Women-only gyms

>It's equalizing the field after the *past centuries* of oppression.
>old men who are still rich, still alive, still happy oppressed old women
>young women who never experienced oppression are given special privileges to make up for the old women getting oppressed
>young men are are treated like demons for what old men did before them
Justice.

I'm glad men aren't so weak they need safe spaces

>we get harassed at gyms
>there are not nearly as many battered men who are trapped in abusive relationships and will be homeless without their abusive partners
>we still don't get promoted as soon or paid as much or given managerial/supervising positions as often
>This is literally case-by-case but women on average do commit lower anti-social behaviors and criminal acts
>If you're speaking of the parenthood debate it's been shown that people tend to fare worse psychologically when they don't have mothers vs. fathers. Both are bad but mommy issues is a doozy
>not there yet, equal pay is negotiated in situations where the woman has done an equal amount of work, jobs that are considered "feminine" (teachers, nurses, etc.) have historical precedent for being extremely low-paying since they were considered jobs for women to make ends meet whereas their husbands who they must depend on should be bringing in the money

There are also countless things that men have over women and your vitriol towards us is not contained to this board. You commit more acts of violence and anti-social behavior especially towards us by a long shot

The Red Pill by Cassie Jaye is the perfect overview of the topic:
youtube.com/watch?v=HK7n_XA40V8

She did an interview with Roaming Millennial recently:
youtube.com/watch?v=Rv0uLapMqPc

but women also think ignoring them is bad.

basically you want a perfect world.

all rubbish. i shant entertain you with any substance.

It's called the oppression of the past, emphasis on past. Modern first world women have never known oppression none of the people alive today went through the female oppression of their great great grandmother's. The women that were oppressed in the past are not alive today, just because you're a woman you do not get to claim history of people long sense dead, your history is the history of the modern era, probably the most privileged era in First World nations in anytime in history. Stop claiming history that is not yours nor is it mine. Should men and women be held accountable for the sins of their forefathers?

>blatant double standards are Ok because it benefits women
What a surprise, welcome to feminist ~equality~.

This
If anything this proves men are superior and don't need any special treatment.

explain why the field should be equal in the first place.
People always accept this as an axiom for some reason. It's not. Explain why women deserve to be 'level'.

Older women are privileged. Younger women have to deal with male peers who hate them and want to roll back their rights.

>Battered women's shelters; none for men
Lol, if you need a battered men's shelter, you're doing something wrong. This type of shit is why I can't take MRA's seriously anymore. They just want feminism but for men. But alphas don't need an identity politics movement, only beta boys who have the mindframe of a woman want their own feminism.

We're not a monolith and although I wouldn't like to have my presence utterly ignored by the world, I have had enough scary harassment/assault altercations to prefer being ignored over going through that again.

You don't correct an imbalance by adding equal amounts to both sides, you doofus.

Yet men still come out on top at the end of the day. Funny how it works.

well i call it the ''power and control game''

protection and privileges VS fredoom and free choice

womens were objects,or property for centuries
,protected and privileged,yet slaves to other man or more powerful person will

by the other side mens were free ,but they were responsable for showing that they are worthy

womens have it easy to get men because they were ''trophys'' for the men
but men were responsable of ''wining'' women and protecting them
(a personal example is that my grand grand parents were married at force,even if my grand grand mother was in love with other men
and my grand grand parent was forced to feed the family and work)

>expecting it to be anything other than "babies, muh babies and muh coochie support"

lets face it, women are arrogant now. it's a defense mechanism.
they're caught between progressing for the sake of a purpose and just being mothers for the sake of motherhood.

we all need each other, women act too arrogant.

okay so there you have it, all men now ignore you.
but it will never be real. neither would the alternative.
you're talking about fantasies and perfect worlds, things we can't change.

women want to be "equal" but only go for men they percieve as "superior".
They only go for taller men, men who make more, men who are as educated/more educated than them, etc.
They are hypocrites and their hypergamy can not coexist with equality.

>women have been oppressed for centuries
>pay no heed to the oppression of plebs, slaves, serfs and peasants for millennia

This. For fuck's sake people have been oppressing everyone since the dawn of mankind.

>stereotpying feminists as purple haired bra burning lesbians is bad
doesn't stop you from doing it though

>implying anons on Jow Forums are comparable to the entire media

it reminds me of my female friends i grew up with. i treated them like my best friends, never made advances.
later on they become "feminists" and they conveniently ignore guys like me, we just never existed, we don't fit their narrative.

instead they paint guys through the lens of the long haired fuck boys that pump n dumped them.
but see guys don't have this problem because we don't get pump n dumped.
maybe this is why people decided to wait til marriage for sex, because if you don't, then you have no social contract. the other person can just fuck off and go fuck your dad and brother behind your back.

Imagine having this mindset and having it reinforced by worldwide organizations and governments. And you wonder why we call your dogmatic, bigoted ideology cancer.

none of them are going to touch this with a 50 foot pole

you're right it's way worse

Attached: antifem.png (1042x783, 419K)

boo hoo, a few million views of people attacking lowhanging fruit.
Meanwhile literal millions (billions?) are funneled into feminist organizations. It's mandatory classes in universities, and going against the grain can get you fired or blacklisted.
Also, i see you ignore like you always do.
Women are hypocrites, you can't be equal but also submissive. The personal is political.

Id love to see the stats on these imaginary billions of people who pour money into feminist campaigns (only 7 billion in the world and ~half are male)

>the masterful art of baiting retards
>made sure HE was fp too
*tips fedora*
*wishes slow painful death on you and yours*

>women only gyms
Guessing the purpose is prevent men from taking creepshots of women

People with low functioning autism are the most oppressed group. Prove me wrong.

You can make a change in your immediate reality by going to a womens'-only gym instead of one you get harassed at which is exactly what they are doing.

You are just labelling and name-calling without actually pointing out any flaws in the logic, which leads me to believe you can't find any.

retarded
thats not how you fix things

I was clearly talking about money you doofus. Shitloads into women's organizations, womens only scholarships, etc.
Also nice sidestepping the other point AGAIN, you know it's a major hole in feminism and you don't even try to respond to it.
This is why feminism is losing in the younger generations.

Yeah and my generation wants to roll back the rights I already have. Why should I stand for it?

Just go get some cunt and dick virgins.

How about the age old proverb of two negatives don't make a positive? You are blatant hypocrites. You say you want equality but then defend supremacy as a way to "balance" it out. Tell me, is it equal now that women get lighter sentences (and have historically almost always received lighter sentences for most crimes)? How does that "balance the scale"? How about feminists shutting down men's shelters and preventing money from being given to male organizations instead funneling even more into feminist organizations who already receive billions? How is it "balancing the scale" when there are already more women in college than men yet you push for even more? It is not and never was the goal. It has always been a petty revenge fantasy of women for perceived "oppression" that hasn't existed for decades and nothing more.

The only reason they want this is because feminists have dropped the ball.
Again, you ignore the main problem with feminism so I will ask it one more time and hopefully you won't try to sidestep again:
HOW do you reconcile the fact that the VAST (at least 90%) of women are hypergamous and only go for 'superior' men with women's equality? If women are equal, then they can't seek out to be submissive in their relationships. However, women are still only going for men who make more than them, who are taller than them, who are more educated than them, etc. This is hypocritical and not sustainable. Its gotten to the point where women are literally freezing their eggs or impregnating themselves via sperm banks instead of being with men. This is not sustainable and it's bad for society. How can women demand equality but also desire inferiority? The personal is political.

I shouldn't have to have my life ruined because people can't hack the SMV. I've struggled with many issues people see as male only that people say I never faced.

I'm still going to try to get ahead. I don't care how many people resent me. They are the bad guys for expecting me to let go of my dreams just because I was forced to be born in this time.

My answer is they need to grow up and make things work. If they have to get with a guy who makes less and they have a problem boo hoo.

>Private institutions can choose to cater to whomever they want, and this is problematic

Given the tone of OP's post, I'm going to assume his social politics are right-leaning. Let me point out that the right constantly pushes for private institutions to be allowed such discriminatory policies in the first place.

Also
>Plenty of male-only institutions, including (previously) the Boys Scouts
>Male-only entry to specific clubs (although generally those that cater to gay men)
>Gender-segregated restrooms and locker rooms are still a thing; women can't trespass into mens rooms anymore than men can trespass into ladies rooms
>Gender-segregated schools, including all-male schools
>Male-only religious orders, particularly in the East
>Male-only sports leagues, or at least gender-segregated leagues

Much of the time, a womens version of something is just an attempt to attract more women to a particular hobby or lifestyle. For instance, men and women can compete with each other in international chess tournaments, but there are also womens chess organizations for purposes of trying to bring more women into the hobby. A male-only league doesn't have any practical reason to exist as men tend not to be boggled down by the same responsibilities as women - e.g. a lot of women settle into motherhood and a stay-at-home lifestyle by the time they reach their 20s.

I didn't realise women built western society and fought wars. Oh wait that's because they didn't.

And men aren't the only ones having their spaces taken. Women are having their spaces taken by trans women.

I don't want to "ruin your life" or remove women's liberties I am just looking for a way to reconcile this.
You seem to understand and admit that it's not possible for women to be equal to men as a group but submissive to men as a group (obviously).
Have a good night.
Your points are incredible tired and pathetic. Feminism is on the way out, get over it.

Women live life on easy mode raising children and providing for their families and consider that oppression lmao, cry me a river roastie.

Only in the West. Save up crypto and move to Laos

Adding things and programs to benefit women is not taking anything away from men. Yes, if you kept adding or subtracting equal bonuses to uneven scales you would always arrive at the same ratio. But we're not doing that.

>is it equal that women get lighter sentences
You'd have to give me some sauce on those statistics. It's not right for women to get less time on identical crimes, but a lot factors into the final sentencing and intent is a big one. Women tend to have far different and more sympathetic motives behind criminal behavior (partially because testosterone drives aggression and impulsivity) which would change the final verdict.

>shutting down men's shelters
Once again if that happens it's not right, but the fact that shelters exist for women only isn't "anti-male" in the least first of all because women are far more frequently trapped in abusive relationships by just not having the means or physical strength to escape AND women are very often vulnerable to rape, exploitation, prostitution, etc. when they're homeless whereas men don't typically face that as often

>preventing money from being given to male organizations

Taking again the scales analogy, subtracting from a side that is heavier than the other would, in fact, be a solution to the imbalance problem. Of course if you simultaneously added more than the result of the heavier-side subtraction to the lighter-side then you'd have another imbalance, but I don't have any evidence to suggest we're at that point. It could very well be equal to do this.

>Given the tone of OP's post, I'm going to assume his social politics are right-leaning
Are you literally from reddit? Where the fuck do you think you are?
your whole post reeks of reddit or twitter shit.

>Your points are wrong just because

In other words, you can't come up with a counter-argument. Did you actually waste several moments of your life solving a shitty reCAPTCHA just to post this lame ass rebuttal?

Your points are wrong because you fundamentally misunderstood the argument OP was making. OP was talking about state-enforced equity programs that artificially prop up women (even if it's for a "justified" reason like making up for past oppression) and you just spewed out some bullshit about "b-but males have male spaces too!" as though it meant anything.
Not only that, but in this post you outright deny the massive evidence that shows women are given lighter sentences for the same crimes as men (most feminists will argue this point by actually saying it's because society thinks women are 'weak' or 'emotional' or whatever so they're given lighter sentences for that. I mean you literally just make the claim that us men are just testosterone driven aggressive impulsive brutes so it's okay to sentence us to longer sentences for crimes).
In the end you're just another feminist supremacist. I bet you don't have an argument for or either.

I would like to hear your response to this but I'm going to sleep too, so I'll have to read it in the morning and I won't be able to respond probably unless the thread is still up. Either way I look forward to reading your argument.
Have a good night

femoids want to "level the playing field"? who cares? We'll make a new playing field in the virtual world. who /GAMER/ here

>we still don't get promoted as soon or paid as much or given managerial/supervising positions as often

I sincerely hope this is bait or maybe you're just retarded

you didn't even care about baiting, did you? it was just an automatic response

>you outright deny the massive evidence
Au contraire I asked you to present the evidence and am still waiting patiently for it. You're not reading what I said at all.

Like I said the motivation behind the crime plays a lot into sentencing, and the different hormones that men and women have affect their decision-making processes and group interactions to the extent that it likely influenced the way they commit crime and therefore the eventual sentence.

I'm not a female supremacist, I'm not even a feminist really, I've just seen enough female oppression in my life to know that helping women is necessary. I have traditional values, I believe that men should lead the household and women should be submissive to their husbands because that is what the Bible says. But outside of the family unit there's no reason for women to treat men with any especial reverence just because they are male. We ought to treat others as we want to be treated. Desiring a partner who is sexually and socially dominant is completely logical. The act of sex is inherently painful for us, and physical signs of sexual dimorphism are almost always perceived as attractive because it suits a biological drive to be attracted to someone who shows all the signs of being a valid target for breeding. Height and muscularity indicate good nutrition, masculinity, and the ability to be a provider (crucial because for at least 9 months of a woman's life if the biological drive to reproduce is satisfied, she will be very vulnerable). Marrying a man who is capable of providing is thus necessary. It would (and has been) less necessary if we could make money on our own, hence why in ancient times one rich man could have tons of women while the poor serf had just his one poor wife. Women being paid fairly far lowers the drive that makes hypergamy necessary, actually, and makes the idea of women dating down in terms of finances actually feasible.

>Taking again the scales analogy, subtracting from a side that is heavier than the other would, in fact, be a solution to the imbalance problem.
You are so far up your ass holy shit. Who is more prone to homelessness? Men. Who is more likely to commit suicide? Men. Who gets no support but mockery for domestic abuse? Men. Who is more likely to fall into poverty? Men. And you are telling me funneling even more money towards an already privileged class who objectively can not fall as low as men can (i.e. women) is in the name of "leveling the field"? How much more does male suicide, homelessness and poverty rise before men are considered "equalized"? 50%, 80% 99%? How much more do men have to be screwed over and left in the dirt while women get money blown up their arse?