What data is out there to debunk the "misandry annoys, misogyny kills" argument?

[–]ArabicanStout 119 points120 points121 points 1 year ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 26 points27 points28 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SidewaysGiraffe 22 points23 points24 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]captainhornheart 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Add genocide, massacres and slavery to the list.

About 2/3 of Holocaust victims were male, all of the Srebrinica victims were male, the vast majority of the Cambodian and Rwandan genocide victims were male, and so on. (In Rwanda, many men and boys dressed in female clothes to avoid being killed.) This has been the pattern throughout history, from the aftermaths of ancient wars to the very recent massacres in Syria and Nigeria. Some interesting reading about 'gendercide': https://ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu/isa/joa01/

During the transatlantic slave trade, men were significantly overrepresented. They were valued due to their greater ability to do physical work, and generally endured far worse conditions than female slaves, who were mostly given household chores. This has generally been the case for slaves throughout history.

It's actually very difficult to research these topics, as the predominance of male victims is often not recorded and even more rarely highlighted. This is in stark contrast to the much smaller number of cases of gendered mass violence where women are predominantly affected, e.g. witch trials (though in some countries men were the majority of victims of witchcraft trials and were always so in other forms of religious persecution).

Another issue is that internet searches for statistics of victims by sex (even if you specifically use the words 'male' or 'men') always produce results about female victims, often focusing on how women suffered more, despite being a minority of victims.

I'll end by saying that suffering shouldn't be a competition - it's demeaning and ghoulish. It also seems unproductive to dwell on identity when every group has been targeted at one time or another. However, suffering unfortunately is a competition, one that was started by feminists decades if not centuries ago, and serves as the strongest possible reminder that throughout history, the vast majority of men have not been privileged but instead were treated far more brutally than women.

[–]TenuousOgre 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AcceptableLand1783 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]midnight-ghost55 1 year ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bugibom 14 points15 points16 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Careless_Barnacle_66 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Francis_Dollar_Hide 32 points33 points34 points 1 year ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Vegetable_Ad1732 16 points17 points18 points 1 year ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Fun_Butterfly_420 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Vegetable_Ad1732 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]KarateInAPool 21 points22 points23 points 1 year ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]KarateInAPool 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AOD-333 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]liberty340 25 points26 points27 points 1 year ago (79 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I know the statistics, so let’s talk about this, let’s rule out murder suicide, trans women suicide, and people over 80 that don’t have access to assisted suicide for want to end it because they lost their wife. All counted as male suicide. Let’s talk about the median age of suicide, males is around 47, females is around 44, women wait till their kids are adults men take the most violent and spontaneous. The suicide rate in men in Australia dropped dramatically when men had less access to guns. Indigenous and coloured men commit suicide and 6 times the rate of their non coloured counterpart. Let’s have a frank discussion, I’m down, let’s talk about veteran support, let’s talk about indigenous and coloured support, let’s talk about trans support, lets talk about elder support let’s work together to lower the rate of male suicide, we can take action together and fight these statistics together z

[–]midnight-ghost55 1 year ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Qantourisc 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]midnight-ghost55 1 year ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Qantourisc 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Moody-49 -21 points-20 points-19 points 1 year ago (73 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 26 points27 points28 points 1 year ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Moody-49 -20 points-19 points-18 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]Late_Indication_4355 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]liberty340 19 points20 points21 points 1 year ago (63 children) | Copy Link

[+]Moody-49 -12 points-11 points-10 points 1 year ago (62 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago (59 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Top-Situation-6634 -9 points-8 points-7 points 1 year ago (57 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 7 points8 points9 points 1 year ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[+]Top-Situation-6634 -4 points-3 points-2 points 1 year ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[+]Top-Situation-6634 -4 points-3 points-2 points 1 year ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear3 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-6634-1 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear3 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-66340 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear2 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-6634-1 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Upper-Divide-78423 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Respectfully, the links you provided do not prove your position.

"Keeping women out of the job was a matter of both preserving male privilege and maintaining an exclusionary craft union."

This is a modern day ideological projection onto the past. The closest they have to this position at the time is one guy saying women working outside of the home "disrupts the natural order."

This may be a bad belief to hold but it is clearly not the same thing as saying "We're doing this to maintain our structural privilege."

Indeed the inclusion of this policy as a part of the same policy that limited children's work rather suggests that this was considered a safeguarding issue.

Unless you believe that these policies also represented an attack on children but it's okay because children did, in fact, need to be taken down a peg it's hard to see how this greater concern for women's welfare than men's represents a patriarchal attack on women.

Perhaps most damningly of all, especially for feminist pieces, none of the sources you provided seem particularly interested in what women thought about this policy.

We know they were supportive generally of the child labour reforms that these female labour reforms were included under. I don't know why we would assume, without evidence that they were supportive of the child labour reforms but not the women's labour reforms.

I can't help but feel that if there had been widespread opposition among women to these reforms some evidence of that would have been included.

Also, I don't know if you are aware of this but your third source argues extensively against your first.

First source claims that women were kept out of work by unions. Second sources states that unions did not have the power to do this and that women had their own well established unions.

First source claims these reforms to be a conspiracy between working men and the capitalist patriarchy. Third source notes that the capitalist patriarchs were largely opposed to these reforms as they wanted to exploit all available workers to the highest possible degree.

The third source also additionally notes that the industries affected already had women as a minority of workers anyway which is pretty problematic to the first sources claim that these reforms represented women being "pushed out" of these roles.

And that's before we even acknowledge that none of these links are very germaine to the question of "who set the system up" all of these papers clearly indicate people refering to social values already in place. You would have to go back quite a bit further than the 1800's to answer that question.

As for evidence of this other guys claim about women not wanting to do dangerous work. You're living in it.

Men still overwhelmingly perform the most dangerous jobs in society despite these professions being open to women for decades.

You'll probably try to claim that these professions are excluding women but that would be a bad argument.

There is basically no profession that that was not true for, including jobs in which women are now overrepresented.

The reality is a preference is very much being revealed by these facts.

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Unions didn’t keep women out: Some unions, especially in industries like textiles, definitely played a role in keeping women out of certain jobs. It wasn’t just about safety, it was also about protecting male jobs and maintaining traditional gender roles. They didn’t want women taking jobs they thought were “theirs.”
The reforms were about safety, not just preserving male privilege: Sure, some of these reforms were meant to protect women’s safety, but they also played into the idea that women were “too fragile” for certain physically demanding jobs. This kept women out of these roles, limiting their opportunities and reinforcing the idea that they weren’t cut out for hard work.
Women supported child labor reforms, so why wouldn’t they support reforms for their own labor?: Just because women supported child labor reforms doesn’t mean they were all on board with the reforms that affected their own work. Women at the time didn’t have much of a voice in these decisions, and they were often left out of the conversation when it came to laws that restricted their job opportunities.
No documented opposition from women to the reforms: The lack of documented opposition doesn’t mean women were fine with these reforms. At the time, women didn’t always have the platform or the freedom to speak up against these policies. They were often excluded from these discussions, so we don’t have a clear record of any resistance.
Men still take the most dangerous jobs today: Yeah, men still dominate dangerous jobs today, but that’s because these roles have historically been seen as “male work.” Even though women are legally allowed to work in these fields now, the social and cultural barriers still make it harder for women to get into them. It’s not just about choice, these roles were built for men over centuries.
The system goes back way before the 1800s: For sure, gender roles and the exclusion of women from certain work go back way further than the 1800s. But the reforms in the 19th century really locked those roles in place and kept women out of certain industries, reinforcing gender inequality that had been around for ages.

So in summary, even though these reforms were sold as protection for women, they ended up reinforcing traditional gender roles. The laws that were supposed to help women actually kept them out of certain jobs and limited their opportunities. The real issue wasn’t just safety, it was about keeping women in certain roles and maintaining the gender inequalities that had been in place for a long time.

[–]Upper-Divide-78423 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"The real issue wasn’t just safety, it was about keeping women in certain roles and maintaining the gender inequalities that had been in place for a long time."

What's the evidence for this claim?

"No documented opposition from women to the reforms: The lack of documented opposition doesn’t mean women were fine with these reforms."

Yes, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But It IS absence of evidence.

It is simply not true that women were unable to opine on this subject at all. Women wrote in all kinds of subjects at this time.

This is only about 20 years away from the begining of the temperance movement and though it would take some time to get rolling the temperance movement was an overwhelmingly female movement that was able to get alcohol made illegal in the united states.

You're telling me that there was nothing women could do about this? Even with unions of their own? Even with the capitalist class also largely opposed to these reforms?

To be clear. The evidence I'm talking about MIGHT exist somewhere. It's just odd that it would not be referenced in an essay in this exact point.

"Yeah, men still dominate dangerous jobs today, but that’s because these roles have historically been seen as “male work.” Even though women are legally allowed to work in these fields now, the social and cultural barriers still make it harder for women to get into them. It’s not just about choice, these roles were built for men over centuries."

I already addressed this argument in my original comment.

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I get what you’re saying, but I still think there’s a difference between women being able to speak out and actually having their voices heard. Sure, some women wrote or spoke about things, but that doesn’t mean society was really listening to them, especially on issues like labor laws and working conditions. Women didn’t have the same platform as men at the time, and their opinions often weren’t taken seriously or given the same weight in public debates.

Now, about the evidence you’re asking for, there are plenty of examples of how women were excluded from discussions around labor reforms. For instance, when we look at the history of labor unions, they were largely dominated by men who often pushed policies that protected male jobs and kept women out of certain industries. One example of this is in the textile industry, where men pushed for the idea that women were too fragile for certain types of work, and it wasn’t just about safety, it was about keeping women out of jobs that were seen as “male.”

You bring up the temperance movement, which is a good point. It was a big female-led movement, but it was driven by a specific set of social and religious factors that aren’t directly comparable to the labor movement. While women were central to temperance, they didn’t have the same kind of sway over labor reforms, which were seen as challenging traditional gender roles.

As for the absence of evidence of women’s opposition, you’re right, the lack of it doesn’t mean women were okay with these reforms. But if there had been widespread resistance, we would likely see some documentation of it in the historical record. The fact that it’s not there suggests that even if women had objections, they didn’t have the power to challenge these reforms or be heard in the same way men were.

On the issue of dangerous jobs, I know you addressed it already, but I still think it comes down to deep-rooted cultural and historical factors. It’s not just about whether women have the legal right to work in these jobs, it’s the fact that these roles have been culturally built around the idea that they’re “male work.” This idea didn’t come out of nowhere, and even though women technically can work in these fields now, the social and cultural barriers are still there.

[–]Upper-Divide-78423 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"they didn’t have the power to challenge these reforms or be heard in the same way men were."

No. I would agree that they didn't necessarily have the means to change it if they disagreed. However they would have had the means to register some objection. It's just odd that that is not included in your source.

In reality I think necessarily some women must have opposed them. But it's a question of whether they would have been any kind of majority. Conversely it would not surprise me if women had in fact been the driving force behind these reforms through advocacy.

Not that I'm saying that is the case either.

Basically I would imagine that it is a safe assumption that women at this time were generally ideologically aligned with their male counterparts. It's also worth pointing out that as the primary caregivers of shildren women would have had a key role in reproducing this ideology.

Look, I'm not trying to be all "get back in the kitchen" here.

I'm completely willing to acknowledge that women were oppressed at this time. However by impressed I'm refering to a specific relationship with power.

What I find feminists tend to mean by "oppressed" is that society was, in all ways a massive 5D chess move against women by men and that I gotta say I simply don't buy.

To put it as simply as I can what I have a problem with is the idea that the reason why the sex that generally produces baby food from their chests is expected to raise the offspring and the sex that is on average twice as strong is expected to fight all the wars is because men were in charge and maliciously and arbitrarily decided it would be so.

That I do not believe.

Fact is women do most of the caregiving and men fight most of the wars even in cultures that are considered matriarchal. Or at least less patriarchal.

Bonobo's are ruthlessly matriarchal and the females still raise the offspring and the males still fight more.

Go into these mom groups and you may get an idea of what I'm getting at. Women generally eschew physical risk (I understand that you will believe that this is socially constructed but to my eye it appears natural) until you get into the one realm of physical risk that is entirely the domain of women, birth and pregnancy.

Then, suddenly, they become like the men and you're a total coward if you had an epidural. Likely this is exacerbated by the fact that a women who has gone through pregnancy naturally receives hormons that cause her to forget how painful the process actually is.

Meanwhile men, observing from the outside invented numerous forms of pain relief for labour.

Feminist like to state that we don't know what the social mores of a gender egalitarian or women lead society would look like but they often accompany this with the baseless assumption that everything would be better.

No doubt some things would be but it seems entirely possible to me that a great many gendered issues in our society could easily persist in such an environment or even be worse since they aren't so clearly based on the self interest of any particular group.

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You raise some interesting points, but there are a few things I think you’re overlooking.

First, on the idea that women could have objected but didn’t, sure, some probably did. The issue isn’t whether opposition existed, but whether it was documented and taken seriously. Just because we don’t have widespread records of women protesting these reforms doesn’t mean they were fine with them. The historical record is shaped by those in power, and for most of history, that wasn’t women. Even when they did speak out, their voices were often dismissed or erased.

Second, I agree that it’s possible some women supported these reforms, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t also shaped by male control. Plenty of women throughout history have reinforced systems that limited their own rights, look at the women who opposed suffrage, for example. That doesn’t prove these systems weren’t oppressive; it just shows how powerful social conditioning is.

Now, on your point about gender roles being “natural” rather than something imposed by men, I don’t think anyone is arguing that men sat down one day and decided women should stay home and men should fight wars. But just because a pattern exists across cultures doesn’t mean it wasn’t reinforced in ways that restricted women’s choices. Women being primary caregivers might make sense biologically, but that doesn’t justify laws that, for centuries, kept them from owning property, voting, or working certain jobs.

Even if some of these divisions have a basis in biology, human societies aren’t just built on biology. If we stuck strictly to what was “natural,” we wouldn’t have medicine, technology, or modern political systems. The point isn’t to deny biological differences, it’s to ask whether we should let them dictate people’s lives.

And about your last point, you’re right that a gender-equal or women-led society wouldn’t automatically fix everything. But the goal isn’t to replace one hierarchy with another, it’s to create a system where both men and women have equal agency over their own lives. That doesn’t mean ignoring differences, but it does mean challenging outdated norms that limit people based on gender.

[–]Upper-Divide-78423 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"I don’t think anyone is arguing that men sat down one day and decided women should stay home and men should fight wars."

I don't know. I get the impression from some feminists I talk to that they believe not only this but that I was there.

"Women being primary caregivers might make sense biologically, but that doesn’t justify laws that, for centuries, kept them from owning property, voting, or working certain jobs."

I agree. But it would explain why these social attitudes exist.

"The point isn’t to deny biological differences, it’s to ask whether we should let them dictate people’s lives."

If someone's out here saying women are biologically incapable of doing anything other than raising babies then of course that is insane and plainly wrong.

But a biological difference IS going to effect your life to some extent. Right?

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AdSpecial73661 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm confused, what're you people arguing here?

Women were allowed to work and women did work in history.

http://web.archive.org/web/20040604211355/https://history.org/foundation/journal/spring04/women.cfm

https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Gender_Work_and_Wages_in_Industrial_Revo/gJEWvlqlEoIC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=info:VIfWu5LLPikJ:scholar.google.com/&pg=PA15&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

A study of 1,350 working-class households from the 19th Century Britain suggests that the husbands’ proportion of family earning was between 55-83% when mostly it was around 70%. (See page 31)

Between 1787 to 1815 in families with unemployed children wives earned 41 percent of household income. The share of household income generated by women started to decline rapidly from 1850.

[Horrell and Humphries, "The Origins and Expansion of the Male Breadwinner Family," p. 48]

By 1890, women’s work in Europe and the United States contributed just 1.9 percent to 3 percent of household income.

[Haines, Life Cycle, Savings, Demographic Adaptation, p. 49, table 3.1.]

This is a full book, the relevant chapter is by Haines.

This change from close to almost a third of women working (pre 1850s) to a small percentage (by 1930s) was overwhelmingly welcomed by women, and universally seen as a benefit to women.

The German Government stated in 1940: "the goal remains to ensure that, in 20 years' time, no woman is obliged to work in a factory."

During WWII, when many women had to do war work in factories, it was found that women had been "made miserable by the [war work]" and "fervently wished themselves back into their prewar home routine."

[Winkler, Frauenarbeit im Dritten Reich, pp. 110-9.]

[–]Jostrapenko2 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[+]Top-Situation-6634 -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago (7 children) | Copy Link

What supremacy? Fighting for women’s rights is supremacy? Fighting for our protection against men is supremacy? Fighting to be paid the same as men is supremacy? Fighting to have access to the same jobs as men is supremacy?

And let me tell you something: you’re talking about female supremacy, but it doesn’t make sense. Men have always claimed to be superior to women and have humiliated them for centuries. So saying “female supremacy” is like saying “racism against white people exists”, it just doesn’t work.

Historically, women have never been equal to men until today, so female supremacy has never existed. Yeah, maybe you’ll find some rare cases where women had more power (like some queens ruling or societies where lineage went through women) but that’s nothing compared to the thousands of years where men had all the rights, all the privileges, and all the power.

Also, let’s be real: when people talk about “female supremacy,” most of the time, they just mean feminism or women standing up for themselves. But fighting for equality is NOT the same as wanting to dominate. If you actually find historical proof that women, as a group, were ever truly superior to men in rights, power, and privileges, then sure, I’ll shut up. But spoiler alert: you won’

[–]Jostrapenko2 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+]Top-Situation-6634 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Jostrapenko21 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Jostrapenko2 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]The_true_gamer_man 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[+]Top-Situation-6634 -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]Upper-Divide-7842 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger85931 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Upper-Divide-78421 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]Top-Situation-6634 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I get your point, but I think you’re missing the bigger picture. Sure, it’s true that support for abortion is split between men and women, but historically, and still today, most of the push to restrict reproductive rights (like birth control and abortion) has come from men in positions of power. The fact is that many of these decisions were made by men in government or religious leadership, and women had to fight just to gain access to these services.

It’s not about narcissism. It’s about the reality that women’s rights to control their own bodies have been consistently undermined by laws and policies designed by mostly male lawmakers. That’s a fact. And even if some women opposed these rights, that doesn’t erase the history of patriarchal control over women’s reproductive choices.

As for the argument about the philosophical debate on when personhood begins, of course, it’s a complex issue. But let’s not ignore that these discussions have often been used as a justification to strip women of autonomy over their own bodies. The fact that the debate centers on when life begins is important, but we also have to consider who gets to make that decision, and historically, it’s been men who have had the most influence on shaping those views.

And yes, men may want birth control too, but the fact remains that women’s access to reproductive health services has often been more heavily regulated and restricted. The struggle women faced was rooted in the fact that their bodies were often treated as public property to be controlled by societal and political forces that were predominantly male.

[–]Upper-Divide-78423 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

"The struggle women faced was rooted in the fact that their bodies were often treated as public property to be controlled by societal and political forces that were predominantly male."

All laws regard what you can and can't do with your body but women as the limiting factor in reproduction do tend to get certain reproductive rights more politicised in a way that goes beyond the abortion debate. I could believe this. But an example would be helpful.

In my research I've generally found that people who opposed contraception opposed all forms of contraception.

"the push to restrict reproductive rights (like birth control and abortion) has come from men in positions of power"

True but these men are representing their constituents. Its the case that the majority of people with political power have been men. You can disagree with that reality on its own merits, as I do but, you could just as easily take that fact and say that the majority of laws permitting abortion were passed by men and that THAT is men forcing their values on women.

Some pro life women do argue that.

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I see what you’re saying, but I think the key issue is that women’s reproductive rights have historically been controlled disproportionately by male-dominated institutions, and often in ways that restricted their autonomy rather than expanded it. You asked for an example : one clear case is the Comstock Laws in the U.S. These laws, passed in 1873, banned the distribution of contraceptives and even information about contraception. They were driven by male legislators and enforced by a male-dominated system, despite directly impacting women’s ability to control their own reproductive choices. Women like Margaret Sanger had to actively fight against these laws just to make birth control accessible.

You’re right that some people opposed all contraception, but the fact remains that the people with the power to pass and enforce these laws were overwhelmingly men. Whether or not their beliefs were shared by some women doesn’t change the fact that women had less say in the decisions that affected their own bodies.

As for male politicians “representing their constituents,” that’s true in theory, but when women weren’t even allowed to vote or hold office for most of history, those male lawmakers weren’t exactly representing them. The fact that men also passed laws permitting abortion doesn’t contradict this, what matters is who had control over those decisions. Even today, we still see mostly male lawmakers leading the charge on restricting reproductive rights.

Of course, there are pro-life women, just like there were women who opposed their own right to vote. But that doesn’t mean the broader system wasn’t structured in a way that prioritized male authority over women’s autonomy. The fact that some women agreed with restrictive policies doesn’t erase the fact that these policies were overwhelmingly crafted and enforced by men in power.

[–]Main-Tiger8593 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[+]Top-Situation-6634 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Oh, don’t worry, I’m well aware that some MRAs happen to support abortion, usually when it’s about avoiding child support rather than defending women’s reproductive rights. That’s not exactly the same fight.

And no, I never said all MRAs are anti-choice. What I pointed out (and what still stands) is that reproductive rights have been consistently restricted by male-dominated institutions, with or without the individual opinions of some MRAs.

If anything, the MRA movement has historically focused on men’s custody rights, false accusation cases, and family court issues, not on ensuring women have access to birth control or abortion. So let’s not suddenly paint them as champions of women’s autonomy.

But hey, if you find actual organized MRA activism around expanding women’s reproductive rights, I’ll be happy to read it. I’ll wait.

[–]Main-Tiger85931 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger85931 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger85931 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger85931 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Men's rights activists (MRAs) and organizations like Men4Choice are advocating for abortion rights and reproductive freedom. This activism has gained momentum since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

How MRAs are involved

Men4Choice

This group has partnered with the Reproductive Freedom for All Foundation and with Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff to encourage men to fight for abortion rights.

Men of color

Men of color are increasingly involved in abortion rights conversations, notes The 19th News.

Why MRAs are involved

Abortion bans impact men

Men can be impacted by abortion bans because they can affect men's ability to plan their lives.

Abortion rights are an issue of fairness

Some men believe that abortion rights are an issue of fairness to women, and that men should not be telling women what to do with their bodies.

Men benefit from abortion rights

Many men have been able to live freer lives and enjoy fuller careers because their sexual partner was able to obtain an abortion.

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger85931 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-66341 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -3 points-2 points-1 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]The_true_gamer_man 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Upper-Divide-7842 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]The_true_gamer_man 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Yoinkitron5000 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Usernamerequired_92 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AcceptableLand1783 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Actual-Comment1575 35 points36 points37 points 1 year ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]CheetahOfDeath 24 points25 points26 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Actual-Comment1575 8 points9 points10 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PsyonicDragoon 25 points26 points27 points 1 year ago (79 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 15 points16 points17 points 1 year ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Actual-Comment1575 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]kmikek 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]PsyonicDragoon 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]kmikek 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Actual-Comment1575 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm in a country where every gender is conscripted in case of war so yeah I could be. Honestly if that means less men die I'd be happy taking some of their places anyway. It's true that the REAL good deal would be banning war altogether lol. Would be better if countries fought over baseball or something.

I get what you're saying, basically the whole gender roles inbalance is fucking things up for both men and women, but even if knowing technical terms is great you gotta know what the words actually mean to people. When talking about "patriarchy", people don't think about the unfairness of gender roles on everyone even men too, they think about the false idea that "men have it all". Obviously, since this is a false idea and undermines men's struggles, men talk back against that word. You gotta update your language as words evolve else you won't be understood. You may tell me "that's on them to understand" but come on the word literally has etymologic links to make people understand you wrong.

But honestly I'm of the belief that today in 2025, in western countries, women are fucked biologially and men are fucked socially.

[–]AcceptableLand1783 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AOD-333 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Actual-Comment1575 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 25 points26 points27 points 1 year ago (57 children) | Copy Link

[–]Actual-Comment1575 14 points15 points16 points 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Actual-Comment1575 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kmikek 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alwaysvulture 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Mountain_Plants 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AcceptableLand1783 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kmikek 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AOD-333 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

A lot of men have similar and far worse experiences. I normally wouldn't share something this personal, but my experience is so in line with what you are saying, and will really illustrate the point.

In 10th grade (when I was 15) a girl I slept with told her group of friends that I had a big dick, and, since it was high-school, and because girls like to gossip, word spread fast, and in a very short time everyone knew.

For weeks afterwards girls would grab my crotch or rub it as they passed me in the hallway during class changes, or sneak up behind me when I was sitting in the cafeteria and grab me, one even walked up to me outside and grabbed me then ran back to her friends and they all had a good laugh about it. And many of them said pretty inappropriate things as well. This became a thing, and happened more times than I could count, sometimes it would happen multiple times just trying to walk from one class to the next, and they would all giggle about it. And when I complained they said things like "don't lie, you love it".

They saw no problem with the behavior, but it was obviously wrong, even more so because the school staff were well aware of it, and did nothing about it.

The teachers were aware of it because girls were talking about it in my classes, openly, and not a single word was ever said about it by a teacher. And this led to a far worse situation.

One of my female teachers started acting really weird towards me, she never actually touched me sexually, but she was very flirty with me for the rest of the year, and would frequently brush up against me and touch my arm or my shoulder or rub my back as she walked by. She would lean down on my desk under various pretexts, like showing me a "problem with my test", in a way that her cleavage was basically right in my face, almost touching me, and on one occasion she knocked a pencil off my desk and bent over to pick it up, with her butt towards me, and she turned and smiled at me, it was very obvious and creepy. And it was all very uncomfortable, and the other students (both genders) in the class knew about it and made jokes. And that behavior only started after the girls were talking in her class about the size of my dick.

I did eventually go see the principle about it, but the principle downplayed the behavior. She said that I was "imagining it" and that the teacher was just being "friendly", and that it wasn't true even if I "wished it was". I'll never forget that entire experience.

And that teacher didn't do that shit to any of the other guys in her class, she singled me out, and it's obvious why. And if I had ever allowed myself to be alone with her (I always made sure I wasn't, and after I was finished with her class I actively avoided her for the next 2 years) I honestly believe she would have gone further.

That whole experience taught me a valuable lesson about how men are basically just pieces of meat to women, they talk about us viewing them as sexual objects, but we are viewed the same way, or worse. I was certainly treated like a sexual object, and when I tried to get help because of the harassment (by a teacher!) I got nowhere, and was told that I wanted it, by the fucking principle! And I'm sure many men out there can relate to these kinds of things.

Even as a young guy (remember I was only 15 years old) I thought, what if this situation was flipped? What if word got around that a girl had really firm breasts or a nice butt, and random guys were feeling her up as she walked through the hallway, and in the cafeteria, and outside, and she couldn't go anywhere on school grounds without being touched inappropriately, and even the teachers knew about it, and one of the male teachers started actively harassing her sexually, what would have happened?

The police would have been called, there would have been suspensions/expulsions, probably even special educators coming in to talk about sexual assault and I'm sure the teacher would have been fired.

This is a massive double standard, and it's very telling that women in general seem perfectly fine with it. In fact, on the entire issue of female on male sexual assault women are shockingly cold-hearted and defensive of sexual predation from their own gender. It seems that the female in-group preference, and privilege mindset is so strong, that they will defend any action committed by their gender, no matter how terrible. It's very "rules for thee but not for me".

The sexual assault thing, as well as domestic violence are both particularly troubling however, because women seem to always portray it as a male problem and they make such a big issue about these things (and rightly so), but only when they are the victim. When a man complains about being victimized in any way, it's always downplayed, or they say he secretly wanted it, or in the case of DV that he deserved it, or that it's worse for women or whatever.

I would normally never share something this personal, but my experience is very applicable to what you said. I really hope women read this so they can maybe begin to see and understand how problematic this double standard is. I was 15 years old, but I'm sure that shit happens to guys who are even younger.

If it's wrong for a man to do to a woman, then it must be just as wrong for a woman to do a man. If we are all equal, then standards must be applied universally. And if you don't like the idea of being victimized yourself, then stop defending perpetrators from your own gender. Because seeing women downplay sexual and physical violence perpetrated by their gender, while endlessly harping on men as a whole about these issues, is both hypocritical, and extremely distasteful.

I really hope that sharing this is helpful to both men and women, I've never shared that experience with anyone during my entire adult life, but thanks to the anonymity of the internet, I'm comfortable sharing it here.

[–]alwaysvulture 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AOD-333 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks, it appreciate the reply and the sentiment. I'm honestly doing just fine, I really didn't let that experience affect my life too much, or make me bitter towards women or anything like that. I've had very successful relationships with some really great girls throughout my life. It's important not to dwell on things like this and let it become a part of your identity as so many people do.

Like most trends, what the girls in general were doing only lasted for a few weeks. It was the teacher's behavior that was more lasting, and more troubling to me, as was my experience with the principle.

Like I said I didn't let it affect my life too much, but the entire experience did teach me some valuable lessons about "gender dynamics", the glaring double standards that men face, and I guess it did sort of make me more suspicious, or at least less trusting of women in general. I've said this many times elsewhere but I have always watched what women do, rather than listen to what they say, because so often the two are at odds with eachother, and that experience was a big part of making me see things that way.

Also it's funny that you said not to sound cringe, as though offering support to a man is cringeworthy lol, and I honestly get it. Posting that story, even though it's on the internet and completely anonymous did make me feel like I was being weak for sharing any kind of vulnerability, or admitting that I was victimized in any way. I truly think those feelings are so central to the male experience, but this kind of stuff is so deeply ingrained that we often times don't even see it, and this dynamic is enforced on men from a young age, and by men as much as by women.

[+]MissMenace101 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PsyonicDragoon 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Moody-49 -4 points-3 points-2 points 1 year ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[+]Moody-49 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[+]Moody-49 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+]Moody-49 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]PsyonicDragoon 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Moody-49-1 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]PsyonicDragoon2 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Moody-491 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Present_League91062 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Moody-49-5 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Present_League91066 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]kmikek3 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Moody-49-2 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alwaysvulture 9 points10 points11 points 1 year ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[+]Moody-49 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]alwaysvulture 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[+]Moody-49 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissMenace1011 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-6634 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Top-Situation-6634-2 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AcceptableLand1783 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jjj2576 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Wylanderuk 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PsyonicDragoon 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Wylanderuk 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissMenace1011 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Yoinkitron5000 12 points13 points14 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]MissMenace101 -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Main-Tiger8593 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RoryTate 7 points8 points9 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]furchfur 7 points8 points9 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]orussell03 9 points10 points11 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]orussell03 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]king_rootin_tootin 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]peter_venture 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Embarrassed-Tune9038 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]UbiquitousWobbegong 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Silver-Original-94 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hendrixski 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]XYBiohacker3 points 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Hobbit- 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lolocraft1 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salamadierha 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]Careless_Barnacle_66 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Salamadierha 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AcceptableLand1783 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]griii2 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DJ_Care_Bear 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RiP_Nd_tear[S] 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Cartographer-476 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Qantourisc 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]No-Cartographer-476 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]captainhornheart 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]midnight-ghost551 point 1 year ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What data is out there to debunk the "misandry annoys, misogyny kills" argument?

Comments

Mother, 29, and her lesbian lover, 28, confess to stabbing to death the mom's 9-year-old son before chopping him up and stuffing his body parts into three bags - a year after the couple 'cut off the boy's penis and testicles to spite his father'

Title	What data is out there to debunk the "misandry annoys, misogyny kills" argument?
Author	RiP_Nd_tear
Upvotes	103
Comments	205
Date	March 25, 2025 4:14 PM UTC (1 year ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1jjn5qe/what_data_is_out_there_to_debunk_the_misandry/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/what-data-is-out-there-to-debunk-the-misandry.1547591 https://theredarchive.com/post/1547591