OMG UPDATE: Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter to get updates on updates!

Updated on Wednesday, October 28



Combat Deaths: 99.9% male
Work Deaths: 94% male
Homicides: 76% male
Suicides: 75% male
Homeless: 65% male

Yes, you are a man-hater if you are a feminist.


  1. The number of deaths / homeless is not the root of the issue, and doesn't make feminists man haters.

    In the first case this is because women don't serve in combat roles in the military. Even if allowed to, I would bet only a small number both have the desire and physical condition required. So this number is kind of pointless to argue with.

    Work deaths is important, it helps explain the earnings gap. You clearly have more men choosing money over safety which contributes to an earnings gap overall.

    Homicides is another important number but does not mean that much on its own. If you are talking about "take back the night" or discussing what kinds of public safety initiatives to institute it becomes relevant.

    Suicides and homelessness are the only two numbers that can stand on their own. In the case of suicide you have a risk factor that is far greater than it first appears. Based on the common argument "women attempt suicide three times more" that means the relative risk is not just 25% over parity, but a rate of 0.75 for completions compared to a total share of attempts of 0.25 (assuming I am remembering my stats right) so you get a relative risk of 3 compared to 0.3 for women. So essentially men are 10 times more likely to complete a suicide than women, and that is an absolutely massive difference.

    So clearly more resources are needed to address the problem of male suicide, but this is a case where feminists have directly interfered by doing things like blocking men's help centres, absorbing disproportionate amounts of funding for women's health centres, blocking speakers who wish to address the plight of boys and men, etc.

    Homelessness is another prime case, as there are many shelters for women but few that accept men. This is also tied into the mental health issues.

    Anyways, the numbers on their own don't mean much, you need context to argue your point.

    1. If feminists are for equality, why aren't they talking about any of this?
      You need the context, but the numbers come first. Why don't any feminists make these numbers known?

      I'm just trying to figure out why people keep tellin me feminism is good for men too, when clearly it doesn't help us at all.

  2. Because feminists only want equality for cushy jobs.

  3. 1) Feminists ARE talking about these issues! Having more women feel comfortable in military roles or hazardous workplaces etc without facing sexism is something that feminism is addressing. You might want to re-look at where you're getting your information if this isn't evident.

    2) Feminism doesn't need to serve men for it to be considered a meaningful and valid movement.

    3) Enough with this extremism!! Supporting womens' rights and hating men are not mutually inclusive. Feminism is NOT about fighting against men, it is about challenging gender inequality in society. Which, by the way, encompasses a TON of issues (not just one you might pick to "prove a point") that benefit all genders.

    Everyone has issues. We get that. But saying that women's issues aren't relevant because men also have issues is like saying you shouldn't stress about a midterm because I'm also stressing about a midterm. It's unproductive and no one feels any better.

    Two groups CAN have their own sets of problems and work together so that everyone is happy in the end.

    1. 1) They aren't talking about this. Show me evidence if they are.

      2) Then feminism shouldn't claim to be for equality when it is clearly for female supremacy

      3) Women have more rights than men. Modern feminism isn't pro-woman, its anti-man.

      Women are the privileged gender and all evidence supports that.

    2. Except the evidence most definitely *doesn't* support that, 3A. And just 15 minutes of actual research somewhere other than reddit would confirm that for you (or maybe it wouldn't, people on the internet tend to be so bound by confirmation bias issues that it literally doesn't matter what evidence you show them to refute their claims).

      Feminism IS about equality - specifically, it's about bringing the same privileges to women that men have enjoyed for... basically ever. And you aren't wrong - there is a clearly identified need for feminism to become a little more humanist overall - address issues that affect more than just women, like racism, homophobia, and other issues of equality. Feminists even have a word for this: intersectionality. The belief is that these intersectional issues need to be addressed in order for feminism to accomplish anything.

      But for all of that, feminism is still primarily concerned, underneath it all, with the equality of women. And it's come a hell of a long way (in Canada, at least), but it clearly still has a ways to go (if it didn't, then feminism wouldn't even be something we talk about anymore).

    3. @3a: Men spent hundreds of years telling women to stay in the kitchen and let the boys handle that rampaging lion/job at the mine/other many things. Now men are trumpeting casualty stats like its any surprise that fighting dudes with guns and working in dangerous places causes death. Of course few women die in these ways, even if they do want those jobs they are driven off by sexist drivel or do their jobs so well they end up managers and out of harms way.

      Half of the manosphere shit is men that suck at stuff being angry because now that women have more freedom they are actually outperforming them. You never seem to see any winners on these sites.

    4. Come on ladies, snap back to reality for a moment.

      You think men WANT to die in wars and work shit jobs? Somebody has to do it. Men have to step up to the plate because women don't.

      Men gave women the privilege not to have to do that kind of stuff. We kept you in the kitchen because it was safe, because as men we know the world is fucked.

      Men would love to switch roles. Stay in the kitchen and hang off my wife's success? Yes please, sign me up. But no, we give you some independence and you find out the world sucks, and now you won't stop fucking complaining about it. Women were much happier before feminism, I wonder why.

    5. 3b here. For the record, I'm actually a white male 3d - I just think your arguments are bullshit.

      But rather than go through the tiresome process of debunking absolutely everything you've written (because, again, 15 minutes of actual research rip apart your fallacy-laden arguments for you), I'm going to focus on one line you wrote:

      "Men gave women the privilege not to have to do that kind of stuff."

      And that's the problem.

      Full disclosure, I'm not actually a feminist. Humanism forms the core of my personal beliefs. But lately I've been pretty convinced that supporting feminism IS the humanist thing to do, and lines like that one are exactly why.

      Why did men have to take away the agency of women to decide what they wanted to do with their lives? To choose what career they wanted to pursue? To decide whether or not they got to fight and die for their country defending a cause they believed in? Why SHOULD women need men to protect them? They're individuals too, and their freedom to determine their own fate - be it good or bad - is just as paramount as ours!

      Maybe women were happier before feminism. Ignorance is bliss, as they say. But it's better to be miserable and free than a well-fed slave - this is not a new lesson! Maybe addressing inequality is the first step we need to take if we want to start trying to fix our broken world.

    6. "Feminists ARE talking about these issues! Having more women feel comfortable in military roles or hazardous workplaces etc without facing sexism is something that feminism is addressing"

      The victim card? Seriously? Need some stats to back this up thanks.

    7. C'mon 3f, that's not a "victim card," that's just "women attempting to enter a field once dominated entirely by men, and facing some resistance in the process."

      As for stats, you don't exactly have to look hard. There are dozens of first-hand accounts from women working in everything from construction to the financial sector to the military who have faced sexism of some sort. There's even a government report that came out earlier this year which discussed issues of systemic sexism in the Canadian military. Go read this stuff, it's interesting.

    8. I'm not 3f, but yeah that's victim carding hard bro.

      Nobody feels comfortable in military roles or hazardous workplaces, not even men. But someone has to do those jobs. Don't pretend that they are facing "sexism" when really they are just looking for an excuse to hide the fact they just couldn't cut it doing a man's work.

      This stuff isn't interesting, its disgusting. Devaluing men so women don't feel bad about themselves.

    9. 3h, I think we're both interpreting the word "comfortable" very differently here. You seem to interpret it to mean something along the lines of "cozy," or "easygoing" or "manageable," as though a "comfortable workplace" means "a workplace conducive to loving your job and getting excited about coming in." That wasn't how I read it at all.

      "Comfortable," in this context, simply means "acknowledged and treated as an actual human being - or at least as an equal - by your coworkers." A lot of women don't feel comfortable with the idea of serving in the military if it means they'll constantly be:
      -Hit on;
      -Sexually harassed/groped (again, see this year's government report for some recent statistics on this);
      -Subjected to constant comments about their physical appearance (I mean this in a 'looking hot today' kind of way, not a 'your boots need polishing' military sense);
      -Judged for making the same mistakes that their male colleagues make, with comments like "this is why women shouldn't be doing this job" (when their male peers might just get a slap on the wrist and a correction).

      You do see how an environment like that, which devalues female soldiers as something less than their equally qualified male counterparts, might make a (perfectly qualified) woman uncomfortable, right? You also see how it can be fixed without any reduction in efficiency to the military or a 'devaluing of men,' right?

      If you don't see it, then we probably see the world too differently to have anything left to talk about. If you do see it... then at least that's something!

    10. - boo hoo men think you're hot.

      - only government report I could find on the subject claimed men are biologically designed to rape. The government has been infiltrated by man-hating feminists, no surprise there.

      - when women say "omg this one guy totally said I was hot" they aren't complaining, they are bragging.

      - they maybe they should blame their fuck-ups on "the patriarchy"

      But sure, "lalala I can't hear you we don't have anything left to talk about" is a pretty solid argument. If you can't handle opposing opinions nor properly defend your own, have a good day sir.

    11. That's right 3j, spin everything 3i wrote out of context to make it sound absurd, assume that women WANT sexual attention in the workplace, and then cap it all off with an ad hominem that takes their words even further out of context. That'll win people over to your side, absolutely.

      3i made the right call cutting you off. Neither of you is speaking the same language, and you're clearly not interested in having an actual intelligent discussion.

    12. It's the fucking military. The guys constantly break each other's balls. If a female solider can't handle a "you look hot today", she really shouldn't be there. Maybe feminists should be training female soldiers on how to give snappy comebacks instead of trying to get everyone else to walk on eggshells.
      Just because the genders get an asymmetric cultural experience doesn't mean it's unequal.

    13. "Boys will be boys" is really only a valid argument if the females owning the dudes back didn't set them back in their own careers.

  4. Where do you get these "statistics", OP? Cite your sources that go to actual studies and not back to some MRA website. Burden of proof is on you.

    1. I don't expect reality-deniers to look up the facts, but I sure as hell won't do your research for you.

      PS. there isn't anything wrong with MRA websites. Its only feminist websites that have proven to lie over and over again.

    2. "It's true, only feminists lie! Only them. Always." - Anonymous, 2015

  5. How the fuck did you make the jump from death stats to feminist?

    1. cause he's a REAL MAN no beta shit he's ALPHA and he knows THE REAL AGENDA of those FEMINAZIS. You just gotta keep up with his FAXTS. his logic is BEST LOGIC. bc he's a MANly MAN. and we should listen. or else HE'LL DIE in combat. fucking feminazis!!!!!

    2. Does feminism also advocate gratuitous use of capital letters?

  6. gr8 b8 m8 would r8 8/8

  7. cause listing stats on the interwebs = TRU FAX