use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~2 users here now
/r/MGTOW banned
submitted 2 years ago by Vulptex from reddit.com
view the rest of the comments →
[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (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 - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (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.
they shouldn't pay men who are caring for children because...why??
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 - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (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 - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (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 - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (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 - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (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 - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (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 - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (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.
[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
So maybe on average women get more but probably they are the caregivers 80% of the time so the math works out
The 20% it doesn't work out for is 1 in every 5 people which is pretty significant. Even if it's 0.1% there's no reason to go by the wrong statistic. It's a pretty obvious excuse to give in to our primal urge to take care of women more than men.
You saying men should be paid to not work didn't make sense in the context of the question.
I never said that. I said women shouldn't be getting paid to not work, especially if men aren't.
view the rest of the comments →
[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (8 children)
[–]Amongstclouds 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (7 children)
[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (6 children)
[–]Amongstclouds 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (5 children)
[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–]Amongstclouds 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - (3 children)
[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]Amongstclouds 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (1 child)
[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)