Indecision 2016 - In Soviet Russia, we elect american president!

Femme

If we would have seen the same amount of backlash and violence, why does it matter who they targeted?
[qimg]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/d5/a3/69/d5a3690f5a905349c5dac424ec9df9ba.jpg[/qimg]

Violence is condemned in any form, but if we are going to examine motives for violence, it does matter who is targeted and why. Also just defining now that "attacks" can be non-violent, like notes put in mailboxes, graffiti on personal property, and KKK marches.

If Trump supporters were attacked, they are attacked for their political views, not who they are.

If diverse Hillary supporters are attacked, it is because of the colour of their skin, what they believe in, or what gender they love.

Dairy Queen of Memes

I have to admit, Roboblue…that's a very fitting picture for lots of situations.

Monkey King

@Femme:

So basically I guess Americans have to answer this question:

What is more important?

The government respecting and supporting the dignity and safety of its entire population?

Or

The government putting more money into improving quality of life in terms of health care, jobs, and the country's economy?

We don't have to make any choice like that, what the heck. Where did this false dilemma come from?

–- Update From New Post Merge ---

@Dairy:

No one's political plans ever come to fruition because everything should come to a middle ground. This is what he has done for a living, negotations. We'll have to say what the rest of his legislation after talking. He's making cases that he's willing to talk to both sides about the issue and come to a reasonable conclusion.

We can go days arguing who's fault it is that Obamacare failed or where/when/how it started to poorly effect American people or helped American people. But plenty of people have only met more hardship in the wake of ACA and they ha their chance to make that heard. We'll have to see where this goes. At least he's allowing disccusion.

Imagine every word in here with the first letter repeating once with a dash in between.

RoboBlue

@Femme:

Violence is condemned in any form, but if we are going to examine motives for violence, it does matter who is targeted and why. Also just defining now that "attacks" can be non-violent, like notes put in mailboxes, graffiti on personal property, and KKK marches.

If Trump supporters were attacked, they are attacked for their political views, not who they are.

If diverse Hillary supporters are attacked, it is because of the colour of their skin, what they believe in, or what gender they love.

Political views are beliefs, and certain people are having their beliefs stereotyped and marginalized because of the color of their skin.

Even if more violence will come as a result of Trump's rise to power, were we really better off with someone who makes known terrible decisions that can and do lead to war?

Monkey King

@RoboBlue:

If we would have seen the same amount of backlash and violence, why does it matter who they targeted?
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/d5/a3/69/d5a3690f5a905349c5dac424ec9df9ba.jpg

Do you really need this explained to you? Or do you know the answer, but the elder god of false equivalency demands its sacrifice no matter the context.

RoboBlue

@Monkey:

Do you really need this explained to you? Or do you know the answer, but the elder god of false equivalency demands its sacrifice no matter the context.

Femme provided the false equivalency, I'm just taking advantage of it to win the argument.

Femme

@Monkey:

We don't have to make any choice like that, what the heck. Where did this false dilemma come from?

–- Update From New Post Merge ---

Imagine every word in here with the first letter repeating once with a dash in between.

Basically I made a simple summary of why trump supporters support trump and why others do not support trump. Trump supporters value money issues first over equality, non-trump supporters value equality first before money issues.

It's an impossible decision to make but it kinda highlights the clash of values between both groups.

Monkey King

@RoboBlue:

Political views are beliefs, and certain people are having their beliefs stereotyped and marginalized because of the color of their skin.

This is not fucking talking about "white people". Its referring to the Trump demographic white people who themselves see themselves as separate and threatened by changes going on and voted for Trump as a sort of nationalist move.
You're not actually listening or reading if you took this personally, or broadly.
And definitely don't know the meaning of the word "marginalized" whatsoever.
And are you seriously comparing this to stuff like strangers racially harassing people in the first place because goddamn that's tone deaf.
In a response to a Muslim girl of all people.

"YEAH ACTUALLY, ITS EXACTLY THE SAME WHEN A MAN ON TV SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT RACIAL MOTIVES OF TRUMP VOTERS AS WHEN PEOPLE SCREAM AT YOU IN THE STREET AND MAKE YOU FEEL PHYSICALLY INTIMIDATED".

Even if more violence will come as a result of Trump's rise to power, were we really better off with someone who makes known terrible decisions that can and do lead to war?

List specifically the decisions in this huge article that can and do lead to war that you are talking about.
And while doing so explain how this is relevant to a discussion that was domestic in nature, and how it isn't a forced change of topic.

RoboBlue

@Femme:

Basically I made a simple summary of why trump supporters support trump and why others do not support trump. Trump supporters value money issues first over equality, non-trump supporters value equality first before money issues.

It's an impossible decision to make but it kinda highlights the clash of values between both groups.

Basically, yes. It could also be said that the Democrats primarily value the advancement of minorities over actual equality, as opposed to Republicans who value the advancement of the rich (their voters) over actual equality. It's an important distinction to make, because while most groups traditionally considered minorities are perpetually being stepped on, there's a case to be made that in some ways men are being suppressed so that women can overtake them.

Femme

@RoboBlue:

Political views are beliefs, and certain people are having their beliefs stereotyped and marginalized because of the color of their skin.

Even if more violence will come as a result of Trump's rise to power, were we really better off with someone who makes known terrible decisions that can and do lead to war?

Political beliefs do not equal religious beliefs.

Monkey King

@RoboBlue:

Basically, yes. It could also be said that the Democrats primarily value the advancement of minorities over actual equality, as opposed to Republicans who value the advancement of the rich (their voters) over actual equality. It's an important distinction to make, because while most groups traditionally considered minorities are perpetually being stepped on, there's a case to be made that in some ways men are being suppressed so that women can overtake them.

You are not being suppressed so that women can overtake you.

Femme

@RoboBlue:

Basically, yes. It could also be said that the Democrats primarily value the advancement of minorities over actual equality, as opposed to Republicans who value the advancement of the rich (their voters) over actual equality.

I think since you're answering with pictures I'll slap this one down.

The advancement of minorities (shortest dude getting 2 boxes) is to help them gain the same rights as everyone else.

It's an important distinction to make, because while most groups traditionally considered minorities are perpetually being stepped on, there's a case to be made that in some ways men are being suppressed so that women can overtake them.

See picture above.

RoboBlue

@Monkey:

This is not fucking talking about "white people". Its referring to the Trump demographic white people who themselves see themselves as separate and threatened by changes going on and voted for Trump as a sort of nationalist move.
You're not actually listening or reading if you took this personally, or broadly.
And definitely don't know the meaning of the word "marginalized" whatsoever.
And are you seriously comparing this to stuff like strangers racially harassing people in the first place because goddamn that's tone deaf.
In a response to a Muslim girl of all people.

Yeah, how dare I bring up real problems that real people have when a member of a minority specifically asks about them. I should lie to her for her own good, because she's a Muslim. Patronizing people based on stereotypes should be the law after all.

@Monkey:

"YEAH ACTUALLY, ITS EXACTLY THE SAME WHEN A MAN ON TV SAYS SOMETHING ABOUT RACIAL MOTIVES OF TRUMP VOTERS AS WHEN PEOPLE SCREAM AT YOU IN THE STREET AND MAKE YOU FEEL PHYSICALLY INTIMIDATED".

I never said that, are you talking about someone else?

@Monkey:

List specifically the decisions in this huge article that can and do lead to war that you are talking about.
And while doing so explain how this is relevant to a discussion that was domestic in nature, and how it isn't a forced change of topic.

It's relevant because the question Femme asked was essentially "why did people support Trump?" The answer is basically "because Hillary had too many flaws and was doomed as a candidate."

The two obvious decisions are her support of the War on Terror and her plan to establish a no-fly zone in Syria.

Femme

It's okay guys, this is supposed to be a peaceful discussion. Let's not get heated, okay?

Bilbo Baggins

This entire thread

RoboBlue

@Monkey:

You are not being suppressed so that women can overtake you.

@Femme:

I think since you're answering with pictures I'll slap this one down.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/d0/40/01/d0400121ca0370b302c6abcf0e681e9e.jpg

The advancement of minorities (shortest dude getting 2 boxes) is to help them gain the same rights as everyone else.

See picture above.

Gender-based equity is the suppression of one gender for the benefit of another. In the case of minorities (many of whom could greatly benefit our society if given the chance), I'm fine with equity if it's properly applied as needed. Applying equity to an entire gender is a recipe for disaster though, as men and women exist in all walks of life at basically the same rate.

Femme

@RoboBlue:

Gender-based equity is the suppression of one gender for the benefit of another. In the case of minorities (many of whom could greatly benefit our society if given the chance), I'm fine with equity if it's properly applied as needed. Applying equity to an entire gender is a recipe for disaster though, as men and women exist in all walks of life at basically the same rate.

I don't understand. The issues surrounding women's rights in the election were about getting the same pay as men if they're doing the same job, and getting the right to choose to not stop their entire lives to have a baby they don't want. Men don't have to worry about getting the same pay as women or worry about carrying a growing child within their bodies.

Monkey King

@RoboBlue:

Yeah, how dare I bring up real problems that real people have when a member of a minority specifically asks about them.

A man on TV said something not about white people as a whole at all is not a real problem, and the attempt to pretend it is, is extra bad to a Muslim female yes.
It has nothing to do with anyone being a minority.
What you are doing here, and constantly doing all over the thread for some reason, is basically the same as constantly and very loudly bringing up getting stitches from a nasty cut, when people are discussing amputations and major surgeries. And in this particular case there aren't even actual stitches.
Aside from being out and out inaccurate in the forced balance, its irritatingly derailing and numbing of larger issues. When you're even bringing up an issue at all that is.
Honestly I wouldn't even care but for the incessantness of it. The discussion can never be started, because every time it turns into having to even establish the issue being notable in the first place.
Its nearly on the level of Russian whataboutism at points.

I don't think you mean to do this, I don't think its motivated by being a scumbag like Sakonosolo, or easily duped sweet summer child like Louis-1988 and Dairy Queen.
I think you're really overly nervous about the issue, which I'm not sure you would even need to be in upstate New York. And it constantly derails you in the first place, let alone the thread. You don't gotta let it do that. Nor is the alternative to turn into some self-hating flagellant SJW. That's comically unessacary, let alone stupid.
You may not believe me, but if actual such people as the cliche SJW turned up here, I'd likely end up ripping into them pretty bad. As once I did with what's her face.

Sakonosolo

@Monkey:

scumbag like Sakonosolo

This is why people don't like you. And actually it might be why people didn't like Hillary either :swanson: .

Femme

Yeah, Zephos. Please don't. We decided we're going to try to make this thread less toxic.

RoboBlue

@Femme:

I don't understand. The issues surrounding women's rights in the election were about getting the same pay as men if they're doing the same job, and getting the right to choose to not stop their entire lives to have a baby they don't want. Men don't have to worry about getting the same pay as women or worry about carrying a growing child within their bodies.

The wage gap is largely a myth. It has been against the law to pay a woman less than a man for decades, and these laws continue to serve their intended purpose.

Women currently do have the right to choose in America, and it would be extremely difficult for Trump to eliminate that. He and his Republican congress can make choosing more difficult for women by defunding planned parenthood, and I do feel that is a legitimate issue.

Jabberwok

Femme, people supported Trump because he claimed he would bring change, and they took the rejection and vitriol that the left, the conservative establishment, and that popular culture threw at him as evidence that he would bring change. People in rural areas and small towns felt disconnected from the nation that they see through media and thus voted for a person who constantly received criticism from that media. They felt left behind and so desperate for a representative of change that they were willing to overlook his myriad of flaws and dirty practices. Trump may have promised economic change, but so did basically every other candidate. It was his status as an unpolished outsider that convinced people to vote for him in both the primaries and the general election.

It helps that the pivotal region, the Midwest, is most insulated from racial diversity. So when Trump insulted Muslims, Latinos, and so on, they considered this a lower priority because they were less in contact with the people at risk. They do, however, frequently feel threatened by minorities for a variety of fallacious reasons. So basically racial, religious, LGBT, and gender equality were a lower priority because of lower exposure, and in some cases the hate speech against them was a plus (though likely viewed through the lense of standing up for the middle-class white person more than targeting minorities).

Dairy Queen of Memes

Trump in the past has been mostly neutral or pro birth control. He rather things get left up to the states to govern themselves on such issues. Likely he only picked up anti-BC to grow support among Republican or conservative supporters. Reasonable to believe that if he were shown that Planned Parenthood does more than just abortions, some good can come out of it. But such issues are taken up more by Congress than President.

RoboBlue

@Monkey:

A man on TV said something not about white people as a whole at all is not a real problem, and the attempt to pretend it is, is extra bad to a Muslim female yes.
It has nothing to do with anyone being a minority.
What you are doing here, and constantly doing all over the thread for some reason, is basically the same as constantly and very loudly bringing up getting stitches from a nasty cut, when people are discussing amputations and major surgeries. And in this particular case there aren't even actual stitches.
Aside from being out and out inaccurate in the forced balance, its irritatingly derailing and numbing of larger issues. When you're even bringing up an issue at all that is.
Honestly I wouldn't even care but for the incessantness of it. The discussion can never be started, because every time it turns into having to even establish the issue being notable in the first place.
Its nearly on the level of Russian whataboutism at points.

I don't think you mean to do this, I don't think its motivated by being a scumbag like Sakonosolo, or easily duped sweet summer child like Louis-1988 and Dairy Queen.
I think you're really overly nervous about the issue, which I'm not sure you would even need to be in upstate New York. And it constantly derails you in the first place, let alone the thread. You don't gotta let it do that. Nor is the alternative to turn into some self-hating flagellant SJW. That's comically unessacary, let alone stupid.
You may not believe me, but if actual such people as the cliche SJW turned up here, I'd likely end up ripping into them pretty bad. As once I did with what's her face.

I do believe that you're not an SJW, and I have to admit that I am a bit oversensitive about the issue as a result of some very unpleasant long-term interactions in other online and offline circles.

Femme

@RoboBlue:

The wage gap is largely a myth. It has been against the law to pay a woman less than a man for decades, and these laws continue to serve their intended purpose.

Women currently do have the right to choose in America, and it would be extremely difficult for Trump to eliminate that. He and his Republican congress can make choosing more difficult for women by defunding planned parenthood, and I do feel that is a legitimate issue.

I don't know enough about American jobs to talk about the wage gap, so I'll let other american ladies take that up if they want.

But do you feel that employers paying women more is a huge threat to men, even if there isn't a wage gap? Women have families too. More women are single mothers, as well. I don't really know of any job in which men have ever had to complain about not being paid as much as women. Is it the fact that this may change that is scary?

RoboBlue

@Femme:

I don't know enough about American jobs to talk about the wage gap, so I'll let other american ladies take that up if they want.

But do you feel that employers paying women more is a huge threat to men, even if there isn't a wage gap? Women have families too. More women are single mothers, as well. I don't really know of any job in which men have ever had to complain about not being paid as much as women. Is it the fact that this may change that is scary?

Not really, no. What I really object to is when misandrists bring up the wage gap to justify hatred of men, which unfortunately seems to happen quite a bit.

Femme

@Jabberwok:

Femme, people supported Trump because he claimed he would bring change, and they took the rejection and vitriol that the left, the conservative establishment, and that popular culture threw at him as evidence that he would bring change. People in rural areas and small towns felt disconnected from the nation that they see through media and thus voted for a person who constantly received criticism from that media. They felt left behind and so desperate for a representative of change that they were willing to overlook his myriad of flaws and dirty practices. Trump may have promised economic change, but so did basically every other candidate. It was his status as an unpolished outsider that convinced people to vote for him in both the primaries and the general election.

It helps that the pivotal region, the Midwest, is most insulated from racial diversity. So when Trump insulted Muslims, Latinos, and so on, they considered this a lower priority because they were less in contact with the people at risk. They do, however, frequently feel threatened by minorities for a variety of fallacious reasons. So basically racial, religious, LGBT, and gender equality were a lower priority because of lower exposure, and in some cases the hate speech against them was a plus (though likely viewed through the lense of standing up for the middle-class white person more than targeting minorities).

That makes sense. Thanks, Jabby.

@RoboBlue:

Not really, no. What I really object to is when misandrists bring up the wage gap to justify hatred of men, which unfortunately seems to happen quite a bit.

Women talking about hating men may be the wrong approach to take if they are frustrated by the wage gap, but that doesn't really change anything if women are being paid less. That issue still needs to be addressed, misandry or not.

RoboBlue

What can our government do to address the issue beyond existing anti-discrimination laws?

Femme

@RoboBlue:

What can our government do to address the issue beyond existing anti-discrimination laws?

Make them tougher, perhaps? But I really don't see how an issue like this can be brought to the presidential debate level if it was just a conspiracy. There must be some truth to it.

Jabberwok

@RoboBlue:

Not really, no. What I really object to is when misandrists bring up the wage gap to justify hatred of men, which unfortunately seems to happen quite a bit.

I don't think anyone here is doing that.

Even if men and women receive equal pay under the law, it's frequently not the case in practice. Some of this is due to employers actually looking to circumvent that. Most of it, however, is mostly due to a variety of societal expectations and pressures that result in women working lower-paying jobs and having their working potential limited by the expectations of being a mother. Women are more likely to go into lower paying fields in college than business or STEM fields. Women face pressure in the workplace to avoid treading on toes or seeming overly aggressive/ambitious, meaning that they're less likely to advocate for a raise or promotion. These are cultural issues that I hope you agree we should work to change.

As for concerns over abortions, Trump even letting states decide how to handle abortion rights, transgender bathrooms, and other things like that means that he's leaving the rights of thousands or millions of citizens up to frequently fundamentalist legislatures that are working to suppress those rights. It's the same reason that school integration was mandated by the federal government and not left to the states.

Dairy Queen of Memes

@Femme:

Make them tougher, perhaps? But I really don't see how an issue like this can be brought to the presidential debate level if it was just a conspiracy. There must be some truth to it.

The only thing remotely coming around to support a "wage gape" was some study that was proven to have done faulty researching. It only amassed income of all men subjects and all female subjects and compared them. IT didn't account for:

Part time or full time
Field of work
Wage rates of jobs
Acquirement of raises/credentials
Overtime
Hours worked per day (as well if weekends or holidays were worked)

And so forth. But because it showed that women were earning less than men, then clearly it meant that women were being paid less.

Jabberwok

@RoboBlue:

What can our government do to address the issue beyond existing anti-discrimination laws?

Paid parental leave, for one. For both parents too, preferably, which would help to tear down gender roles in parenting. Programs to promote the underrepresented in more lucrative fields, starting in middle school and high school where opinions about these fields are starting to emerge.

taboo

why are people actually analyzing why republicans voted republican

–- Update From New Post Merge ---

@RoboBlue:

Not really, no. What I really object to is when misandrists bring up the wage gap to justify hatred of men, which unfortunately seems to happen quite a bit.

yeah, you'd think talking about all the women that get raped and murdered by dudes every year would suffice

Sakonosolo

There are a lot of factors in why woman might work lower paying jobs, maybe partially because of discrimination from men in the field but also because just disinterest on the part of women in wanting to do those jobs. I can't see any way to make it equal without basically affirmative action or quotas, which I hate the idea of. I agree with having both maternal and paternal paid leave but I don't know how economically feasible that would be. If it can be done it would be nice though.

dirt monkey AL

Did any of you bother to read the study Robo's article is referring to?

It's a study on men and women year after graduation men who were in full time jobs. Men were making an average of $42,918, and women made an average of $35,296. They then separated it by sector. Women paid lower than men. Then by their majors. In 4 of the 9 majors, there was apparently little difference. In the other 5, there's still a gap between men and women's pay. None of those are in women's favor.

There's more graphs, but there's a trend going on there, and women are still what? Making less money? ABSURD.

The obvious conclusion is that by talking about how women make less is that I hate men. Obviously.

@Sakonosolo:

There are a lot of factors in why woman might work lower paying jobs, maybe partially because of discrimination from men in the field but also because just disinterest on the part of women in wanting to do those jobs. I can't see any way to make it equal without basically affirmative action or quotas, which I hate the idea of. I agree with having both maternal and paternal paid leave but I don't know how economically feasible that would be. If it can be done it would be nice though.

idunwannadothisjobiwashiredtodosoicanmakemoneyformeandmyfamilynope

Wait, no, what?

RoboBlue

@taboo:

why are people actually analyzing why republicans voted republican

–- Update From New Post Merge ---

yeah, you'd think talking about all the women that get raped and murdered by dudes every year would suffice

See, this is part of the problem. More men are raped in the US every year than women, and we should really do more about rapes by and of both genders.

taboo

@RoboBlue:

See, this is part of the problem. More men are raped in the US every year than women, and we should really do more about rapes by an d of both genders.

in prisons

Femme

@taboo:

why are people actually analyzing why republicans voted republican

Cuz the election is over and it's a good idea to understand the concerns of the other half of the country :P personally, I think that the result of Brexit and this election is absolutely possible in other countries like mine (there's already someone from the Conservative party who said in their campaign platform the other day that she would advocate for screening visitors, immigrants, and refugees for "Canadian Values"), especially since we're so close to you guys. So I want to understand the opposing viewpoint before it happens here, since it seems to be about the same thing everywhere.

RoboBlue

@Jabberwok:

Paid parental leave, for one. For both parents too, preferably, which would help to tear down gender roles in parenting. Programs to promote the underrepresented in more lucrative fields, starting in middle school and high school where opinions about these fields are starting to emerge.

I agree, we need this for both parents.

@taboo:

in prisons

Inside and outside prisons.

Sakonosolo

@dirt:

idunwannadothisjobiwashiredtodosoicanmakemoneyformeandmyfamilynope

Wait, no, what?

Well we're talking about areas of study too, like STEM, being anti-women, which may be true to some extent, but I have heard plenty of accounts (obviously not concrete evidence) of women dropping it for various reasons that aren't abuse on the part of the men in the same classes. People act like there are basically bouncers keeping women from doing STEM and other similar things or outright hate on the part of the men doing it but people are reluctant to say it could be the women just not being interested in pursuing that.

taboo

@RoboBlue:

Inside and outside prisons.

http://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publications_nsvrc_factsheet_media-packet_statistics-about-sexual-violence_0.pdf

RoboBlue

@taboo:

http://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publications_nsvrc_factsheet_media-packet_statistics-about-sexual-violence_0.pdf

That's a series of talking points, not actual evidence. The numbers are also off.

dirt monkey AL

It's almost like our prison system is shitty as fuck as well.

I've gotta assume that women aren't sneaking into prisons to rape men though.

@Sakonosolo:

Well we're talking about areas of study too, like STEM, being anti-women, which may be true to some extent, but I have heard plenty of accounts (obviously not concrete evidence) of women dropping it for various reasons that aren't abuse on the part of the men in the same classes. People act like there are basically bouncers keeping women from doing STEM and other similar things or outright hate on the part of the men doing it but people are reluctant to say it could be the women just not being interested in pursuing that.

I believe we're talking about a different issue all together then. I mistook it for you saying that women were being lazy orsomeshit.

What you're addressing is the almost silent nudge that happens throughout a woman's life where people go: "oh, hey, you're so good with babies/animals/disinfecting my heinous looking rash!" Or the constant, "boys are just so much better at math/science/cutting wood, huh?"

There is a sort of disinterest because we're almost told we shouldn't be without it being straight to our faces. Never mind the places of the world where it's still said.

@RoboBlue:

Inside and outside prisons.

According to your link, that applies only when prisons are taken into account. Your article ADMITS what taboo said. But again, these are prisons which are full of men. How many of these studies are including military accounts of rapes too? The men ratio would go up in that case as well as there are more men in the military.

Bilbo Baggins

Technology and the sciences don't appeal to women. They never have. The difference is that before nobody thought there was anything wrong with that but now every Internet keyboard warrior and allied goon has to screech and holler about it and demand "something must be done!"

RoboBlue

@dirt:

It's almost like our prison system is shitty as fuck as well.

I've gotta assume that women aren't sneaking into prisons to rape men though.

Yes, and the prison population is over 90% male. That raises some serious questions about the way we handle male criminals as opposed to female criminals.

Jabberwok

@Bilbo:

Technology and the sciences don't appeal to women. They never have. The difference is that before nobody thought there was anything wrong with that but now every Internet keyboard warrior and allied goon has to screech and holler about it and demand "something must be done!"

That's 100% bullshit. It's some of the same reasoning that people used to say that women didn't need education. It's simply a male cultural conceit.

Ubiq

How did we get from the election to members mansplaining to women why they're wrong about issues that concern women?

RoboBlue

@Bilbo:

Technology and the sciences don't appeal to women. They never have. The difference is that before nobody thought there was anything wrong with that but now every Internet keyboard warrior and allied goon has to screech and holler about it and demand "something must be done!"

Eh… I get your point, but you're being really rude about it.

Bilbo Baggins

@Jabberwok:

That's 100% bullshit. It's some of the same reasoning that people used to say that women didn't need education. It's simply a male cultural conceit.

STEM doesn't appeal to women which is why very few take it as their major.

RoboBlue

@Ubiq:

How did we get from the election to members mansplaining to women why they're wrong about issues that concern women?

These are issues that concern both genders.

On mansplaining: