/r/MGTOW banned

submitted by Vulptex from reddit.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

If that's true they should offer this support to people who work less, not all women. It's just another excuse for women to have everything handed to them.

It's not going to encourage women working either.

[–]Amongstclouds 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

If that's true they should offer this support to people who work less, not all women. It's just another excuse for women to have everything handed to them.

Wait, if it's true that they work less because they are caring for the children then they should pay people who aren't caring for children to work less because...why?? I'm sooo confused.

[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

And they shouldn't pay men who are caring for children because...why??

Like I said it's an excuse for why they're helping women more than men.

[–]Amongstclouds 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

they shouldn't pay men who are caring for children because...why??

Like I said it's an excuse for why they're helping women more than men.

Who said they aren't? Most societies still place most of the child-rearing burden upon women. Which is why I ASKED if that was why. It's possible it's slightly different where they are. You are making a lot of fucking assumptions and you're weirdly obsessed with me - like, go continue our argument or whatever.

[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Women who aren't raising children should not get the benefits. Men who are raising children should. That's the problem.

[–]Amongstclouds 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

That's not what they said. None of the convo was saying that. You're making shit up.

[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

They were saying women get back more than they pay in by virtue of being women.

[–]Amongstclouds 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

They were inferring it was by virtue of being women which is why I asked about the childcare portion. I can't read it so I have to go based on their word. If a bunch of it was childcare then it would make sense. A society would want to make sure children have what they need to grow up and not be monsters.

[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It doesn't make sense because:

  • Not all women raise children

  • Some men raise children

Therefore it is not fair to afford it to all women and no men for this reason. If benefits are given they should be given to those who it's supposed to be supporting. In this case, those who are raising children.

[–]Amongstclouds 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I mean, the numbers they cited were an average. So maybe on average women get more but probably they are the caregivers 80% of the time so the math works out...I don't know. Hence the question. You saying men should be paid to not work didn't make sense in the context of the question.