I will never understand this mindset

It is very much a problem that you seem unaware of. I never stated anyone is coming for me. That is you projecting yourself onto me

@Michael B it's very much not a problem, and I'm very much aware of the red pill community that thinks it is. Jordan Peterson, Elon Musk, weird skull guy who just got arrested. Guys who sell division and promote an incel mindset. It's not real.

@Will ok, you don't even know what I'm referring to. I'm not referencing something Peterson, Elon etc said. I also now know you are baised. Peterson for example sells being responsible for yourself, Elon. He bought twitter, he makes funny memes. He wants to put implants in peoples brains. I don't care. I can pull very easy examples off the too of my head if the unlining problem I'm referring to. varying from passive to extreme examples. Here's an easy one from Allie Stuckey, the whole concept of "toxic masculinity" this idea is part of the mindset I was referring to in the first place. https://youtu.be/U-kxdyJs6y8

@Michael B hahaha Prager U. Oh boy. You'll grow out of it once you meet a real person in the real world. Or you'll end up a mass shooter.

@Will i specifically stated Allie Stuckey. Listen to her. You're projecting again claiming I may end up a mass shooter. If you're that insecure about the ideas and opinions of others, that's a problem for you to deal with.

It is a thing, it always has been. I mean not the atitude of woman in the example, but men being disposable. Our societies were always focused in protecting women and children. We save women - sacrifice men. That's how it supposed to be, but men used to have some respect for it - now same thing but hate, disrespect as a reward. If you think we don't need or not doing it anymore - look at the job death rates by gender. Or job related injuries. Women don't do hardest jobs - men still are braking their bodies, dying for everyone else.

@Michael B did you just learn about the concept of "projection" recently? You're not using it correctly. Comparing you and your dumb ideas to the actions of other people who have the same dumb ideas isn't me projecting, it's a "false equivalence."

@Will you've made assumptions about me based on you're views, you are definitely projecting you're bais onto me. I am using it correctly.

@Michael B I've made sarcastic remarks about you based on others who have said what you said and listened to what you listen to. I don't really think you're going to kill people, if I did I wouldn't be talking to you about it.

@Will ah, understanding sarcasm through text is difficult. I take back some of what I said. Really most of the issues I refer to aren't talked about, they are at most hinted at or ignored. Earl Sliverman for example, he is not widely known nor what he went through in trying to create a shelter for male abuse victims. That is something that is very rarely discussed. The idea that a man can be abused in such a way is often mocked and the man in question laughed at and not taken seriously.

@Michael B the part about male abuse victims was true for a long time, but part of 4th wave feminism (if you ignore the example of the idiot in your op) is bringing to light the way men are forced into roles of toxicity. Men expressing "soft" emotions, being open about rape and abuse, and other things I can't think of at the moment cause it's 10pm will, in theory, close the gender divide and make it so there can be more open dialog as to what people need as a whole. I volunteered with a charity for a minute for men who were a victim of rape as children because of a friend. Nobody looked down on them. They were able to find support with each other. It was really hard to watch, but it was really moving watching them be able to tell their story and through that be able to heal. The world needs more of that for men.

@Will I'd actually be suprised if an organization to help male victims instead mocked and ignored them. I do know outside of that organization those ideals aren't widely accepted. There's always going to be a gender divide as that's just nature itself and can't be helped. In the eyes of the law though it should be true equality but that just isn't the case in more then a few areas, family courts being a particularly nasty example of a gender divide that shouldn't exist in law. Far as the op post goes. While the particular example might be made up, I've interacted with and spoken to people who share similar mindsets so I'm at least familiar with that way of thinking even though it's logic is beyond me.

@Michael B Like any social change it's a slow process. But hey, when I was a kid the idea of gays marrying and a black president were crazy. And I'm not even 35. The internet is pushing us along a lot faster than I thought we'd go, and imo is why there's so much division. Gotta be huge whiplash for the people who kinda settled in before the at home pc was a thing. As for the courts, you're right there. But the law has never been equal. It's there to protect those in power. In the eyes of the old man law makers that means the stable family is a child raised by the mother. Once the current crop of political dinosaurs die off I hope we see some change to the legal structure in this country from a lot of angles.

@Will the internet is a blessing but also a curse. You have the complete history of everything humanity knows at you're fingertips but with that comes it's worst aspects and, history doesn't repeat but it does rhyme. The law makers don't really change and generation to generation the political divide has only gotten worse. The change or course correction of that is slow but easily corrupted. The United States as I see has been deeply corrupt for years and we have strayed far from our founding values. That being the constitution and our republic government structure. Imo the federal level obtained way to much power and has been out of control for a long time. I'd be an favor of a restructuring under a convention of states in order to return to those founding values and weed out much of the corruption. The constitution is meant to restrict the power of government but it hasn't actually be enforced in such a way for a long time.