Double Standards, anyone?

[RaikuFA]

girls can reject guys without any consequense yet if a guy rejects a girl hes seen as a asshole

also guys cant stalk girls as its creepy yet girls can stalk guys and its seen as cute

 

[Realitycrash]

I had a rather huge thread a while back about physically defending yourself from a woman assaulting you, i.e if it was okay to hit a woman if she hit you first. There were some people agreeing with the double standard that it was not (no matter how hard she hit you or her size, etc), just because she was a woman.

Always hated that one.
(Soz for double post, no idea how that happened)

 

[Realitycrash]

I had a rather huge thread a while back about physically defending yourself from a woman assaulting you, i.e if it was okay to hit a woman if she hit you first. There were some people agreeing with the double standard that it was not (no matter how hard she hit you or her size, etc), just because she was a woman.

Always hated that one.

 

[steevee]

For years in the UK women had cheaper car insurance.

Last year they had to pay the same as us men and they complained, and I quote, "why should we have to pay more just because we're women"....

I'm sorry ladies, you are paying the same as we've always paid now stick your special treatment up your arse.

In almost every developed country, statistics indicate that men are by far the more reckless drivers and much more likely to get into accidents - particularly under the age of 25. Hence their insurance rates are higher. That's no double standard or unfair treatment, that's insurance companies doing the logical thing because statistically speaking a certain subset of the population is a bunch of fucktards behind the wheel.

Of course this doesn't apply to every young male - myself included, as I'm 23, don't speed, and have yet to be in an accident - but numbers don't lie.

I think the problem always was that women were so happy to base this on Stats here, but when you pull out a stat to a man's advantage it's sexist.

Such as statstically a female doctor will work far less in her lifetime than a male doctor, thus meaning that if we base NHS funding for medical degrees on statistics we should allocate more funding to men. But infact we are having to do the opposite because of 'positive discrimination'. So you see, whilst there is a perfectly good statistical reason for women paying less, it really does irk when it works only that way to the disadvantage of men.

 

[mental_looney]

For years in the UK women had cheaper car insurance.

Last year they had to pay the same as us men and they complained, and I quote, "why should we have to pay more just because we're women"....

I'm sorry ladies, you are paying the same as we've always paid now stick your special treatment up your arse.

Old people get it cheaper too as it's based on the statistics who caused most accidents, young men. Pretty sure they'd kick off if they had to pay the same as a 17 year old who just passed their test.

Don't know many girls like that, however based on the tone of your post sounds like someone pissed you off...

 

[ninjapenguin981]

OMG totally this. Apparently women are allowed to look at other men, but you make one tiny joke about something like that, you get shot down completely.

 

[spartan231490]

Yep.

And when they try and pull that on me, I shove it right back into their face. With LOGIC.

People eventually stopped trying to pull that bullshit on me.

Really? that worked on the women in your life? I have never met someone that lucky, to have women actually respond to the logic in their arguments.

And that pretty much sums up my opinion on the subject, my favorite is when women just ignore logic cuz it disagrees with them.

 

[smurf_you]

girls can reject guys without any consequense yet if a guy rejects a girl hes seen as a asshole

also guys cant stalk girls as its creepy yet girls can stalk guys and its seen as cute

Actually, these aren't true (at least not with anyone I know) anytime someone gets rejected, someone's going to get hurt over it.

Also, girls stalking guys is just as creepy as the other way around......

 

[lettucethesallad]

People are pretty crazy about affirmative action where I live. "We need more women in the male dominated jobs!" they say, and that's all fair and good. But women are getting spots in, say, certain programs in universities not because of their grades, but because of their sex. And people seem kinda fine with that.

Then 3 guys got into veterinary school through affirmative action since it's generally a pretty female dominated job. And shit just hit the fan. People went crazy, and some women who didn't get 'their' spots sued the school. The whole affair just disgusted me.

 

[artanis_neravar]

girls can reject guys without any consequense yet if a guy rejects a girl hes seen as a asshole

also guys cant stalk girls as its creepy yet girls can stalk guys and its seen as cute

no....no that is still creepy

For years in the UK women had cheaper car insurance.

Last year they had to pay the same as us men and they complained, and I quote, "why should we have to pay more just because we're women"....

I'm sorry ladies, you are paying the same as we've always paid now stick your special treatment up your arse.

In almost every developed country, statistics indicate that men are by far the more reckless drivers and much more likely to get into accidents - particularly under the age of 25. Hence their insurance rates are higher. That's no double standard or unfair treatment, that's insurance companies doing the logical thing because statistically speaking a certain subset of the population is a bunch of fucktards behind the wheel.

Of course this doesn't apply to every young male - myself included, as I'm 23, don't speed, and have yet to be in an accident - but numbers don't lie.

I think the problem always was that women were so happy to base this on Stats here, but when you pull out a stat to a man's advantage it's sexist.

Such as statstically a female doctor will work far less in her lifetime than a male doctor, thus meaning that if we base NHS funding for medical degrees on statistics we should allocate more funding to men. But infact we are having to do the opposite because of 'positive discrimination'. So you see, whilst there is a perfectly good statistical reason for women paying less, it really does irk when it works only that way to the disadvantage of men.

Just because it is at the advantage of women does not mean it is at the disadvantage of men

Yep.

And when they try and pull that on me, I shove it right back into their face. With LOGIC.

People eventually stopped trying to pull that bullshit on me.

Really? that worked on the women in your life? I have never met someone that lucky, to have women actually respond to the logic in their arguments.

And that pretty much sums up my opinion on the subject, my favorite is when women just ignore logic cuz it disagrees with them.

In my life it's the women who keep using "logic" to ruin all of my fun

 

[Red Albatross]

For years in the UK women had cheaper car insurance.

Last year they had to pay the same as us men and they complained, and I quote, "why should we have to pay more just because we're women"....

I'm sorry ladies, you are paying the same as we've always paid now stick your special treatment up your arse.

Car insurance is based on the likely hood of you getting into an accident and what kind of car you drive. In Canada women pay less because they better and safer drivers than men. There never was any special treatment, insurance rates are 100% a numbers game.

YOUR likelihood of getting into an accident is based on YOUR driving history and abilities, not your gender. You shot holes in your own argument in the same paragraph that you made it. Everyone paying the same rates is fair. Everyone getting penalized equally for accidents is fair. Likewise, everyone getting equally rewarded for a clean driving record is fair. Having different rates for different genders, no matter what the statistics say (the situation is FAR more complex than you spun it to be), is sexist. End of story.

 

[lumenadducere]

For years in the UK women had cheaper car insurance.

Last year they had to pay the same as us men and they complained, and I quote, "why should we have to pay more just because we're women"....

I'm sorry ladies, you are paying the same as we've always paid now stick your special treatment up your arse.

In almost every developed country, statistics indicate that men are by far the more reckless drivers and much more likely to get into accidents - particularly under the age of 25. Hence their insurance rates are higher. That's no double standard or unfair treatment, that's insurance companies doing the logical thing because statistically speaking a certain subset of the population is a bunch of fucktards behind the wheel.

Of course this doesn't apply to every young male - myself included, as I'm 23, don't speed, and have yet to be in an accident - but numbers don't lie.

that has nothing to do with "reckless driving" and everything to do with the fact that far, far more men drive as a large part of their working lives.

all the business vehicles you will see on the road during an average working day from those operated by the utility companys and service industrys right down to likes of taxis are in the majority driven by men.

That's guesswork. The numbers I'm referring to are for private, non-commercial use. No trucks or business vehicles. I have no idea what the statistics are for commercial vehicles, but in that case the probability of statistics being skewed because of the actual ratio of genders is very likely true. Even so, most businesses (save maybe food delivery) likely aren't going to allow anyone younger than 25 to drive, and past 25 the stats begin to even out. It's the younger ages that screw with the numbers so heavily.

Darn kids and their newfangled automobiles. Back in my day, etc. etc.

 

[Byr0m]

Oh no, another one of these threads... it's not that I don't like the threads it's just I get REALLY annoyed over them because I have this thing about equal rights where I will literally argue somebody to the death if they go anti-either side (seriously though, I don't mind jokes obviously)

 

[RaikuFA]

girls can reject guys without any consequense yet if a guy rejects a girl hes seen as a asshole

also guys cant stalk girls as its creepy yet girls can stalk guys and its seen as cute

Actually, these aren't true (at least not with anyone I know) anytime someone gets rejected, someone's going to get hurt over it.

Also, girls stalking guys is just as creepy as the other way around......

yeah but the guy has to sit there and take it, yet the girl, if shes rejected, the whole school wants the guys head on a platter

and i agree stalking is creepy but if you look at articles about either gender the majority responses if its a guy is "ewww, hes creepy and ugly, lock him up forever" while the majority of it when a girl does it is "awww, thats so sweet, shes in love" which we both know IS bullshit for pople to think like that

 

[lumenadducere]

For years in the UK women had cheaper car insurance.

Last year they had to pay the same as us men and they complained, and I quote, "why should we have to pay more just because we're women"....

I'm sorry ladies, you are paying the same as we've always paid now stick your special treatment up your arse.

In almost every developed country, statistics indicate that men are by far the more reckless drivers and much more likely to get into accidents - particularly under the age of 25. Hence their insurance rates are higher. That's no double standard or unfair treatment, that's insurance companies doing the logical thing because statistically speaking a certain subset of the population is a bunch of fucktards behind the wheel.

Of course this doesn't apply to every young male - myself included, as I'm 23, don't speed, and have yet to be in an accident - but numbers don't lie.

I think the problem always was that women were so happy to base this on Stats here, but when you pull out a stat to a man's advantage it's sexist.

Such as statstically a female doctor will work far less in her lifetime than a male doctor, thus meaning that if we base NHS funding for medical degrees on statistics we should allocate more funding to men. But infact we are having to do the opposite because of 'positive discrimination'. So you see, whilst there is a perfectly good statistical reason for women paying less, it really does irk when it works only that way to the disadvantage of men.

Likely because even when comparing equal working hours and fields of practice (i.e. oncology, neurology, etc.) women still earn less. At least, here in the States. I don't know what the numbers or practice is in the UK. For a long time it was thought that it was due to the fact that women went into less specialized fields like pediatrics or gynecology, but some recent studies are showing that even those who go into specialized areas and work equal hours are being paid less. But again, that's in the US.

 

[RatRace123]

I don't know what this country's coming to, but apparently women can wear a short skirt and no underpants and it's A-OK, but if a guy does that suddenly it's "horrifying".

...Hmph, fought for this country, can't even go commando in a skirt whenever I want to, thanks a lot Nixon.

 

[steevee]

For years in the UK women had cheaper car insurance.

Last year they had to pay the same as us men and they complained, and I quote, "why should we have to pay more just because we're women"....

I'm sorry ladies, you are paying the same as we've always paid now stick your special treatment up your arse.

In almost every developed country, statistics indicate that men are by far the more reckless drivers and much more likely to get into accidents - particularly under the age of 25. Hence their insurance rates are higher. That's no double standard or unfair treatment, that's insurance companies doing the logical thing because statistically speaking a certain subset of the population is a bunch of fucktards behind the wheel.

Of course this doesn't apply to every young male - myself included, as I'm 23, don't speed, and have yet to be in an accident - but numbers don't lie.

I think the problem always was that women were so happy to base this on Stats here, but when you pull out a stat to a man's advantage it's sexist.

Such as statstically a female doctor will work far less in her lifetime than a male doctor, thus meaning that if we base NHS funding for medical degrees on statistics we should allocate more funding to men. But infact we are having to do the opposite because of 'positive discrimination'. So you see, whilst there is a perfectly good statistical reason for women paying less, it really does irk when it works only that way to the disadvantage of men.

Likely because even when comparing equal working hours and fields of practice (i.e. oncology, neurology, etc.) women still earn less. At least, here in the States. I don't know what the numbers or practice is in the UK. For a long time it was thought that it was due to the fact that women went into less specialized fields like pediatrics or gynecology, but some recent studies are showing that even those who go into specialized areas and work equal hours are being paid less. But again, that's in the US.

Oh no, it's not that. There was a study in the Telegraph last year. It showed female doctors of any level worked less hours than male doctors. This due to family commitments, pregnanacy and an unwillingness to work ngiht shifts meant they, on average worked only 3/4 of the amount male doctors did. This moved down to 2/3 at a more senior level, such as Consultant surgeon.