All the evidence Ron stated shows how men are victimized.

I know you don’t want to read them so I will give you an example. I am not clear on the uk funding but in the US, Breast cancer is federally funded 14 times higher than prostate cancer. But aren’t both diseases lethal and don’t both sexes pay taxes?! In fact, prostate cancer accounts for 37% of all cancers but recieves only 5% of federal research funding.

No, I have not got prostate cancer so by your definition that means I am not a victim but you are missing the point. What if I did get prostate cancer, what if you did? Would you be happy knowing that more is spent on regarding the health of women than of men?!

This is just one of many examples. If you are truly interested in seeing how men are victimized, do your own research.

To be honest, if I had prostrate cancer I would be happy to have it treated. I certainly wouldn't be trying to claim things were biased against me. The two causes are both worthy causes. It would be nice if both received equal funding but to claim that the increased funding given to breat cancer is an attempt to marginalised men. It's ludicrous.

It is not intentional and I never claimed it was. Breast cancer is just what is hyped by the feminised media and ends up getting the most funding.

You say you'd be happy to be treated- yes of course, but wouldn't you be happier if the funding was equal as it should be (because it accounts for 37% of all cancers)? So then you would know you were getting the most up to date, relevant and advanced treatment possible and would have a better chance of recovery as a result. You'd be mad to say you didn't want the best treatment possible!

The funding may not be equal for 101 rerason. All of which caould be valid. My point is that at the frist sign of any bias some people immediately claim discrimination. Thats why I cant take them seriously.

Do you know I find the fact that you are dismissive of the fact that women have ever been oppressed as offensive. I also find the fact that you appear to be-little assualts on women, cancers etc as unimportant. Men should have equal rights I totally agree but it is not a competition about who is the most oppressed. Surely we should be looking at ways to gain equality rather than making comparisons about who's assualt is the worst :bored: it seems wrong on every level.

We are all people with needs and should all expect to be treated as individuals with individual needs. I am sure if someone could be bothered to dig around enough they would find plenty of claims to refute the ones you make.

Deleted by author.

I am not sure that I agree women have ever been protected in the sense that you put it across.

In the UK women did not used to be able to refuse to live with an abusive partner, they were not allowed any political rights, could not lay charges against an abusive partner, were not even allowed to keep money they earned themselves (changed in 1870) and it is in many ways thanks to "feminists" that this has all changed and women are now almost afforded equality with their male counter parts. One issue still in need of address is wages, women still generally recieve less pay for work than men in the UK.

I agree that if a man is sexually assaulted it should carry equal weight with police, courts etc as a womans.

Some interesting facts can be found here http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/law.htm...osed%20changes this shows on average only 20% of reported rapes actually make it to court! so not a huge issue to redress here. The main issue is that men do not report sexual assaults. They fail to do so for a number of reasons and until they do regularly report them then figures will always be low for prosecutions.

Deleted by author.

you might want to look at this historical site

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/womensrights.htm

this site lists some of the things I mentioned and when the laws were changed.

You say that women were allowed the vote, but that was only land owners and not a true representative of the population. The majority of every day women were unable to vote. You were also unlikely to see a female politician

Women were "expected" to stay at home and look after the children and house, they were often not given the opportunity to work, the ones that did earn a little had to hand it over to their husband thus taking away their own rights to decision make with regards to finance.

You talk about the pay gap "myth" and give examples of the median wages etc but in the uk this is the case, information I found says different to your thoughts on the matter.

What is the gender pay gap?

The median gender pay gap has reduced from 17.4% in 1997 to 12.6% in 2007. The mean figure has fallen from 20.7% to 17.2% in the same period.

Median part-time gender pay gap has remained fairly static and has reduced from 43.5% in 1997 to 39.1% in 2007. The mean figure for 2007 is 35.6%, compared with 41.9% in 1997.

So yes it is coming down but there are still gaps in certain sectors.

Now you make a sweeping statement about testicular assaults on men being worse than rape for a women! it just isnt a competition, it is a terrible experience for anyone to go through. The after effects of a sexual assualt go on and on for years yet you choose to try and make the rape of a woman sound less important or have less impact . That has to be the single most idiotic statement I have ever read. You can spew your facts at us till the cows come home but by your narrow minded statements you negate your serious participation in this discussion now.

Deleted by author.

really gpood discussion guys enjoyed reading. well; done ron and well done evryone else for makiing effort. i need to go and do spome reading!!LOL

Not if I provided a counter claim to go along with it it's not. Seeing as I did, your argument falls flat. [/quote]

To resort to petty insults just shows so much about your intellectual being. In my opinion of course. So you can provide a counter claim and call someone a f.uckwit?

Deleted by author.

In your opinion of course. I am used to having an open and constructive discussion about subject matter on here with other members. You say you have told me that "if you insult someone AS WELL AS providing an argument, then there is little wrong with this". Again, in your opinion. I actually find it quite offensive. You come across to me as if you want to cause conflict and friction in your threads. But that is just my opinion too.

Your posting style seems familiar to me also. Were you previously a member under a different name on this forum?

Deleted by author.

I cant believe this thread is still going. The OP made statments based on a few carefull selected stats and expects every one to agree. If they dont then they're called an idiot.

The OP has challenged me to provide proof. Why? Does he honestly think I cant provide proof. Therein lies the ignorance of many of his claims.

Does the OP honestly think that men are more opressed than women. Honestly? Truly? I dont doubt the validity of many of his arguments but the title of this thread speaks for itself. It's a biased ill informed statement. No men are not opressed more than women.

I have nothing to prove to you.

Deleted by author.

I dont refute the information I only questionm that you seem a little too obsessed with this arguemnt. No one calims that men are not being opressed but to try and prove that men are oppressed more than women. Why? Do you honestly think we are?

OK I will provide proof as you only seem to acknowledge articles that prove your point.

As I said Ronald, I have nothing to prove to you. What does that have to do with my previous statement? You say you have scanned my posts and not found one interesting thread I have participated in. All comes down to your opinion again doesn't it really.

And that doesn't answer my question now does it?

The OP used the word 'oppressed' in the title of the thread. Dictionary.com defines oppression as 'The exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjust manner.' Thus I'm only going to concentrate on the areas where men are being treated in a burdensome, cruel or unjust manner. Hence, the example that the OP gave of more money being spent on Breast cancer than prostrate cancer can hardly be described as oppressive.

Acording to Wikipedia the following countires do not allow women to vote - Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE. Men can vote but women are not considered substantial enough citizens to be given the vote.

I found it a little harder to get figures on Male spousal abuse and male sexual assault but I'll keep trying. So just by looking up a few general websites I have found examples of female oppression at the hands of men.

The dictionary also defines sexism as: "Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women." Why is it more sexist if a man does it?!

Still, I thought it was me that talked with you about cancer rates? I am not the OP.

I believe the OP means the uk or other westernised countries in terms of how men/ women are treated and the fact that we have for the most part eqaulity.

I agree women don't have equality in some other countries (particularly saudi arabia) and other middle eastern countries. This annoys me considerably and if you would like to talk about how much women are oppressed there, start a topic and I would happily talk about it with you as it disgusts me.

How do you know that the OP meant oppression in the West? HE doesn't say so in the title and when I challenged him on the title he stuck by his guns. Maybe he needs to explain exactly who feels is being opressed. Is it Western males or Western Wasp males or males in general? Who?

Well for the record, all my points are concerning western males. By this I mean countries such as the uk, US, Germany, france, etc... I would never argue women in certain middle eastern countries, amoungst others- perhaps china being a good example, had equality because I don't believe this for a second.

I am not sure if the OP means men in general or just western men. I'm not going to speak or argue for him!