I invoke broken clock. Exceptional case of the feminists hitting on something true.
The most misogynistic men I ever met IRL claimed to be male feminists.
They think it’s an excuse to speak about/treat women however they like (worse, always worse).
Despite taking the same exams and studying in the same fields and working in the same industry, STEM, the oh-so rational men take a wholly subjective view of their female peers.
As in, they don’t see them as peers at all.
In spite of the years of proof in the exact same system.
The researchers found that male students systematically overestimated the knowledge of the men in their classes in comparison with the women. Moreover, as the academic term progressed, the men’s faulty appraisal of their classmates’ abilities increased despite clear evidence of the women’s superior class performance. In every biology class examined, a man was considered the most renowned student — even when a woman had far better grades. In contrast, the female students surveyed did not show bias, accurately evaluating their fellow students based on performance. After studying the attitudes of these future scientists, the researchers concluded, “The chilly environment for women [in the sciences] may not be going away anytime soon.”
Nobody is rational. Humans are not machines.
That men even claim that, seriously, shows they aren’t.
And machines would be meritocratic anyway.
Surely judging your peers requires EQ and SQ, female attributes? They only consider this ‘logical’ because it’s quantifiable. Slight bias in the method there.
The funding gap is totally real too. Even with taxpayer funds (!!!).
In a 2014 survey of more than 2,000 U.S. adults, Harris Poll found that young men were less open to accepting women leaders than older men were. Only 41% of Millennial men were comfortable with women engineers, compared to 65% of men 65 or older. Likewise, only 43% of Millennial men were comfortable with women being U.S. senators, compared to 64% of Americans overall. (The numbers were 39% versus 61% for women being CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, and 35% versus 57% for president of the United States.)
Yeah the older ones are real men with nothing to prove.
If someone wants to contribute, that’s a good thing.
Get over yourself.
I love how they also claim to be superior to dead women.
How insecure have you gotta be to try and one-up a corpse?
The worst are non-STEM losers, with no idea what the industry is like, who go on about STEM. No better than the non-STEM feminists with their mewling. Totally ignorant.
“Whereas three-quarters of Millennial women anticipate that their careers will be at least as important as their partners,” they reported, “half the men in their generation expect that their own careers will take priority.”
You need two incomes, numbskull. And what if she earns more?
And what’s wrong with being the primary caregiver?
Taken together, this body of research should dispel any notion that Millennial men “see women as equals.”
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing actually. This study gets that wrong. These types have always existed but they’re the maladapted SES dregs. They project their passivity, bitchiness, weakness and incompetence onto all women. Blind to its manifestation in themselves, naturally.
The men who can’t get with the 21st century labour requirements will simply die alone.
Historically, men are almost always genetic suicides anyway.
If they can’t be meritocrats, who would see merit in building a life with them?
You have to be on the same team once married, telling a woman regardless of need that she has to give up her career to make you feel like Draper (and the fictive 50s lifestyle) will end in one place – the divorce court.
That type of lifestyle was never possible, it was a small slice of post-war prosperity paid for by the blood of your countrymen, and they say we womenfolk buy into false advertising realities…
Obviously men and women aren’t the same, but for most tasks they are roughly equal in capability, especially the high-estrogen diet modern male.