deleted by creator
More bullshit, made up divisiveness.
Yup.
We live in a country where if I get in the car with my girlfriend on the west coast and drive to the east coast, she gains and loses basic human rights multiple times before we reach our destination and nothing changes for me.
We can’t even treat our women with respect. Trash nation. Full stop.
Try not to “but what about men” challenge
Level: impossible
Tell me that when we ban male genital mutilation.
There is at least a parental choice involved. The government is actively removing women’s rights as we speak
Exactly. adult women’s rights. Point out to me where exactly an adult man’s rights vary, excluding racism, because racism isn’t exclusive to gender.
No where that i am aware of. I wasn’t trying to make that point? Although even non adult women are being affected, such as access to birth control
My comment wasn’t an attack on you, OP just wasn’t comparing fairly and I thought you made a good point, hence my “exactly”
No offense (lie) but cry me a fuckin river. Is it shitty, stupid, fucked up, and should be stopped? Sure! Wholeheartedly agree.
But framing it the same verbiage of something that KILLS LITTLE GIRLS or MAIMS THEM BEYOND BEING ABLE TO PISS let alone have a functional set of genitalia if they get to grow up
is fucking retarded
Sweet, I guess you win the oppression race
Way to pull the ladder up behind you. Selfish jerk.
Point out to me where exactly adult men’s right’s vary by state? Excluding racism because racism isn’t exclusive to gender.
If you cut through the dog-whistling bullshit, there are a lot of issues with child custody, for example. Access to the correct restroom is also highly state dependent. While the legal aspect is only part of it, genital mutilation rates are also variable by state.
Look, this isn’t a competition. Two things can be bad at the same time.
No one said it’s a competition, I’m genuinely asking you. Even under child custody I would be interested to actual know the details, as one might be surprised. Access to the correct restroom, do you mean trans? Because that seems a separate issue from “men’s” rights
Every single one of the amendments called the bill of rights has different limitations per state.
A man’s 1st amendment rights are legally different in Florida than in California
A man’s 2nd amendment rights are legally different in Florida than in California
And so on. 3rd amendment is probably the least variable but still.
Name a “right” that doesn’t vary state by state. Frequently our legal rights vary by county and city even. To pretend otherwise is to be willfully ignorant.
Fair enough. I would love for someone to point out where a man’s life saving healthcare varies by state.
Some people just don’t care if women die
I very much care if women die and it’s so stupid to imply I don’t when I’m disagreeing with the insanely ignorant OP. Stop making enemies out of allies.
If it had said men’s life saving healthcare doesn’t vary by state, that’s a huge fucking difference and you know it. It would still be wrong, because everyone’s access to healthcare varies vastly by state, but at least you’d have a leg to stand on.
Jesus Christ, I didn’t imply you don’t, but you know what? I’m going to straight up say you cannot fucking read. Read my message again. You’re making enemies when you’re taking that message so personal. Grow up.
The leg I have to stand on is women are historically treated like shit, and that’s the point here. Just look at the misogynists crawling around like maggots in this thread.
Similar as to women’s rights a lot of injustice is less enshrined in law and more in practice and societal reality. I.e. a comprehensive picture cannot merely be based on the detail of the law.
A man having a fully clothed boner in public is illegal in Tennessee. And that’s not something we can control.
Aha aha aha but wait, it’s equally legal in every state, thus making it just fine. /s
Would an inconsistent law really be better?
It should be consistently restricted.
Well, minorities exist.
Racism’s isn’t exclusive to gender
Men’s rights to what, exactly? There are plenty of rights that affect men that vary state to state. Off the top of my head I can think of firearm rights that vary dramatically state to state. Or are we talking about rights exclusive to men because of different biology between men and women? I feel like other than a vasectomy, I’m not sure what other male-biology-related rights I have. Honestly there’s less technology related to reproduction on the male side.
I get the point of the message, that there are rights women should be universally guaranteed that aren’t, and I totally agree with that message. But the phrasing seems ambiguous at best.
I am sure that they are speaking of reproductive rights that apply exclusively to men.
The biggest one that I can think of that varies by region are paternal rights. Things like which parent gets custody, child support. I guess you could say that paternal rights in that case simply vary inversely to maternal rights.
I think I recall from the past that in some states, a sperm donor, like for a sperm bank, may be subject to more liability for their children than in other states.
Medically, there’s not only vasectomy, but also drugs that cause erections like Viagra, as well as other impotence treatments. I have no idea if any of those vary by state. Prostate treatment would also count. Any treatment that might increase or decrease viable sperm count.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there were differences between states about how penile implants or even piercings are treated.
Oh yeah, firearm rights are definitely exclusive to men.
You’re the only one making it about exclusive rights and not just generally rights.
Really stupid and asinine for people like you to demand everyone just shut up and agree with you, because agreeing with you but then talking about other related things isn’t nice enough or whatever
The OP is literally comparing the difference between men and women’s rights.
I guess pretending that they aren’t is popular.
Do men have rights that vary state to state? Yes. Do women also have rights that vary state to state? Yes.
So the OP is false.
Nowhere in op says exclusive rights, nowhere in op cuts out specific rights. That’s why people are disagreeing with you. You’re defending a false statement by adding words in your head that aren’t there on the page.
Yup.
A lot of “it means what I mean it to mean” going around in the replies to those pointing out the poor phrasing’s logic fail.
What right, shared by both men and women, differs from state to state only for women? Women have more rights than men do. If some of those privileges differ by state, why should I care? They already have more rights than men do. Women are a privileged class always demanding more privileges.
Men have to suffer twice as much to get any support at all.
This smells like 4Chan AI Bot spamming and winning about nonsensequal bs. "Women have more_rights_ than men do? Be so F **** forreal. Wrong SM keyboard warrior.
Name one right men have that women could have but don’t? Can you? Probably not.
Abortion. Did you know that in several states when a woman has a miscarriage and flushes the baby down the toilet she gets a fine/jail. What’s ironic, is how it’s the man’s fault due to his sperm and his unhealthy habits of his that causes the miscarriage to begin with. Afghanistan, - and this would take absolutely soul crushing action to look beyond the barrier of your own self. The answer is literally in front of you bro. Any muslim country, and see how they treat all the woman.
Men have no right to abortion.
Do men need abortions?
So you can’t name one, then.
You can’t be this fucking stupid. Do you want a right to abortions?
Spoiler, he can’t.
You can swear here, nobody gives a shit.
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
You ever get talked over in a conversation?
You ever get talked over in EVERY SINGLE conversation? Every Fucking Sentance?
The pay gap? Regardless of actual worth? Only getting the job in the first place because you’ve got big tits, and ALL THE OTHER WOMEN who weren’t so “well endowed” were never even considered? Oh, and the boss and over half of the male staff ARE going to sexually harass you at a minimum, and likely try to rape you.
You ever get or lose a job based on how small your dick is? We know it ain’t a shower or a grower
Yes.
Yes, in some contexts.
Big tit privilege, same as ‘being attractive’ privilege. Plenty of men in various fields experience the same because they are men, or are unattractive, or for any variety of biases.
Half of the men are absolutely not going to try and rape you. This is pure hyperbole.
Men are also sexually harassed, touched inappropriately, sexualized inappropriately, they’re also gossiped about and experience forms of relationship aggression and abuse that is yet to even be recognized as bad because it’s women who mostly do it and y’all control the cultural narrative around abuse.
No, it would be a potential crime to inform an employer or others of the size. But Height or weight? Happens all the time.
You claim women are sexually harrassed constantly and in this very thread you sexually harass me about penis size. Perhaps your perception of harassment frequency is more projection than reality.
I didn’t say some contexts, I said ALL contexts.
And did I shove my hand in your pants? Are you scared right now? Did I physically “Help you ‘adjust your scarf’”, unasked, uninvited, unwanted.
Is a larger, stronger, fucking ape with more (completely unwarranted) social backing looming above you right now?
And guess what, you dumb motherfucker? I’m male. I have a penis. I’m cis. But:
I have actual friends who are women, and they trust me enough to tell me the fucked up shit that happens ON THE FUCKING DAILY in their lives.
jerk yourself off to death, you fucking MRA scumbag
You made extreme and broad sweeping generalizations about life in general based on worst case scenarios, as if all women, or even an average of women, experience the worst things your anxiety can imagine, at all times. It’s hard to even take you seriously, though I try anyways. That is a kindness I extend to you. Your thoughts however appear hyperbolic at best and paranoid at worse.
Whatever you’re going through is no doubt tragic and I wish you the best moving forward.
Even though I agree with you, you argue like a piece of shit.
Been one awhile, came free with my legs
The entire system is built to support us men. It’s like an ocean. Women’s rights are a tiny artificial sea wall constantly needing work to keep up with the relentless ocean of male dominance.
This is a farce. Women have all of men’s rights on top of extra rights and don’t have a variety of responsibilities exclusive to men. Most men have to constantly fight for everything they have without any of the support women receive. Survival for men is a relentless war that never sleeps, against other men, women, business, anti-male socio/cultural special interest groups and the state.
The same tired argument that because a few men have a lot of power, somehow all men do. That’s projection from women who use their power to support women and oppress men, and assume men do the same. They don’t. Those handful of powerful men treat most men like shit, worse than they treat women. Y’all have no fucking clue what men would be doing if they were as united in common cause in the way women do. But we may just find out one day if things keep going as they are.
jerk yourself to death, scumbag
Go play make-believe somewhere else.
How are you this fucking stupid when an internet of knowledge exists?
How do you so easily mistake wisdom for stupidity when an internet of education is available to you?
Lmao. Wisdom comes with experience, not age. My wisdom is in recognizing a fucking moron when I see one in the wild.
You, sir, are the perfect specimen.
Men’s rights don’t vary state by state, but women’s rights do vary state by state. There I said it out loud because I’m talking into my phone.
Liability for child and spousal support do vary by state.
Gendered inequity in criminal punishment does vary by state also.
Which rights are you referencing?
My state gives unmarried fathers essential zero rights as a parent of the child. They are expected to provide financial support though.
I didn’t know what essential zero rights mean.
Like 0 rights.
I’ll give you my solidly blue, pretends to be progressive states take:
If you are the father of the child you are responsible for the child. Unless you are married to the mother of the child, you default to having 0 legal custody of that child and all matters of the child’s health and welfare are up to the mother to decide. You have no paternal rights to the child, but you do have paternal obligations.
If you marry the mother you are suddenly legally part of the equation and have more rights, but unless you’re married to the mother of your child you have no legal standing.
Men’s rights very much do differ by state but not anywhere near as significant
You are missing the point. There are no rights exclusive to men that vary by state. The only rights that vary by state for one gender are women’s rights.
Things like parental rights don’t apply here because those impact both genders (they are zero-sum; a decrease in men’s paternal rights implies an increase in women’s rights).
Only women have specific rights that ONLY impact women and vary from state to state
So you’re saying that in addition to the rights we all have, women have additional exclusive rights.
Well yes. In addition to the body parts we all have, women have some that are exclusive to them; and as they’re a bit special they require extra rights.
Well, no. Both sexes have body parts which are exclusive to them. And before you say “yeah but there’s nothing controversial or invasive happening to any male body parts” consider circumcision.
No, I’m saying that women are SUPPOSED to have the same rights as everyone (e.g. complete bodily autonomy) but have their rights restricted in varying ways from state to state.
This really isn’t that hard to understand. Women have had their rights restricted in ways that men didn’t for a long, long time. It’s so normal that you aren’t even aware of it.
They got the right to vote later than men.
They got federal protection for their right to have their own bank account without a man’s approval in 1974 for fuck’s sake.
Is it so hard to recognize that women’s rights are controlled in ways that men’s aren’t?
Female genital mutilation is illegal in the United States. Male genital mutilation is common practice. The discrepancies certainly aren’t equal, but they aren’t exclusively one-sided.
Let’s not forget that women have never had compulsory military service in the US either. I hear some things can happen to your body in war. I mean aside from it being mandatorily shipped away for months and years.
Yes, anyone pushing for that last inch of total exclusivity here has another think coming.
Name a state - or a country - where men have “(e.g. complete bodily autonomy)”. All the examples I can think you might think are false, so either I’m missing something or I’m gonna challenge you so badly I van taste the endorphins (or I’ll learn something, so win win for me)
They got the right to vote later than men
Yes. For example in UK, women got universal voting rights whole decade later than men.
There are no rights exclusive to men or women. Abortion also affects trans men.
While you are technically correct, this is very obviously a discussion about reproductive rights, and the historical oppression of women as those who are most commonly impacted by reproductive rights issues. Your point is factual and valid but it is a distraction from the very important conversation being had here.
If this discussion leads to improved protection of reproductive rights, by pointing to the imbalance between traditionally male and traditionally female rights under US law, then trans men will also benefit. As such, the distraction of pointing out that trans men are also impacted therefore it’s “not just women” and the implication that we shouldn’t be talking about the ongoing oppression of women but rather “uterus havers”, works against your own interests.
The people who need to be convinced that reproductive rights need protection, and for whom the “it’s imbalanced” argument will be effective, are often even more vehemently opposed to trans issues. Bringing your point up here only serves to further entrench people who might otherwise be swayed to make changes that would benefit trans men. This is called “breaking into jail”.
There is a time and a place to have the “trans men are impacted by reproductive rights issues” discussion and this isn’t it.
Maybe make the point in a more direct and less confusing manner then? People are just critiquing the message because its written poorly. Its not even apparent its about reproductive rights until someone else clarifies that.
I knew immediately that it was about reproductive rights, but that’s just because that’s been the latest and most consistent snub against women lately.
If this were 40 years ago it would probably be about their ability to get a bank account or credit card without a man.
Or vote
I know it seems pedantic and normally I wouldnt interject but clearly based on your responses throughout this thread it needs to be brought up.
My omission of your point was intentional because as I said, in this context it’s not pedantic but rather self-defeating.
If we were in a different context I’d be right there with you championing the fact that trans men are effected by reproductive rights issues.
But for all the reasons I’ve already explained I chose not to bring transgender matters into this conversation because it only serves to make it harder to get the things you actually want, which is reproductive healthcare equality for trans men (and women).
It was a deliberate choice to meet my target audience where they are, knowing that a victory in that context would benefit trans men too.
Oh hush. The post clearly means the sexes not the genders.
Transphobia flourishes when it’s dismissed, minimized, and forgiven.
The only differences between “men’s rights” and “women’s rights” comes down to unequal treatment by police and the courts. When we talk about abortion and rape, the group in question can be described a bunch of ways (“female”, “xx”, “uterus-having”) but not accurately simply as “women”.
Because trans-men are men, not women, and treating them as such is every bit as bigoted as treating trans women as men.
Amendment 2 varies by state county city. But not by sex. Lots of rules are state wise, not federal
What do you mean by this?
You can open carry where? You can own an assault rifle where? You can not open carry nor own a pistol where 18 vs 21 where?
All are questions of the second amendment. In NYC you can’t own a gun without privelege. In Orlando, you can now own one and carry one.
You’re missing the point: are any of those rights different my state only for men or are all of those rights different by state for EVERYONE including men and women?
There are no rights exclusive to men that vary by state. The only rights that vary by state for one gender are women’s rights
There are no rights exclusive to men
You can kinda stop there, I mean, are there any rights exclusive to men? If there aren’t this is kind of a false dichotomy.
Not that I disagree with women’s rights of course, I’m just having trouble thinking of something that even would possibly “only apply to men.”
What’s amendment 2?
Electric bugaloo
The second amendment to the constitution
The right to bear arms.
right to own bear arms.
Oh. Usually it’s phrased as second amendment.
Yep, I definitely think the whole phrasing of that comment is unusual. I understand the basic facts they are stating, but not the point of stating them.
I’m confused about what your point was in your original comment. I don’t get the relevance?
My original comment? I just answered your question as to what that other commenter meant by “amendment 2.” I didn’t say anything else? Did you not want someone else to answer your question and only want that commenter to?
Which rights are exclusive to men?
Show me in the OP screencap where it says exclusive
Women’s rights vs. men’s rights.
Do women have the right to receive life saving medical care(abortion) as they should?
The right to drink a beer while operating a riding lawn mower in full view of the public without wearing a shirt.
But that’s illegal for everyone. Even for women.
I think you have it slightly twisted. If you’re mowing your own lawn on your own property as a dude and showing a bare chest, you will find that there are no laws on the books in your locale prohibiting this. If you dare to show boobs while doing so, however, you are certain to cop an indecent exposure charge (or at least the threat of the same) if anyone sees you.
There are some exceptions where being out and about topless as a woman isn’t illegal, but these are indeed exceptions in specific states and municipalities, which is kind of the point of this entire thread. Nobody’s going to say anything to a guy doing this, even if he’s ugly.
I think you missed the part about operating a riding mower while publicly consuming alcohol. That’s the part that’s illegal for everyone.
On your own property? No it ain’t. On the street, sure.
I don’t get why people think saying things like “REPEAT THAT OUT LOUD” makes their point better. Let the horror speak for itself, it’s plenty capable of doing so.
Just like “Read it again, slowly”. dw, I understood it the first time around.
oh no, rethorical tools. what an horror
I mean when it’s something really obvious that the entire audience already knows it’s just obnoxious
if you’re right and the audience knows it’s obnoxious, why do you repeat yourself? or using rethorical tools is ok when you’re using them?
honestly, it’s such a non issue.
It’s an issue to me because it’s really annoying 🤪
why use emojis if the meaning is clear? DAMN RETHORICAL TOOLS, WHY ARE THEY SO UNIVERSAL
I kinda just wanted to see what would happen if I did that lmao
(Also it does meaningfully change the tone of the message)
Yes it does, that is the point of rhetorical tools. otherwise imagine if it was costumery to send messages as succinctly as possible without any fluff or emotional tone. Communicating would be a pain.
My rule of thumb, if complaining about something annoying is even more annoying than the thing I am complaining about, it is not worth complaining about.
oh no, rethorical tools. what an horror
REPEAT THAT OUT LOUD
See? So much more effective: @[email protected] missed an opportunity to prove a point.
too lazy, better let other people prove my point for me.
“an horror” is far scarier
To be fair, given the apparent average reading comprehension of most social media users, it probably does actually make a difference
Social media users on text platforms are probably above average on reading skills. I’m convinced the average person is only semi literate, and there’s a shocking amount of people who can barely read at all.
Especially when it’s something untrue followed by “REPEAT THAT OUT LOUD”.
you ain’t been around a whole lot of the states, have you
Why?
when i was younger and stupid and in the (glass) closet i was dating the son of a pharmacologist. this man had made millions developing medications. he was fond of me and privately told me i was too funny and smart to be dating boys.
he also said that it was incredibly unlikely that sexism will ever be resolved in the medical field. that the majority of medications i will ever take - even some of which are “for women” - will not be clinically tested on my body.
the problem, he said, was in getting any human clinical trial approved.
to test on a body with a uterus - any body, even elderly patients or those who have been sterilized - was often nigh-impossible, because the concern was that the test patient may, at any point, become pregnant.
once/if the patient became pregnant, the study would not be about “the effects of New Medication on the body.”
instead, the trial would fail - the results would be “the effects of New Medication on a developing fetus/pregnant patient.”
it was massively easier, he said, to just test without accounting for a uterus.
that’s how he phrased it - accounting for a uterus.
at the time, i remember him talking about the ethical implications of testing on a developing fetus; how such testing could theoretically bankrupt a company if a lawsuit was filed. he talked about informed consent and about how long it took for any legislation to be passed about this -
- that in 1993; the year i was born, it finally became illegal to outright exclude women and minorities from clinical trials.
i remember him shrugging. “that’s not to say it doesn’t happen,” he said. my ears were ringing.
i was thinking about how every time i have been rushed to the ER, the first thing they have asked me is if i am pregnant.
when i broke my wrist at 16 years old - despite never having had sex - they made me wait three hours for the test to come back negative before they gave me pain meds. the possibility of a child haunts my health.
how many people have died on the table because they were waiting for the pregnancy test before treatment.
how many people have died on the table because they were pregnant, and the only thing we care about is the fetus.
it is hard to explain to other people, but it feels like some kind of strange ghost. our entire lives, we are supposed to “save” our bodies for our future partners. but really we are just saving the body for the future child, aren’t we? that hovering future-almost that cartwheels around in a miasma. you can’t get your tubes tied, what if you change your mind? think of the child you must have, eventually. who cares about you and your actual safety. think about what you could be carrying.
women are also dismissed or outright ignored in the ER OR AT appointments, as having a period or being hysterical when they have serious symptoms of a disease.
how many people have died on the table because they were waiting for the pregnancy test before treatment.
You would be extremally disgusted hearing what happens in poland since 2020.
jesus, that was a haunting read
No states give men the right to not be a father. They’re along for whatever ride the woman chooses
Right to abortion is body autonomy, not right to escape parenthood. Fetal death outside the womb is a byproduct.
Natural law, in its majestic equality, frees the sexes alike from the duty to carry unwanted occupants in their bodies. Men have equal rights to eject unwanted occupants from their bodies whenever that happens. Only by accident of nature are biological women regularly cursed with the burden to carry child.
As frivolous as that may naively seem, it’s a serious argument: don’t blame natural rights for natural differences.
Loss of right to abortion should concern non-women, too, if they ever found their bodies hooked up to sustain someone’s life and wanted to discontinue that: the courts might deny them.
Men have the right to use birth control or get a vasectomy
How is this not also an argument against abortion
It is
Which don’t protect them in cases of rape or reproductive coercion. Vasectomies are a form of permanent sterilization with dubious reversal rates.
That’s also ignoring how there are fewer options for birth control, in no small part due to biological differences (read: hormones).
The poster simply doesn’t care about men, dude.
Sure, but, that’s not why I bothered. It’s a small effort to hopefully get other folks to think about these problems holistically.
Fair enough.
Men have the exact same right to abandon and refuse to raise their child that women do. This right is not always respected in American courts, but the same laws that protect her if he doesn’t want to help also should protect him if she just wants to drop the baby and run.
And if she sabotaged the condom, stole his sperm for IVF,.or similarly took action to concieve against his wishes, then she committed a crime and should be punished. But not the child.
As far as the law or justice cares, babies could be delivered by storks.
