Is there sexism towards men in america?

[Vyvansia]

women have always has more options for contraception

this is because contraception used to involve shoving cow shit up your vagina



ahahahah what

It isn't about more options, it's about more visible options. Every time a woman has sex she is able to confirm whether or not (unless shes extremely forgetful) that the level of contraception at present is adequate, either by viewing the man's condom or knowing her own routine.

A woman has more options, period. An IUD, a patch, one of several pills, a diaphragm or a tubal ligation*. A man has two options: condom or vasectomy.

Whether or not that's a result of sexism I hesitate to say. I suspect it's more about biology than a conscious effort to oppress men.

*I might have even forgotten one or two

[The Black Forrest]

No not really.

As to the shorter life span? It's so we can escape!

[Socialdemokraterne]

Women's expected life: 80.1 years
Men's expected life: 74.8 years

...this is society's fault?

There are seven federal health agencies specifically for women. Not one for men.

39 of the 50 states have an office of women’s health, only six have one for men.

OK. So what you're telling me is that if you tried to advocate for the formation of an office of men's health in your state people would say no? Or haven't you tried?

Even the post office has gotten into the act: there is only one disease for which you can buy a postage stamp and the profits will go to research to cure the disease: breast cancer, even though heart disease kills millions more men prematurely.

...men can contract breast cancer. And women are susceptible to heart disease. Why not work to combat both problems? Why not adopt a strategy that is clearly working for other illnesses of concern to men? Get active in awareness groups that raise concerns about men's health issues and steer them toward the successful marketing strategy that the breast cancer awareness groups have used instead of trying to tear down the breast cancer awareness groups and making everyone suffer along with you.

We can also see more advertisements geared towards women. Take breast cancer awareness (which is pink for obvious reasons), and we even have a breast cancer awareness month. Can anyone tell me what month is testicular cancer month? or prostate cancer month?

...again, men can contract breast cancer. They lose nothing from the fundraising efforts' marketing strategy if the availability of resources is increased all the same. As for the other months you want...establish charities and develop a marketing strategy just like the breast cancer societies did. Some people have already done so. Another thing you can do is advocate for increased federal grants for research into breast cancer, heart disease, testicular cancer, and prostate cancer. Finally, instead of taking a hostile approach to other awareness groups, why don't you try networking your own awareness group with other, larger ones? The more they can get the word out the better, and the same goes for you. Locking hands is a win-win proposition.

[Forsher]

How is that....how is that sexism? What?

Well, I guess nature is just sexist.

Funding is disproportionately allocated to diseases and health problems which have more female victims.

Breast cancer and prostate cancer are the classic examples, but the phenomenon is widespread; and yes, it is sexist. We respond to women suffering, as a society, much more than we respond to men suffering.

I'm fairly certain women cannot get prostate cancer, men, on the other hand, can get breast cancer.

I won't say much about sexism towards men in the US because it's there but in the scheme of things it is unimportant, what is more important is looking at the issues which contribute to this.

[Forsher]

OP: Yes, you have pointed out some legal and public measures by which women come out in favour.

But that is not to say that women come out in favour on all such indicators, or indeed that on aggregate. If you were to look at the gender distribution of power in a society this would still not come out in favour of women.

Basically, the assumption we're working with here is that since women are under-represented in well paid jobs, and for equal work they get paid something like 10% less (google statistics), it is quite clear that men still come overall in control of social structures. So we care a bit more about medical conditions in women? Seems only fair. It won't make up for how much we're screwing them over in the board room, but it's a start.

I remember a study about pay discrepancies. It was a very bad one because it was clear that the men were doing harder work on average (in terms of physical cost), which defied its main claim of equal work. Others have been much better and actually agreed with the conclusion (that women get paid less for the same work).

Of course, there are sometimes quite obvious reasons for this gap, seniority. That said, one example that never gets enough attention is the case of twins applying for car insurance. The gap between his premiums and hers was unjustifiable. In many cases, the only reasonable conclusion is sexism...

[The Black Forrest]

OP: Yes, you have pointed out some legal and public measures by which women come out in favour.

But that is not to say that women come out in favour on all such indicators, or indeed that on aggregate. If you were to look at the gender distribution of power in a society this would still not come out in favour of women.

Basically, the assumption we're working with here is that since women are under-represented in well paid jobs, and for equal work they get paid something like 10% less (google statistics), it is quite clear that men still come overall in control of social structures. So we care a bit more about medical conditions in women? Seems only fair. It won't make up for how much we're screwing them over in the board room, but it's a start.

I remember a study about pay discrepancies. It was a very bad one because it was clear that the men were doing harder work on average (in terms of physical cost), which defied its main claim of equal work. Others have been much better and actually agreed with the conclusion (that women get paid less for the same work).

Of course, there are sometimes quite obvious reasons for this gap, seniority. That said, one example that never gets enough attention is the case of twins applying for car insurance. The gap between his premiums and hers was unjustifiable. In many cases, the only reasonable conclusion is sexism...

I saw it with programmers a few jobs ago. The women worked just as hard and were called critical and yet they were paid less.......

[Forsher]

I remember a study about pay discrepancies. It was a very bad one because it was clear that the men were doing harder work on average (in terms of physical cost), which defied its main claim of equal work. Others have been much better and actually agreed with the conclusion (that women get paid less for the same work).

Of course, there are sometimes quite obvious reasons for this gap, seniority. That said, one example that never gets enough attention is the case of twins applying for car insurance. The gap between his premiums and hers was unjustifiable. In many cases, the only reasonable conclusion is sexism...

I saw it with programmers a few jobs ago. The women worked just as hard and were called critical and yet they were paid less.......

They should have stopped criticising everyone, don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Actually, if they were working harder (but not physically harder) I wouldn't be surprised if they were paid less. Mistrust, you see it with immigrants all the time.

[Natapoc]

Look... patriarchy doesn't hurt both genders. Patriarchy hurts females.

No. Patriarchy harms women the most but it also harms (some) men. In some ways it harms all men and all women.

It is true that patriarchy gives men "privilege" but that does not mean that it does not also cause some harm to men.

[Wikipedia and Universe]

There's sexism towards everybody, everywhere. Period. No pun intended.

[Sanguinum Maria]

Look... patriarchy doesn't hurt both genders. Patriarchy hurts females.

Tell me something, as in a patriarchal society, men are usually forced into the armed forces, if I were born male, and were forced into service against my will, and, against my will, was killed for a cause I did not believe in, would this not be harm?

There are a multitude of ways in which a patriarchal society harms men. "With great power comes great responsibility". Many men don't want that responsibility, and would gladly give up that power, and yet, both are forced upon them against their will.

[Dagnia]

There are some aspects of our society that favor women. Especially given that many women seem to want the benefits of living in a modern society where they have all the opportunities of men, but still expect chivalry and a leg up for being women.
Now that rape and spousal abuse are taken more seriously, women use accusations of these every time the person she had a fling with doesn't call her the next morning or the wife doesn't get her way. Columbia University amended its rape policies to deny accused students, faculty or staff the right to be present when accusers or witnesses testify. Accused individuals are no longer guaranteed the right to cross examine such witnesses, or have an attorney present.
Women can abort a baby without the father having any say at all. She can also get pregnant and force the father to pay for a baby he never wanted.
Yet women still complain about sexism. Under the slogan "Equal pay for equal work" they feel entitled to the same amount of pay in spite of the fact that they have taken off several months for their babies, sometimes created in part with the costly fertility treatment they schemed to get covered by their company's insurance.

[Souseiseki]

There are some aspects of our society that favor women. Especially given that many women seem to want the benefits of living in a modern society where they have all the opportunities of men, but still expect chivalry and a leg up for being women.
Now that rape and spousal abuse are taken more seriously, women use accusations of these every time the person she had a fling with doesn't call her the next morning or the wife doesn't get her way. Columbia University amended its rape policies to deny accused students, faculty or staff the right to be present when accusers or witnesses testify. Accused individuals are no longer guaranteed the right to cross examine such witnesses, or have an attorney present.
Women can abort a baby without the father having any say at all. She can also get pregnant and force the father to pay for a baby he never wanted.
Yet women still complain about sexism. Under the slogan "Equal pay for equal work" they feel entitled to the same amount of pay in spite of the fact that they have taken off several months for their babies, sometimes created in part with the costly fertility treatment they schemed to get covered by their company's insurance.

holy shit lol

[Vyvansia]

OP: Yes, you have pointed out some legal and public measures by which women come out in favour.

But that is not to say that women come out in favour on all such indicators, or indeed that on aggregate. If you were to look at the gender distribution of power in a society this would still not come out in favour of women.

Basically, the assumption we're working with here is that since women are under-represented in well paid jobs, and for equal work they get paid something like 10% less (google statistics), it is quite clear that men still come overall in control of social structures. So we care a bit more about medical conditions in women? Seems only fair. It won't make up for how much we're screwing them over in the board room, but it's a start.

Exactly what kind of statistics are those?

[Parastovia]

There's a definite sexism directed towards both genders I find.
Kind of like a "violence creates violence" sort of thing.

[Yaltabaoth]

I saw it with programmers a few jobs ago. The women worked just as hard and were called critical and yet they were paid less.......

They should have stopped criticising everyone, don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Actually, if they were working harder (but not physically harder) I wouldn't be surprised if they were paid less. Mistrust, you see it with immigrants all the time.

I might be wrong here, but I think The Black Forrest meant "essential" when s/he used the word "critical", not that the women were being critical of others.

[Oceanic people]

in the world period? YES! The only places where that isn't so is in Islamic countries and who the #@!! wants that? Everything that used to be 'manly' is now looked oppon with disdain and contempt unless of course it caters to and pampers women. That's ok, but anything else is wrong and will get you into trouble. To be decisive is to be agressive. To be firm in a decision made is to be intractable even if you're right! You're supposed to 'discuss' and 'consider' everyones 'feelings' about this or that. The whole @#$ &$%@ world may be falling apart around you but you'd better get a consensus. The Talaban and other religous nuts the world over may have a point with 'keep ye women [of all sexes] silent!'

[Bengera]

in the world period? YES! The only places where that isn't so is in Islamic countries and who the #@!! wants that? Everything that used to be 'manly' is now looked oppon with disdain and contempt unless of course it caters to and pampers women. That's ok, but anything else is wrong and will get you into trouble. To be decisive is to be agressive. To be firm in a decision made is to be intractable even if you're right! You're supposed to 'discuss' and 'consider' everyones 'feelings' about this or that. The whole @#$ &$%@ world may be falling apart around you but you'd better get a consensus. The Talaban and other religous nuts the world over may have a point with 'keep ye women [of all sexes] silent!'

[Forsher]

They should have stopped criticising everyone, don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Actually, if they were working harder (but not physically harder) I wouldn't be surprised if they were paid less. Mistrust, you see it with immigrants all the time.

I might be wrong here, but I think The Black Forrest meant "essential" when s/he used the word "critical", not that the women were being critical of others.

To be honest, I was pretty sure he meant critical thinkers. He may be looking for crucial...

[Transhuman Proteus]

Here is the stats:

Women's expected life: 80.1 years
Men's expected life: 74.8 years

On that - I kind of doubt it is because of "sexism". If one wanted to say men would live longer if more resources were dedicated to them... well, I don't know. There are a whole lot of issues. From Australia at least it seems a big aspect of health issue awareness is actually convincing men to get tested or see a doctor to begin with - especially with things like depression or prostate exams.

Not so much because no one is researching "man only" illnesses or because there is not the resources to treat them.

Even the post office has gotten into the act: there is only one disease for which you can buy a postage stamp and the profits will go to research to cure the disease: breast cancer, even though heart disease kills millions more men prematurely.

Heart disease also kills women.

We can also see more advertisements geared towards women. Take breast cancer awareness (which is pink for obvious reasons), and we even have a breast cancer awareness month. Can anyone tell me what month is testicular cancer month? or prostate cancer month?

There are so many charity and awareness days in Australia I tend not to remember most till I see a ribbon or some other fundraising item in a shop. But there is definitely a prostate and testicular awareness day (and a general month) along with skin cancer fundraising, breast cancer awareness, diabetes awareness and fundraising, a children's hospital, red nose day...

My point is simply this, if men are dying on average 5 years before women, shouldn't we be focusing on men's health more than women? And where is the feminist movement on this? Seeing as feminist will say to your face that they are fighting for equal rights between the sexes... does this one area not count?

You would need to identify exactly why men are dying on average 5 years before women and see if that can be linked to some discriminatory social/cultural attitude that is negatively impacting upon the male populations health.

[Bluefootedpig]

I agree that the problem is not so much research into various diseases, as yes men can get breast cancer as well.

Without a doubt, the largest problem with men is getting checked up. At least where I live, insurance pays for breast exams, but will not pay for prostate exams. Doctors also tend to give better instruction to women on how to care for their body over men.

But I will agree that is how often a man sees the doctor, but most of that is advertising. Women are expected to get monthly check ups, and are advertised to do so much more than men. So it isn't so much of "do we have the drugs" it is more education and awareness, as it seems to be primarily directed at women.

As far as equal pay, since the 1970s, studies that have singled out men vs women where that was the only difference (same experience, skills, education, etc), women earn MORE than men. The reason they on average do not, is as someone said before, women favor good working hours, benefits, security rather than raw pay. If you factor in commute time, men make less. Although this is anecdotal, my wife works 5 mins from my house, while I work 1 hour away. So my work day is a 10 hour work day if you count commuting. So if my house would be surveyed, I could look like I earn more per hour, but I commute so much that when that is factored in, i earn less.

As far as age being an indication of sexism, I would say yes. If one sex is living longer, why is more than 50% of the funding dedicated to helping the group already doing well? If we translated this to taxes, it would be giving a tax break to the wealthy, while ignoring the poor. Women already live longer than men, so why help them live yet longer instead of helping out the gender that is dying sooner?

[Alien Space Bats]

Heart disease is the #1 killer of both men and women; it receives a tremendous amount of research funding and has for many years.

[DaWoad]

in a word? no.

[Ashmoria]

This might be applied to the world, or various nations, but I would like to focus in on America.

pulling some info from various, but here is an entry I that spurred the thought: http://www.martynemko.com/articles/shou ... lth_id1231

Here is the stats:

Women's expected life: 80.1 years
Men's expected life: 74.8 years

There are seven federal health agencies specifically for women. Not one for men.

39 of the 50 states have an office of women’s health, only six have one for men.

Even the post office has gotten into the act: there is only one disease for which you can buy a postage stamp and the profits will go to research to cure the disease: breast cancer, even though heart disease kills millions more men prematurely.

We can also see more advertisements geared towards women. Take breast cancer awareness (which is pink for obvious reasons), and we even have a breast cancer awareness month. Can anyone tell me what month is testicular cancer month? or prostate cancer month?

My point is simply this, if men are dying on average 5 years before women, shouldn't we be focusing on men's health more than women? And where is the feminist movement on this? Seeing as feminist will say to your face that they are fighting for equal rights between the sexes... does this one area not count?

yeah.

the thing i find most disturbing is when a substance abuse problem only becomes an urgent problem when women start doing it. if its only down-and-out men its not big deal, if down-and-out women take it up its all over the news.

[Choronzon]

The government is secretly taking all men about to hit the age of 75 and bringing them to Logan's Run style camps where they disappear. The OP has foiled the secret Feminist Free Mason plot!

[Neo Art]

Funding is disproportionately allocated to diseases and health problems which have more female victims.

Breast cancer and prostate cancer are the classic examples, but the phenomenon is widespread; and yes, it is sexist. We respond to women suffering, as a society, much more than we respond to men suffering.

The 5 year survivability rate for prostate cancer is nearly 100%
The 10 year survivability rate for prostate cancer is 98%
The 15 year survivability rate for prostate cancer is 91%

The same figures for breast cancer are 89%, 82% and 77% respectively.

While a roughly comparable number of men get prostate cancer (241,740 expected in 2012) as women will get breast cancer (226,870 expected in 2012), significantly more women will die from breast cancer than men will die from prostate cancer (39,510 and 28,170 respectively)

Statistics from the American Cancer society and cancer.org

Which means 17.4% of women who get breast cancer will die from it. Prostate cancer will kill 11.3% of men who get it. Meaning that a woman who gets breast cancer is 50% more likely to die than a man who gets prostate cancer.

Now maybe, juuuuust maybe, the reason breast cancer receives more money that prostate cancer is that we're already fairly good at treating prostate cancer, and breast cancer kills considerably more people a year?



Perhaps the fact that breast cancer gets more funding is that it needs more funding, considering that it kills more people?