* you're about seven times less likely to be raped: especially if you stay out of prison * you still make 27% more, on average, than wimminz * being assertive, even aggressive, it tolerated if not encouraged: nobody is going to call you "that fuckin bitch" for speaking out * if you are heterosexual, the chances of you being beaten up by your partner are vanishingly small compared to hetero women * you can wear anything you want without being branded a "slut" * you have the privilege to act totally unaware of any of this.
Greater likelihood of rape.
Statistical problems. A problem with rape statistics, as any good feminist will tell you, is that many rapes tend to go unreported. So relying on official government data as to who is raped, and what constitutes rape, sets up massive flaws in any analysis.
Do men report rape as well as women? In a culture that expects men to be manly, and views sexual humiliation, or "being bitched," as the ultimate failure of manhood--beneath even, perhaps, the ability to rightfully obtain and provide for a female mate and produce and provide for a family--is it likely that, every time a man discovers he has been drugged, raped, molested, et cetera, he immediately rushes to a government agency to make a public report of that fact? And lets the officers know where he was that evening, and who his friends are, so that everyone can be asked about how his rape happened, and who might've penetrated him?
Many women know how incredibly difficult it is to report any kind of violence, and particularly sexual violence, to law enforcement agencies. And this in a culture where there are now in many institutions a longstanding understanding, backed up by serious political pressure from above, that women can be helpless, non-guilty victims of sexual predation by bad men. Victims' rights advocates, privacy and safety policies, political and social pressure, funding requirements, and decades of legal standards protect the rights of women making such reports. Imperfectly--maybe even poorly--done, but utterly absent for men. For men, to report sexualized violence can be a form of social, career and emotional suicide.
Even beyond that hurdle--assuming the male victim makes it--all the same problems as with female rape then occur. "He wanted it." "He knew it was a gay bar." "He was wearing his shirt buttoned open." "He used to wear makeup in the tenth grade."
"Mr. Smith," asks the prosecutor, smiling at the jurors and newspapermen, "is it true, that during your youth, many people at school considered you an openly gay man?"
"Objection, your honor!"
Prosecutor grins. "Withdrawn, your honor."
Prison. Just some Q&A, here:
1) Do all prison rapes get reported? No. Do the majority get reported? Haha. I bet all of Big Joey's friends will be real nice to you in the yard next week if you report what happened.
2) Do all prison rapes get recognized as rapes if the prisoner is simply found dead or beaten senseless? No. See above. Also, victimized women are often studied for signs of rape, whereas with victimized men, why bother? He's a man, Lou. Don't be disgusting.
Men Make More Than Women.
Frequency/duration. Men also serve in the armed forces in combat zones more than women. Is this a privilege? Is this a good thing? Selling this mortal coil for a few bucks, working yourself into ulcers and death, being emotionally abused and domineered by managers for the greater part of your adult life, is a sign of ascendancy? Being protected from this hell by a domestic partner or partners of any sex is a blessing. Which is why corporate America and the government take so well to feminist ideas that women should enter the workforce as equals to men. Just wait for a "child's rights" movement, a la Zoolander, to turn this coin in a way that current humans will perceive (rightly) as dark.
The right to get used up and treated like shit is not something worth advocating for.
Choice. Even the longest-time and hardest of feminists now recognize that a lot of the wage discrepancy issue results in conscious choices. This is why "male chauvinism" became less the focus of feminism, and "the patriarchy" became more the focus. The terms had to be shifted, because in order for Women's Studies people to have battles to fight, they had to stop looking for formal or informal policies of not promoting women, and instead begin pushing women to fill higher paid, more stressful, more miserable jobs that women were not going for in the right numbers.
Mr. Silber--among many, many others--recognizes that being President or Congressman involves "soul crushing compromise[s]", as well as the desire to wield terrible dark power and screw over the greater part of the human race. Selling your soul to become one of 130 Vice Presidents of some awful corporate empire is in many cases a sign of unhealth, rather than success.
If we're going to challenge the power structures that fuck over our world, should we also be simultaneously encouraging women to gain the same problems and awful expectations as men? Do we really want to improve society by making more women atrociously overpaid, coked-up, family-less, sharkishly greedly day traders or investment bankers?
These kinds of arguments represent a corporate and political co-option of equality, where "equality" is used as a weapon to goad ever greater numbers of lower castepersons into the grindery. Old fashioned chauvinism, for all its very real and terrible flaws, at least had embedded within it the idea that women should be protected from the most crushing hells the lords had to offer--dying for land and treasure, or working to death in the factory. Now, congratulations--feminism may yet give everyone the right to suffer and die for elites.
We should be extending the protections once expected for the "fairer sex" to everyone, rather than making things "fair" by allowing everyone to suffer equally.
(This type of divide-and-conquer technique works well in a different way against public school teachers. When rallying American conservatives against teachers, "charitable" assholes like Bill Gates, Mayor Bloomberg, and others make teacher "seniority" and "pensions" and "job security" divisive issues. Making regular waged workers jealous of seniority encourages them to attack teachers, reduce teacher salary and working conditions, and makes it easier for the Gates Foundation to fire the teachers, close the public schools, and replace them with a rotating schedule of private-sector employees operating under charter control. Instead of asking "how can we fuck over teachers to make it fair to the average working person?" we should be asking "how can we give the average working person the same protections as teachers?")
Same considerations as rape. How many guys want to let someone know that their wife/girlfriend hurt them? The expectation of being stronger, and in control, is always there--how naive to assume that the government will always give you accurate statistics about it.
There are a lot of statistics, and depending on the formal ones, they can cut more or less closely in "favor" (i.e., disfavor) of men receiving relationship abuse. Here's just one link for fun, but googling it would be far better: Women abusing men.
Ever been approached by a cop while out alone with a man? P.D. policies are often to separate the male from the female, and ask the female if she is there of her "own will." This question, and these policies, are not there for men. No one assumes that men will be victims, because men are always the aggressors. Right.
Yeah, because as a man, you can wear anything without eliciting comment. Woman wearing revealing clothes: slut. Man wearing revealing clothes or just presenting in the wrong manner: let's kill that faggot.
Chicks have it so much easier.
Guys don't have to worry about being killed for sexuality or expression.