Says the guy who resorts to name-calling.
White male is the most privileged thing to be
No, being an upper middle-class white male is the most privileged thing to be.
not some down trodden, exploited minority
Think positive, maybe one day a minority might become president.
Notice I said being an idiot. Name calling would be saying that he was an idiot as a state of being. I didn't say that, nor do I believe it.
>No, being an upper middle-class white male is the most privileged thing to be.
If you have to be poor or middle class you want to be white male. Do you honestly think you'd be better off being poor and black or poor and a woman? Maybe some day we'll get there but we're not there today.
>Think positive, maybe one day a minority might become president.
Yes, one half-black person getting elected president means there is absolutely no racism of any sort (never mind all the racial motivated attacks Obama has had to deal with since before getting elected...).
Seems to me more interesting is the risk of being poor. I think you'll find that there are a lot more poor men than poor women. I guess this is the case because 90% of homeless are male, and men tend to be more prominent on the extremes (more rich men and also more poor men than rich/poor women). Feel free to research the actual data, though.
I only learned about /r/mensrights yesterday, checked it out but didn't like their attitudes at all. I think it is important to counter misguided feminism, though.
But that doesn't excuse making a post that could have been word-for-word copied out of mensrights about how downtrodden we are, complete with quotes to claim the wage gap doesn't exist. I'm all for countering misguided extremists from any side.
By the way, you're quoting articles from Rupert Murdoch's WSJ to support your point? Didn't they have an article that claimed that the WHO and Berkley reports were wrong and the US (pre Obama care) had the greatest health care in the world? Yea, not believing anything from WSJ.
And I argue against misinterpreting a statistic here, not particular feminists.
I wonder why you are so emotionally invested in the belief that women are being oppressed? And what is absurd about men wanting rights?
One issue I have with the "discrimination causes the wage gap" theory is that it prevents looking into the real causes. WSJ was just something that came up yesterday. I am not from the US so don't know their history (similar wage gap in my country, though). Using common sense, too - and researching more.
Pretty much everyone who studies the issue concludes that there is a gap. It is likely that if anyone is misinterpreting a statistic it would be a laymen like you or I, not experts in the respective fields.
>I wonder why you are so emotionally invested in the belief that women are being oppressed?
I'm not emotionally invested in anything but the truth.
>And what is absurd about men wanting rights?
Obviously nothing. But /r/mensrights is a well known group of women-haters [1] who love to spout off one-off anecdotes to show how men are "actually the exploited group" and other such nonsense. There are cases where men get a raw deal (divorce court in the US comes to mind) but they are by far the minority.
[1] 2 seconds of searching: http://manboobz.com/2013/01/28/the-mens-rights-subreddit-a-n...
As for /r/mensrights I really can't comment. I do think men have a problem, though.
Divorce court: aren't divorces rather common?
BTW, your post reads like a tour of logical fallacies. You can do better I'm sure.