
No, but they are fundamentally valued less under the patriarchy. Men and women are both hurt though, men are made to think simultaneously that they are entitled to women and to success along with being made disposable sources of labor and soldiers. Women are thought of as weaker and therefore arenāt put in those particular types of violent and dangerous positions, but theyāre also made to think they are only as valuable as their ability to appeal to men and bear children. Additionally, this-
-stance that women are weaker is fundamentally rooted in a desire to control women. If they think theyāre only capable of rearing children and homemaking, theyāre less likely to resist the systems in place against them. Basically what Iām trying to say is that the patriarchy hurts everyone. However, women are hurt more. Menās pain is valid and needs to be seriously addressed more, but womenās pain and oppression goes deeper
81% women have been a victim of sexual assault whereas 43% of men have. Women have had the right to vote for just over a century. Women have been able to have an independent bank account for just over half a decade. Itās a real risk that a woman turning down a man could result in her being assaulted or even killed, this risk is not present for men, at least not anywhere even remotely close to how it is for women. I could keep going
Yes, they donāt want to because of the men there. Misogyny goes unchecked and festers in those workplaces, of course a woman wouldnāt want to work somewhere where sheās more likely to be sexually harassed daily, sexually assaulted, and just not looked at as equal for no valid reason.
Love how donāt even acknowledge the fact that itās work women donāt want to do. So letās say in a hypothetical scenario, oil rigging for example, thereās one that is only allowed to hire women. Can you say with absolute certainty that women would apply and would be able to do that job for a significant amount of time?
Men are not always the strongest and fastest. There are many women that are just stronger than men even though itās not the norm statistically, even without training. And regardless, not every man is suitable for the military, regardless of their testosterone, theyāre not automatically āthe bestā soldiers
Initially, probably not. The patriarchy has a real influence in making many women never even consider those types of jobs because they think they canāt, which then leads to many going down different paths that they end up liking. For the rest, that hostile, misogynistic environment does the rest at making most women hesitate or quit early. Once thereās been time for it to be normalized in this hypothetical scenario, absolutely plenty of women would join. Dangerous jobs like that pay-
The patriarchy affects women even before theyāre born (people being disappointed theyāll be having a girl instead of a boy or even getting them aborted sometimes just for being a girl), why do you think it wouldnāt affect this hypothetical oil rig scenario? You said the oil rig would only hire women, not that it would eliminate the patriarchy and all of the negative effects itās had
To clarify, because women arenāt a hive mind, I canāt make a criticism towards all women. Every woman is an individual and so I canāt make a generalized criticism towards all women, just like I canāt make a generalized criticism towards all men. I can criticize the systems in place that benefit different groups though
You canāt even give a criticism about your own sex. Yes every woman, man, person in general are not a hive mind and are unique. I can still give criticism of my own sex. Easily can think of some. You canāt even name one. And if you did it would still somehow wrap back to men or the patriarchy. Women are infallible apparently. So thereās no point. Have a good day
yeah i came across a post with several people sharing their experiences having been sexually harassed and even brutalized by boys when they were younger, which is in and of itself awful, but what made it more horrific were the adults in their lives not believing them when they reported what was happening, or doing little to nothing about it upon finding out
not only is the experience in and of itself violating but it teaches/reinforces to girls and women that when things happen to them, they wonāt be believed, or nothing will be done about it, the perpetrator wonāt be held accountable. that in some cases theyāll be the ones to face consequences, rather than the person who assaulted them in the first place
i mean i donāt really know what you want me to say. iām not the one trying to downplay the suffering of men YOU came here trying to make a comparison using an example that does in fact result in the suffering of both men and women, with the intent to downplay the suffering of women. so i simply set the record straight
and in this case i especially donāt know what you want me to say because is it not often times men sending other men to go rape and kill and be maimed and die in war? is it not the guise of being this ultimate patriarchal masculine figure that they use to help propagandize men into going to war in the first place?
i mean if you ask me i think its different types of suffering men and women experience under the same system but said system is put in place to benefit men the most and punish women, render them (and any man who doesnāt fit the mold, often because they are unmasculine/feminine) basically second clsss citizens
itās often also men who willingly keep upholding said system and so then it becomes a bit difficult to hold a lot of sympathy for them even if i recognize theyāre also suffering yāknow. so even with the war example, the draft is one thing, but there are many men who perfectly willingly go to war, right?
but there is no woman or child in a warring nation who signs up up to be raped or killed by foreign soldiersā¦they just end up being considered unfortunate collateral, dehumanized entirely against their own volition just by virtue of being women and children. so even if everyone involved is suffering in some way its easier to sympathize with one party over the other yāknow.