[user104658]

Originally Posted by lostalex

The difference is that men have not been systematically abused, raped, discriminated against, and murdered at grossly disproportional rates by women.

Please try to put things in perspective.

When women "perv" on men, it doesn't make men feel demeaned. In fact every str8 man i know would love to have women perving over them.

So women should get preferential treatment over men to right a historical wrong? Has Eugenie Bouchard been abused, raped, discriminated against and murdered by men? I don't think she has, and I can't understand why people feel the need to take on the burdens (or the guilt!) of people long dead and buried. For example, I refuse to feel guilty about historical sexism and racism just because I am a white male. Am I sexist? Am I racist? No, and no. Do I have anything to do with, or give a **** about, what other white men happen to have done in the past? Does it have anything at all to do with me? NO and NO. I am an individual, I am not part of some collective conscious of "males", and the actions of any other individual who happens to be a male are not my responsibility.

Equality is equality. The past is irrelevant and each situation should be taken exactly as it is found, right here and right now. Otherwise what is being sought is NOT equality - it is retribution / reparation.

Men leer at female sports stars, women leer at male sports stars. That is equal. Is it RIGHT? Maybe not, that's a completely separate issue that has nothing at all to do with gender equality. If it is not right, then it should stop, or at least, presenters and interviewers shouldn't be engaging in it. Whether the sports star happens to have boobies and bergina or a peeners and testercoes.

Not every moral question is a "feminist issue" ffs.