Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Men's Group
In reply to the discussion: International Day for the Elimination of Violence against men [View all]6502
(256 posts)69. I call BULLSHIT.
Yeah... really.
You are just grasping at all kinds of stuff and creating a fruit salad of shit to somehow support your real goal:
You want to somehow get people to accept the weird idea that there is no income inequality between men and women so that support for pay equality would appear unnecessary.
You see the kicker: most of us are married to ladies... have sisters... nieces... aunts.... moms.
We've heard all of the stories already.
And as fellas, we worked for or alongside the very bastards that stunted the careers of ladies.
Heck, President Obama (Yeah... remember him?... the one who won the election fair and square.),
he's using the government data to back up his experience and push for pay equality based on the very premise that women make $0.75 for every $1 a man makes.
And that's the rub... your premise is that the disparity does not exist.
The device being used here is to invalidate or weaken anything else that shines a light on the disparity.
And don't waste your time denying it.
That's what you're doing.
Plain and simple.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
78 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

International Day for the Elimination of Violence against men [View all]
4th law of robotics
Nov 2012
OP
The total lack of any self examination within this group is not amazing at all.
Warren Stupidity
Nov 2012
#16
He is a troll because he was shitcanned the fuck out of du for being a troll.
Warren Stupidity
Nov 2012
#24
Undeniably, more women are injured by physically violent men than the reverse. n/t
lumberjack_jeff
Dec 2012
#78
In a heterosexual relationship, IPV is more likely to be initiated by the woman.
lumberjack_jeff
Nov 2012
#30
violent people would have to change the most. as in, people who are violent.
Warren DeMontague
Nov 2012
#19
I think he is saying, rightly, that violent people are violent whether men or women.
Bonobo
Nov 2012
#25
"To you, the very mention of violence against men is a ludicrous embarrassment"
Warren Stupidity
Nov 2012
#34
On the internet I'm indifferent to people. Points of argument, I can either like or dislike.
lumberjack_jeff
Nov 2012
#37
That is a certainly an authoritative sounding statement, I will grant you that.
Warren DeMontague
Nov 2012
#35
Do you know that that stat correlates to the proportion of young males in the population?
Warren Stupidity
Nov 2012
#38
For the sake of argument, let's accept for a moment that what you say is true.
lumberjack_jeff
Nov 2012
#47
I have to assume it's something you're demanding I say, that I'm *not* saying, thats making you mad.
Warren DeMontague
Nov 2012
#48
Also. Tell me something: From a, I guess it would be, sociological perspective?
Warren DeMontague
Nov 2012
#49
The problem with your theory is it just doesn't prove itself in the real world
Major Nikon
Nov 2012
#43
Why do you almost always have to conflate sexism with racism to make your arguments?
Major Nikon
Dec 2012
#73