work-related death.
We need to respect workers, period, and stop taking shortcuts that can be fatal. Men often take more dangerous jobs (and hey, isn't that the excuse the men's movement use for why you get paid more (even at cushy non-dangerous jobs) ?)
In solidarity, men and women working against oppression of men and women.
[–]guywithaccount 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Encouraging men to be more aware of their feelings rather than to 'toughen up' is a men's issue
The problem isn't that men can't recognize that they're miserable. The problem is that men can't tell anyone.
[–]ebonlance 27 points28 points29 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Without sources stuff like this is easy to dismiss as angry rhetoric to the average person who honestly buys into modern feminism. Let's work together to annotate this to include sources, as the vast majority of these are pretty legitimate. Some of them could also use expansion (for example, citing "Feminism" as an example of female privilege isn't as self-explanatory to many as it would be to an MRA)
[+]wrez -18 points-17 points-16 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Sources don't win discussions - good talking points do!
[–]dakru 18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Let's have sources behind the talking points, then.
[–]ebonlance 17 points18 points19 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
We're not feminists. 'Winning discussions' is high-school-debate-team bullshit. Sourcing our arguments and presenting a logical, cohesive portfolio of evidence is the highest ideal we can aspure to.
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link
Sources?
[–]mastersword83 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, he needs some sources. On the "less chance of commiting suicide" is false. While men may have more successful suicide attempts per capita, women still have higher attempted suicide rates
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_differences_in_suicide
Ninja edit: Keyword is reported. If a guy failed a suicide attempt then he probably wouldn't tell anyone because he would be a "pussy"
[–]EclipseClemens 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
There's no signs afterwards when you put a gun to your head and don't pull the trigger. There's signs when you stopped eating pills before a lethal dose.
There's a reason why there's a gap, but I don't think we agree on why the gap is there.
[–]mastersword83 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, I forgot about the "reported" in italics.
Also, you're right, because the article says that women are more likely to use pills or something, while men do something more immediate.
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Men also don't typically attempt suicide for attention.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Do you have studies suggesting women do?
[–]Celda 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yes.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/11/981112075159.htm
In the past, researchers who looked at the high rate of attempted suicide in women concluded that women were just not as efficient as men at taking their own lives. Murphy calls that "sexist baloney" and points to statistics that show that like men, women who commit suicide most often use guns. However, even as the number of women using the most lethal means increases, the suicide rate in women has slowly declined. "So it really goes back to the same thing -- that women, when they intend to do it, can be just as effective as men in committing suicide. But they aren't so inclined," Murphy says.
In the past, researchers who looked at the high rate of attempted suicide in women concluded that women were just not as efficient as men at taking their own lives. Murphy calls that "sexist baloney" and points to statistics that show that like men, women who commit suicide most often use guns. However, even as the number of women using the most lethal means increases, the suicide rate in women has slowly declined.
"So it really goes back to the same thing -- that women, when they intend to do it, can be just as effective as men in committing suicide. But they aren't so inclined," Murphy says.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Although that is an article from a psychiatrist, it's not a study and doesn't actually reference any data. The only evidence given for his conclusion is that most successful suicides among women employ handguns and hanging - the same means as men.
That in itself is not nearly enough to draw the conclusion that attempts with different methods are for attention. You would nee data on state of mind and motivations to draw Murphy's conclusion. If you can find it that would go a much farther ways to helping your case.
As it stands with the information given the only clear conclusion to be drawn is that methods other than guns and hanging are less effectively lethal.
EDIT: A couple interesting articles/studies I've run across
A University of British Columbia study sheds important new light on why people attempt suicide and provides the first scientifically tested measure for evaluating the motivations for suicide. The study, based on 120 participants who recently attempted suicide, suggests many motivations believed to play important roles in suicide are relatively uncommon. For example, suicide attempts were rarely the result of impulsivity, a cry for help, or an effort to solve a financial or practical problem. Of all motivations for suicide, the two found to be universal in all participants were hopelessness and overwhelming emotional pain.
A University of British Columbia study sheds important new light on why people attempt suicide and provides the first scientifically tested measure for evaluating the motivations for suicide.
The study, based on 120 participants who recently attempted suicide, suggests many motivations believed to play important roles in suicide are relatively uncommon. For example, suicide attempts were rarely the result of impulsivity, a cry for help, or an effort to solve a financial or practical problem. Of all motivations for suicide, the two found to be universal in all participants were hopelessness and overwhelming emotional pain.
http://news.ubc.ca/2013/06/13/first-major-study-of-suicide-motivations-to-advance-prevention/
While the gender paradox of suicidal behavior is common, particularly in industrialized countries, it is not universal, she said. In China, for example, women die of suicide at higher rates than men. In Finland and Ireland, men and women engage in nonfatal suicidal behavior at similar rates. There are more exceptions to the gender paradox of suicidal behavior when one examines female/male patterns of suicidality by age or culture, she said. "A broad cultural perspective shows that women and men do not consistently differ in terms of the kinds of suicidal behavior they engage in, or with regard to the circumstances or the motives of their suicidal behavior," she said. "When women and men differ with regard to some dimensions of suicidal behavior, the meaning and salience of these differences vary from one social group to another, one culture to another, one historical period to another, depending on local scripts of gender and suicidal behavior." The cultural variability in patterns and scripts of women's and men's suicidal behavior calls for "culturally situated suicidality research and prevention," Canetto said.
While the gender paradox of suicidal behavior is common, particularly in industrialized countries, it is not universal, she said. In China, for example, women die of suicide at higher rates than men. In Finland and Ireland, men and women engage in nonfatal suicidal behavior at similar rates. There are more exceptions to the gender paradox of suicidal behavior when one examines female/male patterns of suicidality by age or culture, she said.
"A broad cultural perspective shows that women and men do not consistently differ in terms of the kinds of suicidal behavior they engage in, or with regard to the circumstances or the motives of their suicidal behavior," she said. "When women and men differ with regard to some dimensions of suicidal behavior, the meaning and salience of these differences vary from one social group to another, one culture to another, one historical period to another, depending on local scripts of gender and suicidal behavior." The cultural variability in patterns and scripts of women's and men's suicidal behavior calls for "culturally situated suicidality research and prevention," Canetto said.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100812172040.htm
Data from a psychological autopsy study were used to test the theory that women who commit suicide use less violent means because they are less intent on dying. Although women were significantly less likely to use a violent method than men, there was no difference in the lethality of their suicidal intent.
Method Choice, Intent and Gender in Completed Suicide - Denning, Conwell, King, Cox
The aim of the present study was to characterize the severity of attempted suicide by extracting components of suicidal intent and analyzing levels of suicidal intent by gender, age, and variables indicating the severity of attempted suicide. ... RESULTS: The level of suicidal intent was not gender-dependent, but rose with age. Males and females were also similar in terms of discrete components.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19767269
This next one is actually a meta-study analyzing 39 other studies on suicidal intent.
The first intentions mentioned are internal perturbations type: to get relief, to escape, cannot endure situation or thoughts any longer, loss of control. They are often blended with interpersonal intentions: to make people understand what they felt, to seek help, to make things easier for others, while more aggressive, punitive or manipulative functions are seldom reported. Women report more reasons than men, but do not differ in their pattern of intentions. Suicide attempters report varying desire to die across studies.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22516269
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
All anecdotal, though I'm keen to start collecting data if you'd like to volunteer.
As far as I know there are no studies indicating men or women attempt suicide "for attention".
Frankly, I find the assumption without any evidence completely repellent. Both cruel and rather dense. People who make attempts on their lives are usually sick and in despair but always need help. Maybe that's the "attention" they're willing to die for.
EDIT: For studies/scientific articles I've run across in my research of this question look above at my response to /u/Celda
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
While men may have more successful suicide attempts per capita, women still have higher attempted suicide rates
And its pretty disappointing for some people to think its acceptable to trivialize suicide attempts of an entire gender in order to further a political aim. Surely we can all agree that suicide, successful or not is a serious problem that needs attention. Issues like this should not be a competition of "who has it worst" - claiming women are in it for "attention" as seen below.
Women have almost double the attempted suicide rates of men - that is a huge problem. Men are largely successful when they attempt suicide and therefore rarely get help and an opportunity to recover - that is a huge problem.
They are not mutually exclusive and I'm hard pressed to see anyone's attempt at suicide as "privilege".
[–]BrambleEdge 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
There is of course the issue of parasuicide, whereby you feign a suicide attempt to gain attention and sympathy. An issue in and of itself, but not comparable to suicide and suicide attempts.
I don't know how high of a percentage of either sex' suicide attempts are parasuicidal behaviour, but I wouldn't be surpurised if most suicide attempts are in fact not suicide attempts.
[–]Stephen_Morgan[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I just saw it linked to on another message board.
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Posts like these which have no sources will receive a lot of criticism.
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I saw this thread a week ago and the original OP said this was a rough draft. You're a dickworm reposter who hasn't brought anything to this sub at all.
[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
This comment is much more productive, I agree.
[–]dakru 18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago* (16 children) | Copy Link
Ignoring the lack of sources, I thought this was pretty good up until the point that it mentioned hypergamy. Hypergamy is the tendency among women to prioritize finding a partner with high social status and marry up in terms of social status (compared to men who tend to be concerned with other things in a partner, like beauty, instead of social status), and I'm really not sure how this trend in women's partner preferences constitutes any sort of privilege.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
In addition, the only way for women as a group to consistently "marry up" is if they, as a group begin at a lower level. Not an example of privilege.
[–]sens2t2vethug 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
The privilege could be that they marry up in the sense of marrying partners who have higher incomes than they do. That doesn't necessarily mean they begin at a lower level overall. Perhaps they choose not to earn so much money because they expect to find a partner who'll do it for them.
If the genders were reversed, and women were working longer hours in more dangerous jobs, and men simply married a wealthy woman and shared in that wealth, there can surely be no doubt feminists would be talking about it as a privilege for men.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
The privilege could be that they marry up in the sense of marrying partners who have higher incomes than they do.
Then women must begin at a lower socioeconomic rung than men. Usually the factors mentioned are in fact, income and "social status" (although I hate that bullshit PUA measurement). Regardless of the reasons you personally feel women make/have less money the fact remains that in order to marry up you must begin below. That will be true of whatever metric you choose.
Yes, if men as a whole were "marrying up" it would not be a feminist issue but rather an MRM one since men were occupying the lower rung. Since reality is the opposite, it is in fact a Feminist issue that women as a whole are on a lower socioeconomic rung. Which makes it completely inappropriate for this poster.
EDIT: I find it a little odd that people would identify hypergamy as a mens rights issue (because its somehow unfair how men choose their own partners?). Yet refuse to acknowledge the obvious issue that for any group as a whole to be "marrying up" they must begin below.
[–]Celda 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Then women must begin at a lower socioeconomic rung than men.
That is not true at all.
It could simply mean that the women in the highest socioeconomic rung do not marry up.
Your logic is flawed.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
True, it would be possible for the majority of women to marry up and for men and women to have equal worth if the top echelons of women do not marry. Logically that would be consistent.
Personally, I would see that as indicative of a different social problem.
[–]Celda 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
....if the top echelons of women do not marry.
Not at all. The top echelons of women could either marry down, or marry on an equal level.
Again, your logic is quite flawed - you seem incapable of deducing simple and undeniable conclusions.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link
Not if we accept that hypergamy is a legitimate widespread phenomenon. In order for hypergamy to exist women must be marrying above their socioeconomic level.
If women at the top echelons are marrying at their level or below there simply isn't room demographically for women as a whole to be marrying up. Unless women as a whole group begin from a lower socioeconomic position. I even drew you a pretty diagram to give you a hand. Try drawing lines on that last one that retains hypergamy for women without having the top echelons of women remain unwed.
Protip: its not possible.
[–]Celda 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
All it would take is for 10% of people, spread out throughout the socioeconomic stratum, to not marry (or not be married currently).
You seem to think that 100% of people are married, which is quite false.
[–]test_ost 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Not exactly.
Consider: Women born into rich families already have it made, same as men.
So this only matters for people who aren't born into privilege.
Of those, 50% are male and have close to zero chance to marry up. They have to make it entirely on their own (and will lose 80% of their net worth in a divorce).
The other 50% are female and they can acquire a higher standard of living than their own labor would produce, from men.
This might seem like it doesn't work, because of the idea that the gender split must be 50-50, until you consider that only 40% of men reproduce, while 80% of women do.
It's not about EVERY woman having it better than every man -- the bottom 20% of women are thrown away. But THREE TIMES AS MANY men are thrown away.
I will also point out that a lot of rich men get married to women who aren't exactly lookers, or young. Why is this? Because so many women aren't pursuing their options when they're young. They've been told to pursue careers, which puts them at odds with their own biological clock.
Combine this with many rich men being very bad at meeting women. It's open season for women with chutzpah. When Google filed to go public, a gaggle of would-be Rich Housewives descended upon the googlers and divvied up the millionaire bachelor geeks amongst themselves (proceeding to get them stylists and etiquette lessons).
Marrying up! Financially, anyway. Not every guy can be John Wayne.
The only example I can cite off the top of my head about men marrying up is Western men who go to China and marry girls from rich families, because white-skinned men are seen as highly attractive. (Also, most wealthy Chinese leave China to live in the West, and the ones who stay buy things like New Zealand baby formula since they can't trust Chinese ones, with melamine and various toxic contaminants and adulterants. Marriage makes residency much easier, and the kids can get citizenship in the father's country.)
http://www.chinasmack.com/2013/stories/differences-between-chinese-men-and-laowai-foreign-men.html
http://www.chinasmack.com/2013/stories/chinese-girls-laowai-foreign-men-dislike-and-marry.html
http://www.chinasmack.com/2013/stories/myths-chinese-girls-have-about-laowai-foreign-men.html
This might seem like it doesn't work, because of the idea that the gender split must be 50-50, until you consider that only 40% of men reproduce, while 80% of women do. It's not about EVERY woman having it better than every man -- the bottom 20% of women are thrown away. But THREE TIMES AS MANY men are thrown away.
Marriage is the measurement here - not reproduction. So unfortunately, this entire paragraph is irrelevant (to this discussion at least).
According to the US Bureau of Statistics once you reach the age of about 30 ten percent more man have never been married than women and by 40 that number is seven. So while there is a gap in marriage statistics for men and women - its not very large.
Of those, 50% are male and have close to zero chance to marry up. They have to make it entirely on their own (and will lose 80% of their net worth in a divorce). The other 50% are female and they can acquire a higher standard of living than their own labor would produce, from men.
Although "making it on their own" is a very charged and in my opinion, inaccurate assessment, if we accept that hypergamy exists we have already accepted that this is the case. That women "marry up".
I will also point out that a lot of rich men get married to women who aren't exactly lookers, or young.
Truthfully, I have never seen this to be the case. Rich men typically marry contemporaries or younger and generally more attractive women. Regardless, I'm not sure how you think this is relevant. What we're examining is social status and income - not attractiveness or youth.
In order for women to "marry up" in terms of social status and income they must have less than their partner. If this is a widespread social phenomenon then women as a whole begin from a lower rung on those metrics.
Although you've cited some interesting ideas, none of them effectively refute that in order for hypergamy to exist women must have less money or "social status" than their partner. Its the very definition of hypergamy, if you accept that it exists you must accept that those conditions are in place.
[–]test_ost 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
I include anything where women (or men) leap to a bigger, better deal in "hypergamy", not just when there's a marriage license.
This isn't arbitrary; the relevant portion is the exchange of sex or company for material resources.
Hypergamy existed before state-sanctioned marriage did.
But it's really the spectre of divorce which makes this such a hot button issue. You still have to pay, but they don't have to do anything at all.
So I would also include a woman getting high child support payments in "hypergamy" even if she's not married; there's a legally-mandated transfer of wealth from one party to another.
The difference is pretty stark. For example, let's assume that female movie stars have just as many partners as male movie stars; so they've probably slept with attractive fans. But a normal Joe can never pop up 9 months later and say, "I'm suing you for child support, Scarlett Johansson! I told you I was wearing a condom but I wasn't and I jacked your egg!"
Rich men typically marry contemporaries or younger and generally more attractive women.
Generally, sure. But there's a significant number of extremely beta-acting men with lots of money who are quite vulnerable to more dominant women.
none of them effectively refute that in order for hypergamy to exist women must have less money or "social status" than their partner.
There seems to be some confusion about individual women, and women as a group.
By definition an individual would have to have less, or it wouldn't be marrying "up".
But that doesn't mean that women as a group have to be lower than men as a group. As mentioned, more men are disposable.
Let's illustrate with a simple example: 10 Men and 10 Women, who have wealth equivalent to their number, e.g., Man #1 and Woman #1 each have one dollar, or one rock, or one cow, or whatever. Man #2 and Woman #2 each have 2 rocks or 2 cows or whatever.
There are multiple pairings which result in women marrying up.
For example, let's remove Woman #10 for a moment. Now let's shift all the women up by one -- the woman with $1 marries the man with $2, all the way up to the woman with $9 marrying the man with $10.
Only the man with $1 is left out. There are multiple options -- maybe having $1 isn't enough so he died, or maybe Woman #10 married him, or maybe he just stays a bachelor.
You have women as a group (all but one) marrying up.
If 9 out of 10 women marrying up isn't "as a group" to you, what about 3.5 billion out of 3.5 billion plus one? Or just assume woman #10 died.
Another pairing:
Man #10 marries woman #9 and keeps woman #1 as a mistress. Man #1 left out again, along with Man #2. Everyone else shifts up by 1, except woman #10.
See, because we distributed the money evenly to men and women, Woman #10 can never marry up, and Man #1 can never marry down.
You can also imagine all the men in America lined up in order of wealth, and all the women lined up precisely opposite them. The women take one step to the right (knocking the richest woman into the Sea) and they've all moved up.
Let's also remember that not everyone gets married. If women will only marry a suitable man (meaning richer), then any marriages that take place will de facto be hypergamous.
Let's illustrate this with 10 women who all have $2-$11 each, and 10 men ranging from $1 to $10 as before.
The women have both more total wealth ($65 vs. $55) and a higher median wealth.
The richest 2 women ($10 and $11) can never find a suitable man, and the men with $1 and $2 are not suitable for any woman.
The other 8 can get married, but only if they each move up ONE spot. If anyone but the $9 woman marries the $10 man, then the $9 woman will be left out, too.
Or, maybe only guys who make more than the average are considered suitable -- just having more isn't enough, they have to pass a threshold, too.
This would mean only men #6,7,8,9, and 10 are suitable.
As for marriage rates:
http://www.justfourguys.com/marriage-rates-plummet-projection-of-never-married-rates-to-2017/
Oh yeah, and women as a group obviously DO make less money than men, possibly partly because they are counting to marry into money rather than make it themselves.
[–]Brintyboo 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
It's difficult to explain, but the way I see it is this trend perpetuates the idea that men are work horses, they're providers and their value as a partner should be judged on their social and economic capital. The privilege aspect comes in I believe, in a woman's sense of entitlement to these things in a partner while at the same time feeling entitled to the same level of social and economic capital for herself. It links to the 'Having it All' slogan. Women will not start to become accepted in these higher-status roles until they start to accept men in lower-status roles - Lindy Mundy wrote an interesting book on this called 'The Richer Sex'. I guess what I'm getting at is hypergamy is a female privilege because although it re-enforces stereotypical gender roles on both sides of the fence, women generally come out on top and are supported in their unrealistic aim to 'have it all'.
[–]dakru 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
There's nothing wrong with women (tending towards) caring about social status in a partner. If they want to judge someone as a potential partner on their social and economic capital, that's their business. A woman can't help being turned on by a high-status man than a man can help being turned on by a beautiful woman.
It just sounds too much like the opposite of the male-preference shaming we hear so often from feminism, where "a woman's value as a partner shouldn't be judged on their physical beauty!". It doesn't make men stop caring about beauty... It just makes them less likely to admit it.
If what you're getting at is that women are supported more in their preferences than men, then I'd say that from my perspective it looks like that to me too. However our goal shouldn't be to start attacking women's preferences so that they're attacked as much as men's are; it should be to get people to stop attacking men's preferences.
[–]Brintyboo 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't think there's anything wrong in having preferences and I'm not 'attacking' women for having these preferences, but that doesn't change the fact that these preferences/trends result in a sociological pattern that groups of men and women seem to dislike. This is why I call 'having it all' unrealistic. Either you can have all your preferences met and re-enforce current gender roles, or you can re-consider your preferences (yes, it's possible!) and challenge these roles. Some people are perfectly happy with how things are right now on the gender front so they don't have to bother, but if you're a woman who is unhappy with the over-representation of men in higher-status roles, then you're going to have to make some changes in regards to how you value men! Just as if you're a man who dislikes the stigma attached to men who work in fields of care, you're going to have to make some changes in regards to how you value women! Hypergamy wouldn't be a problem if women with this preference were happy to be subservient and their partners were happy to be unconditional providers, but this is not always the case. Women WANT IT ALL and society accepts this mismatch of personal preferences and life goals from them a lot more than they do men. Your preferences in a partner have to align with the goals you have for yourself, if they don't align you either have to change your goals or change your preferences, that's not 'attacking', that's just life.
While I agree and understand your point... men have to "accept" this in order for it to happen. If men would not marry down, this wouldn't exist.
[–]Brintyboo 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
but you see, men don't actively 'accept' this, they just dont marry on the basis of status. That book I mentioned discusses how men honestly don't care how much a woman earns, even if it's more than him. Men don't reject women on the basis of social/financial standing while women do, and I doubt encouraging men to start doing this to break the trend is a good thing. It's much more positive to encourage women to be more accepting.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
The fact that I have to pay some stupid price to enter a club and get a drink when if I had a vagina that would be for absolutely free.
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
Ok, explain this to me. What's the appeal of clubs over bars? I just turned 21, and only go to bars because I've been to a couple clubs and hated them
[–]pelpeh1 points 12 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Oh I actually agree with you. I would much rather have a nice pint in a bar/pub with friends then drink in a loud obnoxious club. Was making a point though
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Me too. Damn. I just don't get the appeal, so I want someone who loves them to explain haha
[–]guywithaccount 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
More skinny young women wearing nothing but spandex aprons and five-inch fashion stilts, I guess. You usually get a more mixed crowd in a bar.
Yeah, and the guys tend to be frat douches. I had a guy try to grind on me at a gay club, what the fuck?
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Far too much duplication:
'Less work-related injuries'/'Less work-related deaths'/'Safer work conditions'
Same for mental health issues/addictions, and a number of related points about education.
And a few don't make much sense at all, IMHO.
Would be better with a far shorter list of only the strongest points, more carefully worded.
[–]Brintyboo 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I agree with some of these items, but not all. In particular, how is 'feminism' a female privilege? Does that make the MRM a male privilege? Everyone, in some way or another, is born with someone that advocates for them and their rights. I wouldn't really consider it a privilege to have people care about you, that's more a basic human need. Although on that note I think some of the choices and actions made by feminists are indicative of 'female privilege'.
[–]Meistermalkav 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
I can see how the black community activists can speak of priviledge. I can see how a chinese banned blogger can speak to us about first world priviledge. Heck, I can even see how a refugee, or someone from a noneuropean country can accuse me of "european priviledge"
However, if some Stepford wife immitating, goat cheese lovin', motherfuckin' Himalayan salt tastin', wine guzzling, self involved, nature loving, SUV driving, helicopter parent worshipping, Sugardaddy having, Cosby watchin', pompus ass licker of the rich and famous, jazz listenin', Morgan Black Republican Freeman foreign film watchin', french pastry eatin', Housewife paintin', 'Oh, I have an antique shop too', jewelery makin', PETA supporting, white guilt swallowing, environmentally friendly and homegrown supporting, "Oh we just buy from our local producers" admitting, home bakin', recipie swappin', coupon clippin', farmer's market, flea market, equestrian horse fucking, thrift shop ripoff, Connecticut foliage, chocolate pretzel eating, "Oh, I have a 40.000$/month alamony, because I spend the best years of my life married to him and got accustomed to that lifestyle" having, "Immunisations cause autism" supporting, "A real man should never ever hit a woman, no matter how often she hit him" saying, "you go gurrl" sayin', "female genital mutilation is a crime against humanity, male genital mutilation is totally different and a religious right" reasoning; rich oblivious chiuaua breedin; gold digger tells me that I have priviledge, but she does not have priviledge, because in some backwater part of the world brown women whose first names she can't even correctly pronounce get forced into marriages and beaten....
Then I ask myself if I should really walk the rational path of calm cool and collected discussion with the intent to change her mind, or just yell her priviledge in her face untill she accepts that she is just as priviledge laden as me, and her criticising my priviledge while sitting on her mountain of priviledge is not exactly the best point to make.
But I am probably too priviledged to even see how much the suffering and hardship of a 48 Year old sudanese refugee mother of eight, who had to burry her own children because they were killed in civil war, and who would love to just work in any sweatshop at all if that means that she can feed her children for a little while longer and to prevent them from dying from hgunger compares to the suffering of a 34 year old housewife, who has 2 children she calls Tyler and Taylor-Lynn, who freely admits that she is a helicopter parent, that Tyler is just big boned and has a problem with the glands, and that Taylor Lynn has every right ever to call herself a virgin even if the gonnoreah crystals come out of her nostrils. Yea. tell me again how the hardship of these two women is in the least bit comparable, and how that prevents me from calling it out like I see it.
But yea... Priviledge. Hell of a Drug...
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
YOU TAKE BACK WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE COSBY SHOW
[–]Meistermalkav 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
MAKE ME! .... Sweater west wearing ....grumbles
((And for allo those who did not gfet the reference, and felt the need to write me.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-d6XUXMZpk&list=PLx8MErhM-cAAFB1Xo3Og0CB-1LFpkKY6e&index=1))
I dis get the foamy reference, though that's a blast from the past haha. But I love the Cosby show
[–]pericardiyum 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
A lot of these repeat... "Safer work conditions, Safer workplace conditions, Less likely to live in poverty, Less likely to be homeless, Less mental health referrals, Less mental illness" No references either, making points like "Having it all" and "The Sisterhood" doesn't even make any sense.
[–]whippedcreamcuntsack 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link
There are like 5 mens shelters in my city and one womens shelter.
[–]PassifloraCaerulea 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
And what amazing men's rights nirvana do you live in, pray tell?
[–]whippedcreamcuntsack 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Canada?
[–]warsie 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Edmonton? Damn the MRAs are good there.
[–]Celda 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Nope, he is wrong.
No shelters for male domestic violence victims exist in Canada.
[–]warsie 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
D:
[–]Celda 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
No, there aren't.
No shelter for male victims of domestic violence exists in Canada.
You will be unable to show one.
[–]whippedcreamcuntsack 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Oh sorry, the lack of the specification "shelter for victims of domestic violence" wasn't in the image, so maybe that threw me off.
[–]Celda 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yeah, that's what he means. Homeless shelters for men do exist (though most of them are not exclusive to men), but not men's shelters in the same way women's shelters exist.
[–]BrambleEdge 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Are these possibly homeless shelters?
[–]whippedcreamcuntsack 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yes, they're homeless shelters.
[–]compuwiza1[🍰] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
FEWER work related injuries and deaths, not less. To be taken seriously, use the language correctly. This is third grade English. Women who saw this are laughing.
[–]PassifloraCaerulea 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
OMG yes. Unfortunately, the Internet seems to have forgotten that "fewer" is even a word.
It's true, I've seen a lot less "fewers" than usual.
[–]anoneko 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why are there so many women in this subreddit? To keeps privileges checked?
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You misspelled Michael in Michael Kimmel
[–]Chizumaru 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
no one cares if you objectify the opposite gender
"safer work conditions" is repeated.
[–]sens2t2vethug 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I think this is a good list. Like others have said, imho concepts like privilege aren't really useful. But as a tool to show how silly and one-sided the current debate on gender is, these kinds of infographics are fun and useful.
[–]Hyunion 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
where does the statistics for "women control 60% of wealth in US" come from? sounds bit ridiculous.
[–]p3ngwin 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
it's a common stat, and one i've seen plenty of times.
here's a quick source:
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/print-edition/2010/11/19/Women-gain-wealth.html
[–]chauncesauce 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This list is ridiculous and it makes the men's rights movement look like an unintelligent group of whiny women-haters. I'm a woman who fully supports men's rights but this makes us all look bad.
[–]guywithaccount 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I don't think it's ridiculous at all. It's a pretty good list actually. And if asking for justice, equality, and the public recognition of hitherto unrecognized sexism in society is whining, then call me whiny.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Doesn't that quote more apply to us than to women? I'm all for Men's Rights but to act like we have fewer privileges than women is kinda dumb- this post makes it sound like you think men are being controlled by a Matriarchy.
[–]XtraStrongMint -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
"chance to commit suicide" Oh so it's just random? By chance I might just suddenly commit suicide? I really fucking hate that this is used in ALL of these kinds of posts.
Things cause people to commit suicide... unless there is some serious mental illness in play, this shows more than just committing suicide.
[–]XtraStrongMint -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
How is it a gender issue? "Things happen" sure OK, but things don't just auto suicide people. It's a choice where men and women have the exact same opportunities to make a decision.
It's easier for women to get mental health help, though
Your situation and the things that happen to you determine your opportunities... so this clearly plays a role.
[–]Redskull673 -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Privilege is an illusion used to ignore the pain and hardship of others and patriarchy is just a conspiracy that feminist use.
[+][deleted] -10 points-9 points-8 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
To be fair, it's not just Women's Studies. There's also Men's Studies.
It's just called History.
[+][deleted] -9 points-8 points-7 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Fuck off with the privilege bullshit.
It's retarded when feminists do it and it's retard when you do it.
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Almost as "retarded" as your sentence here. Also, you should learn to use less offensive language.
[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Check your non-offensive language privilege, asshole.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]raptorrage 24 points25 points26 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]noprotein 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]raptorrage -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Number357 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kaesylvri 85 points86 points87 points (17 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (9 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]kaesylvri 39 points40 points41 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–]notaveryhappycamper 6 points7 points8 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Non_Social 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Lightfiend 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]kaesylvri 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]rapscallionx 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (1 child) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]kaesylvri 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] (2 children) | Copy Link
[permanently deleted]
[–]wanna_dance 10 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]guywithaccount 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ebonlance 27 points28 points29 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]wrez -18 points-17 points-16 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]dakru 18 points19 points20 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ebonlance 17 points18 points19 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[–]mastersword83 0 points1 point2 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]EclipseClemens 2 points3 points4 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]mastersword83 1 point2 points3 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]BrambleEdge 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Stephen_Morgan[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 11 points12 points13 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]dakru 18 points19 points20 points (16 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]sens2t2vethug 4 points5 points6 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]test_ost 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]test_ost 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Brintyboo 10 points11 points12 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]dakru 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Brintyboo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Brintyboo 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]pelpeh1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]guywithaccount 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Brintyboo 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Meistermalkav 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Meistermalkav 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]pericardiyum 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]whippedcreamcuntsack 1 point2 points3 points (10 children) | Copy Link
[–]PassifloraCaerulea 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]whippedcreamcuntsack 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]warsie 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]warsie 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]whippedcreamcuntsack 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Celda 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BrambleEdge 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]whippedcreamcuntsack 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]compuwiza1[🍰] 4 points5 points6 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]PassifloraCaerulea 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Lightfiend 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]anoneko 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Chizumaru 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]sens2t2vethug 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Hyunion 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]p3ngwin 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]chauncesauce 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]guywithaccount 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]XtraStrongMint -1 points0 points1 point (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]XtraStrongMint -1 points0 points1 point (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]raptorrage 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Redskull673 -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -10 points-9 points-8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -9 points-8 points-7 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points (1 child) | Copy Link