Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just an observation. Every week in my city there are multiple fundraisers for breast cancer (which has a 99% survival rate), I see signs everywhere for "Girls Who Can Code" classes, "Feminist Karate" classes, then there are all these engineering scholarships exclusively for women. I almost feel as if women have been elevated to a sacred status. Meanwhile in my city, the streets are filled with homeless vets who've been burned/maimed. Or I walk by construction sites and see men laboring at 4 a.m. in the pouring cold rain. Seems like both men and women have hardships in society, but men's problems don't get as much publicity because there's a huge effort to "prove" that everything is peachy for men and everything sucks for women.
Poor snowflakes. Do males need a safe space?
The five year survival rate for breast cancer is around 85% but there are many factors that determine survival so your percent is wrong and simplistic.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 5 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,602,372 times
Reputation: 5697
Quote:
Originally Posted by KonaldDuth
Just an observation. Every week in my city there are multiple fundraisers for breast cancer (which has a 99% survival rate), I see signs everywhere for "Girls Who Can Code" classes, "Feminist Karate" classes, then there are all these engineering scholarships exclusively for women. I almost feel as if women have been elevated to a sacred status. Meanwhile in my city, the streets are filled with homeless vets who've been burned/maimed. Or I walk by construction sites and see men laboring at 4 a.m. in the pouring cold rain. Seems like both men and women have hardships in society, but men's problems don't get as much publicity because there's a huge effort to "prove" that everything is peachy for men and everything sucks for women.
99% Survival Rate = 1% Death Rate. If your wife or child, or even you, had a disease that had a 1% chance of killing you, would you want research into this condition to continue? I think you would.
Coding, engineering - women are underrepresented in these fields, high paying ones at that. Furthermore, unfortunately STEM fields tend to have lingering sexism in them (my cousin is a medical researcher, and she told me about some pretty sexist stuff that can go on even in this field, which has many more women than the STEM fields do).
Construction in the pouring rain - were I a heartless bastard, I'd say "they should have spent their years being a 'nerd' so they could go into engineering! Whataya expect when you don't have much of an education." But I don't, because I know that a lot of people can't afford to go to college these days, PLUS not everybody is made for higher education to begin with. Plus even a lot of sensible intelligent people simply have a strong inclination toward construction work. They may not be book smart, but they know how to handle equipment worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. As for intelligence, they're definitely good at spotting the central points of a matter, even without advanced "schooling".
Also, that "everything sucks for women", even assuming it's perfectly true, does not mean that they think everything's peachy keen for men. One does not mean the other. Even if I'm wrong, that only means men need to get together and challenge the cultural meme that "men (esp white men) have it all A-OK". What prevents men from doing that. Hell, I speak up about how overly macho male culture is fairly often on C-D. You can do the same if you think society and the media trivialize men's sufferings.
Homeless Vets - That has nothing to do with "feminism" and everything to do with a government that does not adequately fund care for its veterans.
Added:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wynternight
Poor snowflakes. Do males need a safe space?
The five year survival rate for breast cancer is around 85% but there are many factors that determine survival so your percent is wrong and simplistic.
I stand corrected, Wynter. But even if Konald were correct, that doesn't detract from my central point about this matter.
That 99% survival rate Konald claimed is an outright lie.
I have a sister-in-law who's a recent breast cancer survivor. Breast cancer runs in her family, and she has the cancer gene, so she has always been very alert. The only reason she survived was because of blind luck; her cancer was discovered very early, and she had loaded up her insurance to the max years before, just in case, so she could afford the highest level of treatment available.
Her younger sister, who developed cancer just a couple of months before, wasn't so lucky. She died about 15 months ago, following her mother, aunt, and grandmother.
The survival rate for breast cancer is NOT 99% or anything close to it. The survival rate is only that high in stage 1 cancer, hers, and stage 1 can become stage 4 cancer in less than 90 days if a woman carries the cancer gene. The survival rate for stage 4 cancer is 22%.
Breast cancer is not just one cancer. It can be one of several, and a patient can have a couple of different cancers at the same time. Stage 1 is often un-detectable in a common breast self exam, so most often by the time an alert woman thinks she can feel a lump, it may be late Stage 1 or Stage 2 by the time she first sees a doctor.
C'mon, Konald. What's your problem? Did some female pick on your tender feelings or something? I'm the father of a daughter, have a sister, 4 nieces, and an old mother and one old aunt in my family, and I sure don't want any of them dying from a female killer disease.
I want all the young women in my family to be able to defend themselves, and the men have taught their women to shoot in my family. They can all handle a gun as good as any man, but I wouldn't mind if they all took karate too, just in case a gun wasn't available.
And I want every single one of them to go just as far in their careers as any man could ever go. There's nothing at all wrong with allowing a girl some special opportunities to become a mathematician or an engineer- I know girls who are very interested in science, math, and other 'men's occupations', and America needs all the trained minds it can get these days. Gender has nothing to do with ability.
I'm a vet, and I donate to vet's causes, including homelessness. I don't care if a PTSD vet is male or female. Vietnam was my war, so I've seen just how bad it can be for vets for the past 50 years. I'm glad that finally, there is now some treatment available that can pull a few of the guys of my generation off the streets at last.
And I hope my support helps all those vets who followed them. I don't care who gets help- they are all my brothers and sisters in arms, and that's good enough for me.
Do you? Do you actually do anything but whine about them, or do you put your money where your mouth is?
The vets, and men in general, do not want nor need this kind of self-pitying nonsense.
It doesn't help in any way, but it's sure a good excuse to stay on the streets, or unemployed, or a opioid junkie for some men who whine like you did in this post. Those guys don't need your encouragement.
This is just another Right Wing "victim" thread. Just look at the title, the OP feels victimised . Just like most on the extreme right. These are highly "entitled" folk, they are not used to having to compete to get into a school or for a job, thus they lash out and blame "liberals" , "illegals", "establishment", "globalists" etc.
Most of the extremists on the right have made the mistake of thinking that if they can just "defeat" some groups the clock will rewind.
Men continue to dominate the world virtually unchallenged. The only thing that is forgotten is how easy it is being a dude.
Generally speaking, men, because they perform so much better than women in higher level math and science classes , don't have trouble gaining admission to schools. Additionally, men often earn more because they are willing to take difficult, dirty and dangerous jobs that woman largely refuse to do. That explains why we have an achievement gap, but it doesn't explain why we have affirmative action.
From what I have read studies have shown men are willing to work more hours than women, it's not that men are doing better than women. More women would rather work part time and be a mom than work 70 hours a week. Sure the men working 70 hours a week make more money, then they die at 62 a day after they retire lol. I'm sure some men would love to work part time and be a dad, it's not like they're given the option. Women simply don't want to do the jobs that entail sacrificing that much of your life.
Last edited by wanderlust76; 10-18-2017 at 09:26 PM..
Men rarely quit working when they have children. Women do.
Men are the most powerful force in the country because they were senior employees for decades and had wives.
However, women are the majority in college now. We will see who dominates in business in 20 years.
Who will take care of the children?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
