Comments by "cchris874" (@cchris874) on "Paul Joseph Watson"
channel.
-
+Proffessor2000 Agreed, there's a double standard. Men are falling way behind academically. There are so many other ways feminists turn a blind eye to men. Witness the existence of the male underclass who does most of society's dirty work, and often get killed doing it. Feminists aren't generally interested in bringing this into the equality equation. As long as someone else does it so they don't have to be the ones going into sewers or carrying away toxic waste, and everyone's sh-t, and getting diseases while working on garbage trucks. (Of course, feminists aren't the only ones who turn a blind eye to this, we all are guilty to some extent.)
Have you read Cathy Young? One of my favorite columnists: fair, balanced, civil, unlike many an angry feminist. I like her use of analogy: comparing what would happen if the same claims about men were applied to women. A recent example is the new term "manspreading," which became an issue recently by some women who started to complain of men taking up too much space on the subway by spreading their legs. Aside from this being another example of trivializing the real issues women face, she asks, could you imagine feminist uproar if men complained about women taking up too much space, and inventing some similar word with "woman" attached to it, and posting pictures on the internet of women taking up too much space on the subway? It would not be long until we would hear cries of sexism and mysogyny. It's a total double standard. That's perhaps the main thing that annoys me about many feminists today. cheers
2
-
1
-
+Prion Indigo
There I wholly agree. The Third World needs feminism badly. I think it's important to always make this distinction, as the West and the Third World are miles apart. My feeling is that much of which fuels feminism in the West is the based on the fallacious view that statistical differences between men and women always reflect injustice. Not just the so called wage gap but also representation in politics, in the highest income jobs, and representation in science and other occupations. There's an assumption, effectively sexist IMO, that things which many males typically value more than females: competition, hierarchy, high status job titles, wealth as a status symbol, etc, should be the norm for society. So if women are, say, more likely to turn down a high paying high status job because it gives them more time to be with their friends and family, why should we then automatically assume the smaller number of women CEOs = discrimination?
It's interesting that in my former profession, a limo driver, very few women seem interested in being drivers. Anyone was free to show up at the pre-job seminars, but very few women did. I asked one of them if she was applying to be a driver and she said something like "God no." She wanted to be in reservations. Whether such job "segregation" is ruled by deeper underlying sexist stereotyping, there can be little doubt that statistical difference may not have anything to do with active gender discrimination.
cheers
1
-
1