So a fella on the Men’s Rights subreddit made this poster, which he’s planning to post in the vicinity of the Women’s Studies Department at his school, assuming he can find it.
Since I know that a lot of females read this blog, I thought I’d ask you all just which of these Unchecked Female Privileges (There’s Nothing “Benevolent” About Them) are your favorites. You can pick more than one! (I know how inherently greedy you feemales are.)
Has he missed any important ones?
Non-women are allowed to post in this thread as well, but only if they preface their comments with “If it may please the feemales, might I humbly suggest that … .”
The idea that she could have refused those drinks – some people obviously have no memory of what it was like to be a 14 year old in the company of popular 17 year olds (of any gender).
What, you mean that you were willing to push through the initial stress that always comes with college and you didn’t just give up as soon as things got hard? That’s female privilege, that is.
The irony. I could make a similar statement about the boardroom.
News related to the Missouri insanity: Anonymous has that town in its sights, and the college that accepted the rapist has had its Facebook page bombarded with criticism. In short, the crapstorm is ready to turn into a crapnado.
Oh look, it’s Not So Good. Over/under on Greater Good appearing?
And .10 8 hours later?! I’ll be back with math, it won’t be pretty.
Not irony and don’t bother.
Works out to about 4.5 shots in a row (or nearly 7 oz of 80 proof) if it was all at once. But this is using elimination rates for adult women (and average weight for 14 year old girls).
I do that I’m puking. In any case, her BAC would’ve been over 0.20 most likely, and having, presumably, no alcohol tolerance, that makes stupor likely and lack of understanding almost certain.
The safer workplace conditons thing? Yeah, I’m pretty sure that the guys at my roughly 50:50 male:female former workplace had access to the same safety equipment I had and were bound by the same health and safety procedures. Which is just as well if you’re going to work with liquid gas, carcinogens, neurotoxins, highly flammable reagents, potentially explosive reagents, potentially infectious material, strong acids, strong alkalis, irritants, poisons, unsealed radioactive sources, GMOs and mutagens. The only difference between us was that I had to inform my radiation safety officer should I become pregnant (protection for the unborn foetus, not me).
That safer workplace conditions thing is really women do different jobs to men and he thinks stereotypically male jobs are more dangerous than stereotypically female jobs. Yes, gender division in the workplace is absolutely a female privilege that feminism has in no way sought to dismantle. Of course.
Or three ounces of 190-proof Everclear in a big cup of fruit punch.
The whole Maryville incident is horrifying in the extreme.
The safer workplace conditons thing? Yeah, I’m pretty sure that the guys at my roughly 50:50 male:female former workplace had access to the same safety equipment I had and were bound by the same health and safety procedures.
Quite anecdotal don’t you think? And feminism’s desire to dismantle gender division in the workplace is based almost entirely on the gender wage gap and none on workplace safety.
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2013/04/today-is-equal-pay-day-the-next-equal-occupational-fatality-day-will-occur-on-april-17-2023/
Oh, they understand it all right. They just aren’t interested in getting it.
So Good wants women to get harmed at work, there’s a shocker.
Re workplace conditions. If access to safety equipment (and to clarify here I mean lab coats, safety glasses, fume hoods, protective gloves and face shields for handling liquid gasses etc.) had been denied on the basis of gender the employer would be in deep trouble twice over. Once for gender discrimination and once for breaking health and safety laws. Can you name any employer that has had a warning/trial/conviction for such an occurrence? Also, can you provide any data to substantiate the claim that men are discriminated against in terms of access to safety equipment and/or procedures for working with hazardous substances/in hazardous environments where they are undertaking the same job as women?
It seems to me that feminism supports allowing people to do the job that they want to do and are capable of doing safely regardless of gender. The gender wage gap is certainly a factor in dismantling workplace gender division but it’s not the only one.
Lastly, workplace safety is every employees’ responsibility. You take on a job knowing and accepting the hazards involved. It is the responsibility of your employer to do everything they reasonably can to minimise risk to your health regardless of gender and your responsibility to use the safety equipment provided, follow their safety procedures, report all accidents and near misses and alert your employer to any potential problems.
Oh, Good’s not arguing in anything resembling good faith, Delurking.
Men being responsible for their workplace safety is MISANDRY.
Good could always go fuck himself at work for an interesting, if embarrassing, workplace injury.
Yeah, bog-variety misogynist, is Goodfornothing. He’s just another carbon thief.
“Or three ounces of 190-proof Everclear in a big cup of fruit punch.”
Drunk in under an hour. I couldn’t do it, so I doubt a 14 year old would voluntarily (well, I doubt it in general, but the idea of drinking that much makes me want to puke in advance)
@hellkell and @kittehserf
Figures. I’ve not been around for a while. Losing track of who the trolls are. 🙂
Wake me up when Good makes a cohesive argument or cites a non-shit source.
Because I’m really really sleepy.
I just have to laugh (bitterly, and without mirth) at the “Feelings given more inherent value” one. All of them on the poster are basically bass ackwards half-truths at best, but that one is so readily disproved on practically a millisecond basis if the internet is anything to judge by. If they mean, “all thoughts and well researched statements backed up by studies presumed to be emotional arguments because you must be on your period” then yeah, sort of. But that’s generally a tactic used by sexist douchecandles to try to discredit women, not give their arguments more credence.
Not to mention that when there is an emotional conversation to be had, those are dismissed even more as “pansy assed” and supposed “proof” of the inferiority of women. Because if women feel like shit in spaces where people treat them like shit, it’s clearly a sign of their emotional weakness and not a sign that maybe treating women like shit is kind of not cool.
But any old dooodly hack can spout off a rambling of broken logic so twisted by bias and an obvious inclination to be enamored by the sound of one’s own written word, and it’s lauded as brilliant, capital ‘I’ Important stuff.
So being reduced to an overly emotional creature not to be trusted even when discussing one’s own experience or quoting well vetted studies = privilege. Cool!
“Less likely to abuse drugs.”
You heard the man. Get yerself some smack and start shootin’ up in the name of gender-equality, ladies.
“‘The Sisterhood.'”
…of the Traveling Pants? Seriously, no need to be jealous. The movie wasn’t that good.
“‘Having it all.'”
He probably could have made this list alot shorter it he just had this on it.
Breaking curfew = wanting sex. Who knew? I always thought it was for the thrill of doing something forbidden knowing that you’d be grounded for a couple of weeks if your folks found out. Going out to drink alcohol? Probably grounded until Xmas. Even more naughty, risky or thrilling.
As for going out wanting to have sex. This isn’t about these two suffering little girls, but generally. A women interested in having sex will, very likely, dress and groom herself in a way that improves her chances of drawing the notice of some men. This does not mean any and every bloke has any right to touch her body without her consent. I know. Big thinkies needed here for some dunderheaded men. The fact that a woman is interested in sex does not mean that she doesn’t care who she has sex with. Bombshell for those who don’t understand consent. But there you have it.
Feminists should want women to be less safe at work! This is a far more fair and reasonable approach than wanting everyone to be as safe at work as possible. Vote for the “no safety equipment” party today!
It’s Good, folks. Unfortunately he will indeed be here all week.
“Less likely to transition gender identity”
Yes, because trans women only transition because being a man is so difficult…
The above was sarcasm obviously. Whoever made that list is assuming bullshit about trans people to use them as pawns in their argument.
This is the point at which I remind everyone about the time that a prominent MRA openly admitted to LBT that the “movement” had nothing to offer him as a trans guy, right?
Good doesn’t understand what false equivalence is, does he?
College is not like a boardroom. Making less than man, in the same job, with the same amount of training and experience, is not like being more likely to face occupational safety hazards at work.
Occupational safety is important. No one should die or be injured at work. Th obvious solution is to fight to make workplaces safer, not to try to attack women via poster form.
And that case in Missouri. I can’t even go there. The worst part is how depressingly familiar it is.