Debate what?

How about this

Eh, not sure how to conduct a debate about that xD

Debate about what implications that observation has for society.

For starters I would disagree with the premise as I have seen women do that.

I'm against debates. Objections? :D

But even if it's "more true" what does it mean

@Men Are Human depends if I'm losing

Lol

Ok an actual topic with defined sides!

WOMEN HAVE IT WORSE

MAN MUST HUNT BIG DEER, MAN DO MORE WORK, MAN GET HIT BY SHARP SPEAR

MAN HAVE IT WORSE

Haha sorry about the caps I was just trying to have a formatted obvious title

Oh no lol, trying to parody this

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/62qy7h/cmv_fire_bad/

TRUE DEBATE

Truly intellectual

Man have many woes.

https://www.reddit.com/r/talesfromcavesupport

I feel derailed

New topic with a less divisive start

"should the drop in men's entry to university be corrected by affirmative action"

oh interesting

No

Affirmative action is an incredibly blunt instrument to correct systemic discrimination. Much of the drop to men's entry into university is the result of men's choices and is not systemic. Even the parts that are systemic tend not to properly fall under the definition of discrimination per se.

no, affirmative action should not exist, if you want to focus certain demographics you should encourage them in other ways, focusing programs in disadvantaged areas

Moreover, increasing men's entry into university would not be, on the whole, beneficial to men. The debt burden is a real issue with university education, and jobs gained via university training tend to be higher stress and lower life satisfaction

This effect would tend to be worse for people who don't naturally qualify for the slot

A more productive solution to the university gap would be gender focused literacy programs in elementary and high school, as well as other accommodations in elementary and high school designed to reward and benefit boys -- though this will likely never solve the gap in its entirety.

Not that solving the gap in its entirety should ever be a goal unto itself

Nope. Affirmative Action is partly how we got in this mess

@asparkofpyrokravte in the UK you have to remember the debt burden is no where near as bad as other countries. It's also forgiven after 50 years

The cost remains somewhat comparable

though taking a year off of school does indeed decrease debt burden

That's very interesting

Yeah the student loans in the UK are actually fair. You don't start paying it back until you're earning above a threshold.

It still gains interest but it's quite low

Canada has a similar system: https://www.ratehub.ca/blog/what-happens-to-your-credit-score-if-you-default-on-student-loans/

But with four-year schooling, it is still a massive risk to take at the beginning of adult life

So the debt burden is unchanged, it is just less unfair than, say, the US

Also our interest on student loans may very well be cheaper than UK

..

https://www.statista.com/statistics/376423/student-loans-england-average-debt-on-entry-to-repayment-timeline/

Woah, perhaps the debt burden in the UK isn't actually that good

..

And unlike Canada, you can't really escape your student debt if it turns out to be crushing you financially (other than bankruptcy) since it is a payroll deduction: the standard way of collecting student loans back in Britain is through the payroll. So, basically, anyone who's not self-employed never actually writes a cheque to the student loan company – the money just comes off their pay packet, a bit like income tax, before they ever see it

Though unlike the US, the UK does allow bankruptcy to affect student loans.

It's like £40 a month probably less than. It changes depending what you earn. It's not really making the difference imo

For what I earn which is 2/3 of fuck all

Hrm, so instead of making students choose between loan repayments and rent, the UK just shackles students to debt for life by allowing sub-interest minimum payments?

Not sure how I feel about that

Yup.

I don't pay attention to it. Most my friends don't either

As you say it's just like extra tax

It discourages bankruptcy, but actually puts people into an even worse financial situation

I think...I actually don't like that at all

I suppose technically you can still make retirement savings, and the debt goes away at age 50 regardless

So...it might not be that bad?

I suppose that age 50 thing really is the saving grace of the whole system

So you just make minimum payments on the student debt until you retire

Exactly. The majority of the risk is taken by the government. It doesn't really effect your credit score as long as it's being paid

But I haven't checked that lately

Huh, that's kinda janky. 40 pounds a month for life though depending on what you earn

That's what I pay

I mean, it is less life-interrupting than any of the alternatives

I don't know about others

So, basically if you judge that you are going to repay the loan before age 50, you pay above minimum payment to prevent the interest from gouging you

but if not, you just end up essentially paying someone else's phone bill

I suppose that is preferable to a bankruptcy situation for everyone involved, though owing a large debt while still saving for retirement seems hella janky

@asparkofpyrokravte idk if you know this but college is free in the UK (as long as you are the right age), the loans only apply to uni

...But 40(pounds)\*12(months)\*30(years) is only 14.5k

Wow

Actually it would appear im not paying anything back at all as I don't earn enough. :/

I used to pay 40 when I earnt 22500

That really is the government betting on you getting a highish paying job

My loan is only like 22000

Yup. There losing that bet atm

@InsaneCaterpilla I did not know this. Interesting

So the UK really is doing the whole socialized post-secondary education

Given that I suppose I am a tad surprised the UK male rate of university attendance is still only low-40s%

Though that depends on the difference of utility between college and university

But anyway

Back to the debate.

Losing men at university does mean losing men in important fields that require a degree to enter. Like stem and medicine.

Only if those particular fields have declined

Attendance of uni /=/ attendance of specific degree

Medicine definitely counts then

I don't think it really does there, James. Remember that with affirmative action we're talking about people who are barely capable of entering the fields in the first place

Many university degrees do not find employment in their degree

these things are not unrelated

But if we're to go but oppression logic

They have the ability not the opportunity or the right background

The background being as men they were never given all the "women in stem* days

One of the keys behind the oppression logic is that they do in fact have the capability, but discrimination is stopping them. That claim couldn't really be made for affirmative action for women, and certainly not for men

Because even if the problem was systemic (some of it, much of it isn't), it isn't a matter of discrimination

And therefore affirmative action has no real power to fix it

You forget that the other half of oppression logic acknowledges that even if the selection isn't discriminatory it doesn't mean the sum of all of the differences leading up to it don't need to be righted

I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here

Right, there is that half, but that half doesn't lend itself to affirmative action