To think it really is a man's world?

[TreatTreat]

We all know it is, but itv1 confirmed it even more for me today by calling the Euros tournament the 'women's euro tournament'. TV stations sure as hell don't introduce men's tournaments with their gender in the introduction.

And I think the poor men will cope with the widespread mocking to be honest, whilst they hold the majority of the world's wealth and enjoy unlimited, often invisible privileges.

I would have put 'Dear Sir or Madam'.

Some fair points.
Advertising I'd argue is for a man's benefit both as I'm sure the majority of profits go to male shareholders and women looking better for men to look at. The latter is so bad that women genuinely think they lose weight, wear make up and remove body hair for themselves. They think that dressing provocatively empowers them. If that doesn't tell you it's a man's world, not sure what will.

Yeah, they're mostly victims of their own, preciously guarded, misconceptions about it being a 'man's world' !?

The spending on healthcare misconception is the one that screams out here "the Queen is wearing no clothes again".

Posters on here regularly post that there's more money spent on ED than whatever women medical condition is the trending one of the moment..... Yet, one walk into a GP surgery would tell you that maybe 3-4 times the number of women are trying to access healthcare daily ahead of men.

Ditto for spending on specific conditions too e.g. spending v mortality rates on Breast cancer versus Prostate cancers say?

I'm guessing there's far more spent on Breast cancer versus it's mortality risk, based on ads, awareness campaigns & screening programs e.g. I've never seen a screening program for prostate cancer. Like why not??

Yet, we'll hear all the usual moannetters on here randomly reiterate that there's more spent on men's healthcare than women's , when this is patently not the case!!

P.s. this is what Google AI says on this matter (be aware though Google AI maybe written by a man for a male audience 🙄 😉)

"While both breast and prostate cancers are major health concerns, research and treatment spending are not always allocated proportionally to disease burden. Breast cancer often receives more funding and attention, despite prostate cancer having a similar mortality rate in the UK. This discrepancy highlights the influence of advocacy and public perception on funding decisions...."

QED

Yeah, they're mostly victims of their own, preciously guarded, misconceptions about it being a 'man's world' !?

Yeah that's what women are mostly victims of isn't it?

Just checking you understand the meaning of the word 'mostly' above?

I appreciate it may be a level of nuance you may struggle with on this topic...

https://rapecrisis.org.uk/get-informed/statistics-sexual-violence/

1 in 4 women raped or sexually assaulted. And that's just the over 16s. And that's just the ones reported.So no, women aren't "mostly victims of their own, preciously guarded, misconceptions about it being a 'man's world' !?" as you erroneously stated. Women are overwhelmingly, victims of entitled males, which I'm going to go out on a limb and guess number you amongst their members.Take your 'nuance' back to reddit

Look try to derail the thread down a rabbit hole all you like but it's still a rabbit hole imho. The OP asked a fairly straightforward question: I.e. AIBU

To think it really is a man's world?

I fairly debunked this thesis further up the thread, however because I then used the word victimhood to illustrate the type of thinking in the OP despite the very many facets of day to day life that show this premise to be complete bunkem, it's been jumped on by people wanting a different debate on here. That's all irrelevant here.

P.s. the OP didn't ask AIBU
'Are more females sexually assaulted than males?'

If she had , your post might be someway relevant to that conversation. But it's just pure whataboutery on this thread, where the OP poses a completely different thesis, and that's the one I was addressing. It's worth trying that I find when replying to a topic.

@ThatDaringEagle I can see what you mean. As a woman I sometimes get annoyed at the idea that because I'm a woman I'm supposed to see myself as a victim or see other women as victims. Lots of women experience hardship but lots of women dont. Sometimes I don't know what to feel about it all.

• I can’t answer why most adverts are aimed at women, or even reliably verify whether or not that’s actually true, but if we assume that it is true - do you think that’s an advantage to women? That you would use it as an example to refute it being a man’s world would suggest that you do? A lot of adverts are related to the beauty industry - which definitely is aimed far more at women than men - but this is an industry that creates a problem and then markets a solution, so I’d struggle to argue that women are advantaged by it. In fact, I wouldn’t argue that advertising advantages anyone but the advertiser. The widespread mocking of men in advertising is probably related to the fact that most adverts are aimed at women - and it’s a fair point that it shouldn’t really be acceptable.
• Car Insurance is risk based, women pay less generally because they claim less generally.
• Healthcare - again, can’t comment on spending as I don’t know the figures and I wouldn’t know the reasons for decisions anyway, but trying to argue healthcare favours women because there’s more women in the waiting room is….. stretching a bit. The appointments are there to be made. The people in the waiting room have made one. Unless you are suggesting the surgeries block men from booking? When you state that spending on women’s health is clearly more than in men’s health, what do you mean? How is it clear? The breast cancer verses prostate cancer awareness comes up a lot - usually around race for life season. Race for Life exists because someone started it. A similar event for prostate cancer doesn’t exist because no-one has started one.
• Family law, I have no on experience of this, but my understanding is that generally the starting point is 50/50? Is that not true? Weighting of assets in one party’s favour is usually done to balance out differences in earnings over the years to reflect time out for raising children. This often ‘favours’ women because they are usually the one who has lost earnings this way.

You haven't 'debunked' anything. The OP was about how men's and women's football is treated in publicity and what that means. And the PP example of 'the man who has it all' about how women and men are talked about and to is a great example of what the OP was talking about.

Sorry I can’t get past ‘debunked this thesis’ 😂😂
No mate, you posted your opinions on a thread on Mumsnet 😂😂

Yes, I posted my opinions, and cited several examples where women are clearly favoured in this supposed 'man's world', and where men are often treated far less favorably. These instances pretty much debunk this false thesis in the OP i.e. To think it really is a man's world?. The fact that you can't get past this, is really just your particular issue, and frankly, totally irrelevant to the debate.

I hope this helps you understand the debate better.

Because whether you have more adverts aimed at you is a known way of showing who is favoured by the system? Poor you, companies aren't trying to sell you washing scent boosters or face cream that costs more per gram than gold. That's a sure sign women have got it all, companies try to tell us we smell and are wrinkly so need to buy stuff to fix it. You're so marginalised.

You didn't bring any receipts either, so no you didn't cite anything.

Yes and women killing two men a week in domestic violence scenarios and us women driving a billion pound industry so we can watch young men being sexually degraded and young men being trafficked by those all female crime gangs and school boys being sexually harassed on the street by middle aged women … no wait a minute hang on 🙄🙄.

They were just your opinions though, which you’re welcome to have but it wasn’t a robust argument.

You didn’t ‘cite’ anything, you provided a list of where you think men are disadvantaged which was prefaced with a sprinkling of sexism.
Your use of academic language (thesis, cite) doesn’t strengthen your argument, they’re just an attempt to appear superior and shut down the discussion (look how clever I am, therefore I must be right!) but they’re just words and without the substance behind them they’re meaningless.

The thing is, there are certain groups of men who are disadvantaged in various aspects of society ( white working class boys/men in education and employment is a prime example) but that isn’t what this thread is about and ‘whataboutery’ feels like a way to shut down a valid discussion. If you want to discuss male disadvantage then perhaps consider starting a new thread instead of hijacking this one to tell us we’re all wrong - it’s an incredibly arrogant thing to do.

And while there are aspects of society where women hold a more favourable position, that doesn’t erase the systemic sexism and disadvantage women still face in society.

There was a whole thread on this a while back. Whilst it may be true that at sone level adults are aware of, Sir is more formal than Miss, kids,including the teens I teach really don't think of it. I get called, Miss, Mrs, Sir, Mum, Gran, on daily basis when doing the register. I am a stickler for manners and pull kids up if they Teams message me too informally, with no salutation but I don't have an issue with Miss.

Advertising is aimed at women because women are the ones that do the most of the grocery shopping, shopping for the family etc. This is entirely within the ability of men to change if they want to take those tasks on

I don't watch enough adds to know. Tesco Woosh and Dominos which I do see a lot mocks everyone.

Women's car insurance isn't cheaper (despite them costing the insurance companies less money - insurance companies do do the maths) - there was a discrimination case, and they did make the change

The amount spent on womens health does not exceed that spent on men's health, and in fact many areas are hugely neglected. Women do spend out on their own health more than men do though, ie it costs them more personally.

Family law is absolutely not biased towards women. It actually tends to be biased against the primary parent (eg. they must make the child available for access, but the other parent can just not turn up with no consequences), Maintenance is low, and poorly enforced, and the courts grant access to abusive men. If a man cares to have 50/50 care, he will get it.

God forbid we hope that people treat each other with politeness. I'm sure busy fathers also want to be treated well at work don't they?

"And while there are aspects of society where women hold a more favourable position, that doesn’t erase the systemic sexism and disadvantage women still face in society."

But this is just your opinion though isn't it?

Where is the evidence to back this assertion up?
This is a widely held belief around here, but yet is totally out of date imho.

It doesn't take account of things like positive discrimination in favour of women, family law court rulings, etc, etc

E.g. if there was even nearly half as much an awareness campaign for the relatively poor education outcomes for young boys coming out of our education system as there now is for keeping young girls in sport it would be a lot.

This is the kind of thing that crystallises how modern society is most definitely not a man's world imho e.g. education, & educational performance are a key factor in future earnings & welfare, participation in sport while important is far from being so essential. Yet there's a huge progressive movement to keep going girls in sport, which is of course a good thing btw, yet in comparison hardly a whimper while young boys are effectively being let down by the education system.

That's the kind of thing that this modern world promotes, it's not favorable to boys (or being male in general), and frankly, it's just wrong.

But this is just your opinion though isn't it?
Where is the evidence to back this assertion up?
This is a widely held belief around here, but yet is totally out of date imho.

There is a huge amount of evidence to support this - what particular aspect would you like me to provide evidence on? My particular expertise is is around employment but I have a pretty good working knowledge of other subjects so happy to engage in an evidence based debate with you.

However, that will require you to provide robust evidence that my argument is out of date.

It doesn't take account of things like positive discrimination in favour of women, family law court rulings, etc, etc

Firstly, positive discrimination is illegal.
Secondly, if we look at the family court as an example. The starting point is 50/50 but they will also take into account who is the primary carer. The question you should be asking is why are women more likely to be default primary carer?

E.g. if there was even nearly half as much an awareness campaign for the relatively poor education outcomes for young boys coming out of our education system as there now is for keeping young girls in sport it would be a lot.

There is work being done on this. I've worked on projects focused on this and as a governor at two schools I know that a significant amount of work goes into improving the attainment of boys.

This is the kind of thing that crystallises how modern society is most definitely not a man's world imho e.g. education, & educational performance are a key factor in future earnings & welfare, participation in sport while important is far from being so essential.

The data tells us that girls outperform boys in education outcomes ( there's some nuanced work to be done on subject choices and how girls self select out of certain subjects but the raw data tells us this) but when it comes to career progression and earnings boys/men are more likely to progress into senior roles and earn more.

Yet there's a huge progressive movement to keep going girls in sport, which is of course a good thing btw, yet in comparison hardly a whimper while young boys are effectively being let down by the education system.

Like I've said, boys education attainment is not being ignored. it's just that it's dealt with in a different way to campaigns that look at getting girls into sport. And rightly so, they are two very different issues which require different approaches.

That's the kind of thing that this modern world promotes, it's not favorable to boys (or being male in general), and frankly, it's just wrong.

It's not a zero sum game though is it? It is possible to acknowledge that not all groups of men are advantaged while still appreciating that women face systemic discrimination due to their sex.

I use "Dear Sir / Madam" rather than "Dear Sirs"

Or sometimes "Good morning" or "Good afternoon"

'There is a huge amount of evidence to support this - what particular aspect would you like me to provide evidence on? My particular expertise is is around employment but I have a pretty good working knowledge of other subjects so happy to engage in an evidence based debate with you.'

OK, I'll bite. If your expertise is employment, as you say it is, kindly show us the evidence there is prejudice against women here.

And please don't go quoting the usual media troll of a difference in salary for sexes, as obviously there are multiple factors impacting on these such as qualifications, opting to work part time, taking leave of absence to raise kids, etc, etc, etc

Lol.

"Show me some evidence, just make sure it's only evidence I like" 😆

Nope, I simply set a standard for evidence e.g. not accepting the simplistic, media trolling, click bait we read every other day, which are clearly not based on any objective analysis...

Re health spending Try spending time on the maternity ward then the paediatric ward. Chalk and cheese. Maternity ward was like a third world hell hole when I had my first in a london hospital when we went back to the same hospital to a different department it was a different world. Funding or lack of was obvious.

Women after major abdominal surgery are expected to be up and caring for the baby within days. Anyone else after a similar operation is prescribed weeks of rest.