Why not Male Lives Matter?

[Axulus]

The proportion of males, including unarmed males, killed by police is far greater, in proportion to their population, than the amount of females killed by police.

A staggering 95% of those killed by police are male, compared to being 49% of the population.

Males are also profiled and stopped much more frequently compared to females.

There is a systematic and institutional bias against men by the police and the criminal justice system. Over 90% of incarcerated individuals are men.

Where is the "male lives matter" movement to protest against this greater injustice?

 

[J842P]

Male lives are expendable.

 

[ZiprHead]

#malelivesmutter

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Edit

 

[zorq]

I think this is one of the things some MRAs bring up, but it's not usually a big plank for them because it reminds them that men as a group are a bit more violent and dangerous than women. And any actual differences between the genders (like this) might justify different social roles in society that they object to.

 

[untermensche]

The rules of engagement that the police have developed and use are the problem.

They allow the police to act, even with deadly force, on little but imaginary fears.

Human life is reduced to that of an insect.

 

[Angry Floof]

Because male lives don't matter. What matters is what the matriarchy chooses to do with them.

 

[Metaphor]

I think this is one of the things some MRAs bring up, but it's not usually a big plank for them because it reminds them that men as a group are a bit more violent and dangerous than women. And any actual differences between the genders (like this) might justify different social roles in society that they object to.

Men as a group are more violent. But what 'social roles' would men being more violent somehow justify?

 

[Metaphor]

The proportion of males, including unarmed males, killed by police is far greater, in proportion to their population, than the amount of females killed by police.

A staggering 95% of those killed by police are male, compared to being 49% of the population.

Males are also profiled and stopped much more frequently compared to females.

There is a systematic and institutional bias against men by the police and the criminal justice system. Over 90% of incarcerated individuals are men.

Where is the "male lives matter" movement to protest against this greater injustice?

It would make more sense, since the gap between males and females in sentencing lengths for the same crime is much larger than the gap between black people and white people for the same crime. ("Same" of course means controlling for as many observed differences as possible but no two crimes are ever really the same).

 

[zorq]

I think this is one of the things some MRAs bring up, but it's not usually a big plank for them because it reminds them that men as a group are a bit more violent and dangerous than women. And any actual differences between the genders (like this) might justify different social roles in society that they object to.

Men as a group are more violent. But what 'social roles' would men being more violent somehow justify?

One of the MRAs biggest complaints in the US is registration for selective service. Theoretically, violent tendencies might justify drafting more men into combat slavery than women, but I agree with the MRAs that the draft is unfair.

 

[Metaphor]

Men as a group are more violent. But what 'social roles' would men being more violent somehow justify?

One of the MRAs biggest complaints in the US is registration for selective service. Theoretically, violent tendencies might justify drafting more men into combat slavery than women, but I agree with the MRAs that the draft is unfair.

It wouldn't justify it any more than women having the sole ability to gestate children would justify the State using them forcibly for breeding.

 

[zorq]

One of the MRAs biggest complaints in the US is registration for selective service. Theoretically, violent tendencies might justify drafting more men into combat slavery than women, but I agree with the MRAs that the draft is unfair.

It wouldn't justify it any more than women having the sole ability to gestate children would justify the State using them forcibly for breeding.

Hmm, I agree with you, but I feel like your analogy is imperfect.

 

[Metaphor]

It wouldn't justify it any more than women having the sole ability to gestate children would justify the State using them forcibly for breeding.

Hmm, I agree with you, but I feel like your analogy is imperfect.

It seems to me quite a perfect rebuttal that group characteristics justify the State forcing (or even socially pressuring) individuals in that group to do something.

If we are aghast at the idea that the State should ever be able to force women to breed against their will, even though literally nobody other than women can do it, how much more aghast ought we be that being a soldier, which men as a group are better at but not the only gender who could do it, is something the State could force on men only?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The proportion of males, including unarmed males, killed by police is far greater, in proportion to their population, than the amount of females killed by police.

A staggering 95% of those killed by police are male, compared to being 49% of the population.

Males are also profiled and stopped much more frequently compared to females.

There is a systematic and institutional bias against men by the police and the criminal justice system. Over 90% of incarcerated individuals are men.

Where is the "male lives matter" movement to protest against this greater injustice?

Because that's useless to the racists.

 

[zorq]

Hmm, I agree with you, but I feel like your analogy is imperfect.

It seems to me quite a perfect rebuttal that group characteristics justify the State forcing (or even socially pressuring) individuals in that group to do something.

If we are aghast at the idea that the State should ever be able to force women to breed against their will, even though literally nobody other than women can do it, how much more aghast ought we be that being a soldier, which men as a group are better at but not the only gender who could do it, is something the State could force on men only?

I feel like we've already pushed this tangent too far, but the imperfection in the analogy is that MRA's don't necessarily have an issue with compulsory military service. But all of them take issue with compulsory military service for men ONLY.

Compulsory military service is objectionable on it's face regardless of who it's forced upon, just like compulsory reproduction. I feel like your analogy highlights this injustice more than the injustice of the gender discrimination and that's the issue that MRAs fight for.

 

[Derec]

It would make more sense, since the gap between males and females in sentencing lengths for the same crime is much larger than the gap between black people and white people for the same crime. ("Same" of course means controlling for as many observed differences as possible but no two crimes are ever really the same).

Men are at the bottom of the progressive stack, so male issues do not matter to liberals/progressives. Take Hillary. Even though men serve longer sentences for same crimes (just look at Mary Winkler's 60 day sentence for cold-blooded murder!), Hillary wants women to serve even less. Un-fucking-believable! Apparently she believes that when a woman commits a crime (like being a getaway driver in a burglary) she was, by virtue of being female, just an unwitting pawn and some man is the real and only culprit.

There are many areas where females are privileged, but it is not PC to point that out. In fact, if you dare to do so, you risk being labeled "misogynist" or "sexist' because anything that doesn't fit feminist ideology cannot be acknowledged to be.

 

[Metaphor]

There are many areas where females are privileged, but it is not PC to point that out. In fact, if you dare to do so, you risk being labeled "misogynist" or "sexist' because anything that doesn't fit feminist ideology cannot be acknowledged to be.

I'm reminded of one of the top five (probably top three) most mind-bogglingly stupid feminist article I've ever come across -- the 'don't send women to prison -- for anything' article.

I read the article waiting for the punchline and I got it near the end. Most women don't need to be in prison for their crimes, but violent offenders should be in 'custodial centres near their families'.

In other fucking words, violent women should be in prison, but if we call them 'custodial centres near their families', that's not really prison.

It's said that women have a higher tolerance for pain. Well, if stupid hurts, feminists must be grand-fucking-masters of pain tolerance.

 

[laughing dog]

It is all just part of the war on men. Also, it is not manly to whine about such things.

 

[dismal]

I think this is one of the things some MRAs bring up, but it's not usually a big plank for them because it reminds them that men as a group are a bit more violent and dangerous than women. And any actual differences between the genders (like this) might justify different social roles in society that they object to.

Nonsense. There are no differences between the genders. Gender is an artificial construction.

If you think males are "more violent" it's probably because the toxic anti-male culture has made you (or maybe even the males themselves) think that.

 

[iolo]

Young male lives have always been expendable, because they don't have babies and seldom think deeply. They can therefore be used in armies or gangs to serve whatever evil bugger thinks it worth his while to fire 'em up.