Some men cannot cope with feminism's victory

[jezestbelle]

Spent the evening yesterday with a male friend of a few years standing who I see from time to time. We always talk about everything and since DS left home I have more time. I had a really really long in depth chat with him about the different pressures on men and women. He is I have to say relatively empathetic about women and societal expectations, entitled men etc. He did make one point which made me think. He said that nobody actually chooses to have sexual feelings, and how much he longed to be able to temporarily switch them off, for example long periods when he has been single. I did of course counter that believe itornot women also experience such feelings, but he said he knew that but was just relating his own experience. He also said he reckons just about every example of unacceptable male behaviour is down to insecurity, and that many men cannot deal with women having relative success in the modern world. Well too bad! I do feel we women are on the up in general and men are..not.

To be fair, I did start reading that in that tone, but it so quickly descended into frothing idiocy that it was impossible to maintain the suspension of disbelief necessary.

You'd think they'd try harder, they get banned for being transparently stupid, and come back to be, well, transparently stupid again.

Well, well, well. poyu it might come as a surprise to you, but working hard, being successful and being a feminist aren't mutually exclusive!

(Although I realise there's actually no point engaging rationally with you as you're clearly here with a grudge an agenda rather than to debate the issues like a grown-up might do)

Buffy! You're using your facts again!

We all know that facts don't work with men of poyu's ilk.

Unless he reads them on Reddit, in which case, they're man facts, and therefore 50% more facty than silly facts.

Yep, you're right. For about five years, firms have been allowed preferentially to hire candidates from under-represented groups provided they are as equally qualified for the role as others. This is 'positive action' and it is designed to provide a just way to ensure that groups who have traditionally experienced disadvantage are fully represented in workplaces. It is often referred to as a kind of 'tie break' situation.

'Positive discrimination', by contrast, would be preferentially to hire someone from an under-represented group even though their qualifications are lower than another candidate. Positive discrimination remains illegal.

I think the simple distinction between the two is probably lost on poyu though.

Where was that unconscious bias video from Google, the one where the guy did a simple model, and found that 1% bias towards a group in hiring resulted in a skew of I think 40/60% by the time you got to the top.

And there are plenty of studies showing that we attribute greater skill and potential to men than identically skilled women.

Sigh.. They have a little picture in their head of a sad, angry 'feminist' and they just refuse to open their eyes and see that we're normal people.

When I hear blokes this and frothing over female quotas I keep asking myself "what did you think of the fact that pretty much every job in the past had a male quota of 100%?".

Silly me, obviously that was totally different because that was the natural order of things until us pesky females started to believe we were human too.

mostly men unsatisfied with feminism at all. But we know who run the world;)

Christ above just came back and read later posts. People like that actually go about in real life. I'm so glad we don't have guns in the UK.

These school shooters in the USA are all male aren't they, presumably thinking along the lines of that angry posting man. "Why are other people happy and successful when I'm not. They dont deserve it. Must put a stop to it."...