Read the quote right, woman! They got to be doctors because of tokenism! They’re not real/true/good/decent/worthy doctors! 
:rolleyes::smack:
Fun story: everything I find when I google “feminists paternity leave” is feminist blogs talking about how paternity leave is definitely afeminist issue. Or academic articles about how feminists embrace paternity leave for its egalitarian underpinnings. Oh yeah! And one article in the telegraph, written by James Delingpole, about how paternity leave isn’t natural and will end in disaster!
Good thing we have blindboyard to set us straight about what real feminists think and are doing to keep men down.
It’s likely a consequence of how Google’s personalized search algorithms work. It’s rigged in favor of steering you towards the same kinds of websites that you’ve clicked on in the past. When blindboyard searches for “feminism”, his top result is going to be a link to a gentleman’s website hosting the SCUM manifesto.
This is my work computer, anyway. I don’t do my feminist batcave research on this computer.
Well, yeah, but if you’re not the kind of person who searches for “breast cancer TOO MUCSH FUNDING” and “sinking ship lifeboat priority men oppression”, your “feminism” results and his just ain’t never gonna match.
Ah yes I think that most of us exist within the middle of the bell curve, there are always people agitating on the edge. These people scare me.
Except I only use google for things like this, providing examples for the internet. For my actual searches I use DuckDuckGo.
When I google “paternity leave” I just get a bunch of government websites of an authoritative and neutral hue. “paternity leave feminist” brings up some neutral sites on the front page, several where google has thoughtfully corrected it to “maternity leave feminist” and a couple of ladyfoxfyre’s sites, the “feminist philosophers” one, which takes the position that men should only have leave if the mother’s voluntarily give up some of theirs, and then launches into a rant about discrimination against women, and there’s also a Guardian article about the “real agenda” of paternity leave being to force women back into work.
You are a liar. Google does not autocorrect “paternity leave” to “maternity leave”.
This is bullshit as well. The article is discussing a UK proposal which allows women to transfer their existing maternity leave to their husbands. None of this “men should only have leave if the mothers voluntarily give up some of theirs”. It’s discussing an actual proposal in the UK parliament not saying that is the only way men should have leave.
I’m starting to see the problem here. You’re a goddamned liar about everything you bring up, and that’s why nobody is interesting in debating you. You can barely be arsed to cite anything, and when people DO bring you citations you can’t even READ them correctly enough to parse what they say. Good luck with your MRA propaganda wall-o’-text diatribes buddy.
On mine, you can see that it’s bringing up both maternity and paternity in the results by looking at the previews and seeing what’s bolded.
Oh, after trying to read all that my head hurts, lol.
See the result at the bottom of the image.
That is the exact proposal supported, and at no point is there any allusion to support for just giving men leave on their own rights, rather than when the mother wants to give some of hers.
You simply ignore the facts and hurl abuse.
Dude, that’s not auto-correct, that’s Google giving you some results including the words maternity leave. Auto-correct would be if it just flat out changed your search terms to maternity leave. You cannot seriously be surprised that search results for paternity leave include results for maternity leave since the two are pretty closely related.
Your NOW cite is from 1997. I find your paraphrasing of that cite to be incomplete and inaccurate. And it’s from 1997! Holy smokes, can’t you find something a little fresher to bolster your point?
For those of you keeping track, I pay spousal support to my ex-husband. As usual when I post this fact, none of the MRA/MRM folks seem to notice. Added bonus information: Two different women adjudicators* signed off on this–the first ordered temporary spousal support when we were initially separated and the second signed off on spousal support as part of finalizing the divorce. I guess we three women must not have gotten the notice that men are to be fucked over when it comes to family law. :rolleyes:
*One was a judge, one a commissioner; I can’t remember which person presided over which situation.
And the number of results for “paternity leave” on the front page search for “maternity leave” is… zero!
NOW’s position is still support for “primary caregiver”.
So what? No-one’s denying that a few women end up paying alimony. I posted an article all about that further up, and how the outcry had led to major reform of the alimony system in Massachussetts. Non-custodial women are less likely than non-custodial men to be ordered to pay child support, however, and are less likely to pay what they owe, and are less likely to go to prison when they refuse to pay. But those are outliers, what the system is designed for is to extract money from men to fund the choices of women.
[QUOTE=blindboyard]
And the number of results for “paternity leave” on the front page search for “maternity leave” is… zero!
[/quote]
Wrong again! The very first result when I enter “maternity leave” is “parental leave”; the fifth result is for “maternity leave and paternity leave”. How about you try to google parental leave? You may note that most policies provide leave for parents not mothers/fathers. Just as most alimony laws refer to spouses, not men/women.
I don’t have the energy to get involved in a long debate on this topic, so I’m going to bow out. Good luck to those of you who do have the energy and the time.
There’s another MRA dipshit in the UK who sued a school because the chairs were wood and hurt his balls when he sat down, and that’s gender discrimination. Wooden chairs are sexism. :rolleyes:
I wonder if it’s the same dumbass, but I don’t care enough to figure it out.
Modern feminist that cheered on all the ideals until her son became a victim.
Boo hoo, my son’s a rapist!
Seriously though, a woman said she was raped, there was a tribunal at the school, and then he was found innocent. I’m outraged… why, exactly? Frankly, she does nothing in this article to show her son’s innocence; lawyer mommy pulled some tricks and got her son out of trouble. What does this have to do with anything?
The first google result for “wooden chairs discrimination” is a website called Manboobz, which is for making for of MRAs. It claims this position was taken by Tom Martin, who was actually suing his school because they ran and advertised a large number of women-only services, including women-only times at their gym, with no male equivalents, and because he felt the gender studies curriculum was so biassed against men as to constitute sexual discrimination.
So, bullshit again. No-one ever sued anyone because hard chairs hurt his balls.
An Australian Government website: advertises a “Women’s Domestic Violence Helpline” to “provide support and counselling for women experiencing family and domestic violence” and a “Men’s Domestic Violence Helpline” to “provide counselling for men who are concerned about becoming violent or abusive”.
And the Californian case against the government’s refusal to fund care for men in cases of domestic violence.