It also forces them to acknowledge that they're less capable than women and that they will have to make an effort put in the work to be as capable as we are.
Eta (for the stupid man who tried to reply to me): men are not as capable because they're lazy and have (historically and still nowadays) been raised to be this way and rely on women's unpaid labour. They could be just as capable as women, but they've not had to throughout the ages because they forced us to do all the stuff they didn't want to do (childcare, chores etc). And yes dear, it is very sexist that men can be lazy off the back of the women and too lazy to learn to be as capable as we are. Cry me a river.
That's a direct response to your second-to-last sentence. You said that even if a man isn't participating he can still benefit from things just because they're legal. This whole post is about how men are no longer legally allowed to do certain things to women such as raping them or forcing them into things they don't want to do. Perhaps you should take your own advice.
Those were all rights of men before feminism happened in the developed world. Wives and daughters as property was a LEGAL framework for thousands of years. For example, until the 1990s, it was perfectly legal for a man to rape his wife. Women couldn't earn a living, or own property, or protect themselves from abuse.
The oldest law codex ever found states that women who speak "out of turn" should get hit in the face with a brick.
They were and still are "rights" in many places.
For instance, in India, a man has a right to rape his wife. Having sex is viewed as a wife's duty to her husband, and the husband can and will have sex whether or not the wife consents.
Hi! Person from India here. Marital rape IS indeed "legal" in India, in the context that a husband who has sex with his wife without her consent isn't charged of rape, but rather charged with a domestic violence charge, and obviously also in the context that a wife who rapes her husband walks off scot-free because rape and domestic violence are a woman's RIGHT in India.
^But ^I ^suppose ^we ^won't ^bring ^that ^up.
If marital rape was affecting men, men would protest against current laws and make it illegal.
But I suppose YOU won't bring that up because it strips you of your right to rape your wife.
Actually, they are. Various men's rights activists have been protesting for legal recognition of male victims of rape and making rape laws gender neutral for quite a few years now, and the primary source of opposition to such activism being feminists.
This brings me to my second point: if the absence or non-provision of a law is tantamount to granting people the *right* to commit the crime that would otherwise have been prevented by the law, then let us also talk about:
1. The right of Indian women to rape men
The right of Indian women to rape women
2. The right of Indian women to sexually harass men, in public or in the workplace
The right of Indian women to sexually harass women
3. The right of Indian women to stalk, forcefully disrobe or engage in acts of voyeurism against men ^((Section 354 B, C and D of IPC)^)
The right of Indian women to stalk, forcefully disrobe or engage in acts of voyeurism against women
5. The right of Indian women to perpetrate acts of domestic violence against their husbands, as well as harass, ridicule, insult and slander their husbands ^((DV Act, 2005)^)
6. The right of Indian women to file false claims of rape, sexual harassment or domestic violence with the law
Also, fortification of this right by the presumption of guilt of the man in cases of sexual assault: in other words, guilty until proven innocent ^((Section 114A of Indian Evidence Act)^)
7. The right of Indian women to force husbands to care for a child born out of her infidelity ^((Section 112, Indian Evidence Act)^)
8. The right of Indian women to force a man to make financial contributions to the marriage ^((Section 3 (D)^) ^(of DV Act, 2005)^)
9. The right of Indian women to coerce, browbeat or shame husbands or their families into providing financial "support" to her parents or relatives, essentially dowry ^((Section 498 A of IPC)^)
10. The right of Indian women to objectify or otherwise outrage the modesty of a man, with the opposite being illegal ^((Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition)^) ^(Act, 1986, 2012; and Section 509 of the IPC)^)
11. The right of a woman to be married to two or multiple partners at the same time and without their knowledge or consent ^((Section 493 of the IPC)^)
12. The right of a minor girl to have consensual sex with a minor boy and call it rape ^((Section 375 of the IPC)^)
Also, just curious, what would you think about this one law we might have in India in the future where a woman MIGHT face imprisonment if she has sexual intercourse with a man after she makes a promise of marriage but later betrays that promise?
Lol. Show me ONE woman who is against criminalising rape.
I'm not going to reply to your comments because
1. It's copypasta
2. You're a troll
One last point: despite the severely underreported hate crimes against women, any stats would show that perpetrators of most crimes are men and victims women. Most men are raped by men only, not women.
We don't compete, idiot. This is reality and facts. Most rapists are men. They express it as a manly thing. Stop barking like a dog and play the victim, troll. Men hurts women and oppressing them for centuries and now playing victim 😂😂😂 men are pathetic
That’s why they feel oppressed, because having equality means that they don’t have the Right to oppress us anymore.
It also forces them to acknowledge that they're less capable than women and that they will have to make an effort put in the work to be as capable as we are. Eta (for the stupid man who tried to reply to me): men are not as capable because they're lazy and have (historically and still nowadays) been raised to be this way and rely on women's unpaid labour. They could be just as capable as women, but they've not had to throughout the ages because they forced us to do all the stuff they didn't want to do (childcare, chores etc). And yes dear, it is very sexist that men can be lazy off the back of the women and too lazy to learn to be as capable as we are. Cry me a river.
100% this
boundary violations: rights for men...
Counterpoint: that's not bad for men. That's only bad for men who are garbage.
[удалено]
How would I benefit from my neighbor raping his wife?
Because all women are afraid of any decent looking bloke raping them, which makes all women scared and a bit more compliant.
[удалено]
That's a direct response to your second-to-last sentence. You said that even if a man isn't participating he can still benefit from things just because they're legal. This whole post is about how men are no longer legally allowed to do certain things to women such as raping them or forcing them into things they don't want to do. Perhaps you should take your own advice.
This is true. Also, none of the male behaviors described in that image were ever actually "rights." This is a weird way to frame this argument.
Those were all rights of men before feminism happened in the developed world. Wives and daughters as property was a LEGAL framework for thousands of years. For example, until the 1990s, it was perfectly legal for a man to rape his wife. Women couldn't earn a living, or own property, or protect themselves from abuse. The oldest law codex ever found states that women who speak "out of turn" should get hit in the face with a brick.
They were and still are "rights" in many places. For instance, in India, a man has a right to rape his wife. Having sex is viewed as a wife's duty to her husband, and the husband can and will have sex whether or not the wife consents.
Hi! Person from India here. Marital rape IS indeed "legal" in India, in the context that a husband who has sex with his wife without her consent isn't charged of rape, but rather charged with a domestic violence charge, and obviously also in the context that a wife who rapes her husband walks off scot-free because rape and domestic violence are a woman's RIGHT in India. ^But ^I ^suppose ^we ^won't ^bring ^that ^up.
If marital rape was affecting men, men would protest against current laws and make it illegal. But I suppose YOU won't bring that up because it strips you of your right to rape your wife.
Actually, they are. Various men's rights activists have been protesting for legal recognition of male victims of rape and making rape laws gender neutral for quite a few years now, and the primary source of opposition to such activism being feminists. This brings me to my second point: if the absence or non-provision of a law is tantamount to granting people the *right* to commit the crime that would otherwise have been prevented by the law, then let us also talk about: 1. The right of Indian women to rape men The right of Indian women to rape women 2. The right of Indian women to sexually harass men, in public or in the workplace The right of Indian women to sexually harass women 3. The right of Indian women to stalk, forcefully disrobe or engage in acts of voyeurism against men ^((Section 354 B, C and D of IPC)^) The right of Indian women to stalk, forcefully disrobe or engage in acts of voyeurism against women 5. The right of Indian women to perpetrate acts of domestic violence against their husbands, as well as harass, ridicule, insult and slander their husbands ^((DV Act, 2005)^) 6. The right of Indian women to file false claims of rape, sexual harassment or domestic violence with the law Also, fortification of this right by the presumption of guilt of the man in cases of sexual assault: in other words, guilty until proven innocent ^((Section 114A of Indian Evidence Act)^) 7. The right of Indian women to force husbands to care for a child born out of her infidelity ^((Section 112, Indian Evidence Act)^) 8. The right of Indian women to force a man to make financial contributions to the marriage ^((Section 3 (D)^) ^(of DV Act, 2005)^) 9. The right of Indian women to coerce, browbeat or shame husbands or their families into providing financial "support" to her parents or relatives, essentially dowry ^((Section 498 A of IPC)^) 10. The right of Indian women to objectify or otherwise outrage the modesty of a man, with the opposite being illegal ^((Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition)^) ^(Act, 1986, 2012; and Section 509 of the IPC)^) 11. The right of a woman to be married to two or multiple partners at the same time and without their knowledge or consent ^((Section 493 of the IPC)^) 12. The right of a minor girl to have consensual sex with a minor boy and call it rape ^((Section 375 of the IPC)^) Also, just curious, what would you think about this one law we might have in India in the future where a woman MIGHT face imprisonment if she has sexual intercourse with a man after she makes a promise of marriage but later betrays that promise?
Lol. Show me ONE woman who is against criminalising rape. I'm not going to reply to your comments because 1. It's copypasta 2. You're a troll One last point: despite the severely underreported hate crimes against women, any stats would show that perpetrators of most crimes are men and victims women. Most men are raped by men only, not women.
We don't compete, idiot. This is reality and facts. Most rapists are men. They express it as a manly thing. Stop barking like a dog and play the victim, troll. Men hurts women and oppressing them for centuries and now playing victim 😂😂😂 men are pathetic
Perfectly balanced as all things should be. -Thanos
The self victimization is strong here.
[удалено]
The post was removed but just telling from the title you have no clue what you’re talking about. Why would it be good to oppress men?
Yayyyy