Unless those men are black, Hispanic, or neurodivergent.
Privileges certainly vary by race, but do 21st century laws vary?
The only example I can think of is reservation laws.
The varies WILDLY in how and when it is enforced, you fucking buffoon. Why isn’t trump in prison for fucking ever right now?
I’ve never even heard of someone else collecting felonies like beanie babies and not spending the rest of their life in jail.
There’s black folks Still in prison for petty weed crimes, on state charges, in states where it’s legal now and has been for years
So, laws are consistent. Enforcement isn’t.
And what makes a law?
If gravity only worked on black people, would it be a law of physics?
Get the fuck outta here
Governing authorities and public institutions make legal laws.
Why are you trying to resurrect a 8 month old argument with deliberate misunderstandings?
You realize those prejudices get compounded, right?
What’s the name of that highway in canada, where they raped and murdered and dumped the corpses of native women?
Never a lead on any of those cases. I don’t think one was male, but hey, maybe there were a couple
Highway of tears, there have been several leads and several serial killers caught. The original list in 1980 included Larry Vu, Eric Charles Coss, and Phillip Innes Fraser but they were later removed after the “highway of tears” designation to focus exclusively on first nation women.
The lack of males is due primarily to the categorization, not the lack of victims.
Tell me that when we ban male genital mutilation.
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
Way to pull the ladder up behind you. Selfish jerk.
Sweet, I guess you win the oppression race
This is just blatantly false, men’s rights do vary wildly state by state. I get what this is saying and I agree with the message but presenting a good message behind a lie doesn’t make it any less of a lie.
I am also very supportive of women’s rights but lying is not helpful.
Honestly the point that it tries to make is not the point that it makes either. It could be understood as “let’s ban abortion everywhere”, and I don’t think that is the point that it tries to make.
I am in favor of bodily autonomy and I don’t care what the law currently is anywhere, it should be a given.
I am also very supportive of women’s rights but lying is not helpful.
Worth knowing: although they attract a lot of anti-feminist losers, the “men’s rights” activists are absolutely correct that men do not universally have the same support programs or even legal presumptions that women do. These can vary widely from state to state and even from court to court.
It’s not nearly as big an issue as “they want her to die from a miscarriage”, but “they presume he’s the inferior parent” or “they presume he caused the violence even if he’s the one bleeding” are also sexist oppression.
(Comparisons to the anti-woke “all lives matter” bullshit are apt – men can and should recognize that relatively minor slights and injustices are not nearly as urgent as denying pregnant humans life-saving care!)
if they assume he’s the inferior parent, why do the men win custody almost every fucking time they try, whereas the woman involved gets the kid dumped on her, completely, with no child support orders unless she fights for them, anytime the guy doesn’t want anything to do with the kid he knocked her up with?
why do the men win custody almost every fucking time they try
I know where you’re getting this from. Just so you know, it comes from a deliberately misleading interpretation of “winning custody”, where if a man seeks any amount of custody, and is granted anything more than nothing at all, it’s ‘counted’ by those spreading this propaganda, a “win”. This is as opposed to what any reasonable person would call a “win”, which is when one gets at least as much custody as one seeks. That’s like calling me a “lottery winner” because I won $5 after spending $1000 on tickets, lol.
If the mother of my child is abusive and I try to get full custody, but the judge gives me every other week supervised visitation, that is obviously not a “win”, but it is, by the definition of the misandrists who propagated that particular piece of bullshit around.
Like i said, the issue varys wildly by state or court.
Although part of the reason why men who ask for custody get it more than 50% of the time is that very often they know (or believe) they don’t have a chance and so don’t fight.
Men winning custody? Surely you jest
The irony is that the issue they’re talking about involves women losing, in some states, rights that men have never had in any state; men have zero legal means of opting out of parenthood, full stop.
If this was about women losing something that men aren’t already without, they might have the foundation of a point. But it’s still a fact that women haven’t really given a shit about advocating for giving men the equivalent rights, throughout the decades that they had them nationwide.
Which state is it illegal to get a vasectomy?
Which state is it illegal to get a tubal ligation?
Well I don’t know, but have you had six separate $150+ appointments with your doc who asks you questions ranging from “well what does your boyfriend of two weeks want” to “are you really sure?” to “we’re going to have to ask you attend this six week course on why it’s important to produce a legacy before we can sign off on this. Then we’ll see what your insurance has to say”
The topic was illegal procedures, the person I replied to was comparing a vasectomy to abortion by asking which states it is illegal in.
The comparison isn’t valid. A vasectomy isn’t remotely the same procedure as an abortion.
Well I don’t know
You could check before posting so that you would know.
If you did, you would find out that there are 0 states in the United States where either tubal ligation or vasectomies are illegal.
I do agree that the access to care situation is shit and caused by sexist lawmakers and doctors.
But, just because you agree with someone, doesn’t mean you can’t tell them that they’re making irrational arguments. If people want to continue to push for change, it’s important that everyone is capable of understanding the issues and know how to argue them effectively.
Making outrage baiting statements are good for social media engagement, but they’re antithetical to convincing people to change.
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.
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?
Sexism? It’s abhorrent to me that so many people think that other people are beneath them, despite being an essentially identical bag of funky water
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.