What have I just walked into

I always missed the Pokémon thing.

Oh nice

Truly would be the final solution.

But in all seriousness I think more organisations need to come out as specifically MRA. The few that exist ATM try to ignore the label

It takes people actually caring and not minimising the issues.

I know Feminists blame MRAs with our whataboutisms but they still reign supreme at that. Or they just blame it on men and continue to ignore it

Let's face it we know they mean men

I try and not focus on any particular group standing in the way. Because you can always go back and forth blaming Feminism or men.

I think straight up advocating specifically issue to issue long run is the way to go.

When anyone (Feminists) oppose it they are the one that look like arse holes.

Oh the Letter writing thing sounds like a good idea

MPs might be a start.

I know it's kind of a stretch but if people start actually voicing concerns to the people who can make a change more votes might happen

Oo yeah

I don't know. I heard it's scheduled late on a really busy day so it may not even be gotten to.

It was supposedly set for the 23rd but I can't find any record of it happening

Oh local MPs are the way to go. They have to take your interest to heart as a constituent. Fortunately for me it's both a conservative and a woman. So maybe there might be both rationality and woman points instead of a labour dismissal.

Which is unfortunate considering I would generally consider my self more left wing.

According to Phillip DeFranco the types of cam girls and Snapchat girls do have to pay taxes. If they aren't keeping a track of those earnings they're going to find themselves in trouble.

Cam girls and twitch streamers probably aren't that stupid. But I wouldn't put it past the odd Snapchat girl sending nudes to college frats.

As for prostitution. It's illegal anyway. The government don't collect taxes on drug money either, unless it's laundered.

No but it looks insane if it's accurate

The article keeps using the dichotomy of what the child does when he's with Mom or what he does when he's with Dad. Nobody has independently talked to the child on their own. Or observed him in a neutral environ

Environment

So depending on the situation I could see the use of the laws. Protecting a real transgender child from an abusive parent.

The issue comes from the family court bias against him as a father and nobody is willing to assess whether the mother is being vindictive

This is why a 3rd party evaluation should be the first go to

Without it is an explicit example of taking the mother's side over there father with no evidence other than what the mother has presented.

The issue being is I've seen that happen

Well the article makes it quite clear that there are strict criteria to diagnose gender dysphoria.

The problem here is the fact that there is conflicting evidence. Not whether or not the diagnoses exists in a wider context.

This is just completely ignoring the father which is A HUGE issue

I think it's stronger than that

But that being said I don't doubt that "progressive" parents may be too quick to jump on it

That's the point. Good or bad

Truly. And the fact it's all court sanctioned and nobody that is in charge bats an eye.

Eye roll*

Is there any word on what the "fix" might be?

Ciao

Yes teaching bias. I don't have the article though.

Why is @InsaneCaterpilla baby talking? I don't know if it's off putting or turning me on.

The studies need to be carried out first. You can't point at studies that don't exist yet.

That's just a recipe for jynxing it

Also papers don't always end the way they began so citing a title for something that might be slightly different could be confusing

Oh they often do.

But they won't give specifics

Oh yeah so reading it it looks like they offer policy advice. So my guess is there's no money for the study.

Doesn't mean a little pressure on the right people won't keep it in the public eye 😏

Indeed 🙁

Still. Ever the optimist

It's how they get ya

Can I get free money if I say in a girl

I think you can no longer discriminate on the UK for car insurance but I might be wrong. @SilasPsy

It may have just been a thing about a company called Sheila's Wheels that tried to give out cheap insurance to only women.

They may have just got in trouble over the latter

Righto

Ooo I see. But considering men drive more and rates are calculated off of that as well it may just be that

They are probably

It's an average remember

Indeed

But just because you remove sex from the equation didn't mean that on average men still won't pay more due to other factors like "commuting" which bumps it up and "miles driven"

It's just the wage gap thing again

In the USA is different

I've not looked at the actual calculation used so if I'm wrong I'm happy to be

Really? I pay like £300 including breakdown coverage. For the year

Reading the article

""For motor insurance, factors such as the type of car, number of miles driven, driving record and claims experience will all impact on the cost of cover," he explained. "Men and women are likely to drive different types of vehicle, do different mileage, and these variations, not gender pricing, will reflect in premiums."

Like I said it looks like a wage gap comparison. Men just drive more under more risky conditions

Well that's just the argument feminists use to claim a wage gap.

"Women are expected to stay at home"

Men choose to work those jobs and men choose to drive fast cars. I pay 300 because I drive a small car and work a low risk job with minimal commute.

If we're ok with one we should be ok with the other.

Any way I need to get back to fact checking people at work haha.

If you go into a driving profession insurance is part of those costs. Anybody with any sense would factor those costs in. It's part of the reason men earn more.

We can restart this later but I have a bunch of stuff to check at work. I respectfully disagree though.

@Men Are Human sold insurance apparently tough

Men don't get sexist remarks made towards them.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/a1apxa/after_a_lifetime_of_involvement_in_male_dominated/?utm_source=reddit-android

I saw this story and I was like wow. You've managed to be in an manly environment and not feel demeaned until NOW?

I regularly have stupid things said to me in my sport or listen to the women at work say sexist bullshit

Haha I'm not saying it wasn't

Bearing in mind that all the people at my work are above me bar one guy who started Monday

Guys being raped by women is an obvious one.

Maybe it's like discrimination based on a skill or trait like strength. I guess you could call it unbiased but technically leads to a group of people being far less likely to be selected

I was/am in a discord with him.

I'm not suoer actuve with it anymore

He's a little "off". Hyper paranoid sometimes but he's generally ok.

Why's he on an FBI watch list?

Although TBF when @PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS did dox us all I can't blame him.

Still not cool PM but I forgive you

@PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS did a while ago while in a Twitter argument. Only first and last names of the 4 of us at the time so not a big deal as I dont hide my first name but it was definitely a lapse in judgment.

Blueorange22 freaked out though and started going off on some spiral about @PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS being an infiltrator trying to wreck things from the insode and work for Feminists

@Men Are Human no not you. Just me and the guys who have access to the MRA Central Twitter

He was trying to prove it wasn't just him on the account.

So they asked for names and like a muffin he gave them

For me it's not a huge issue as I've shown my face in public at events and I've got nothing to hide. In very open with my views even though I work with all women.

But for the others I could understand there's a worry.

The fact that the woman ended up homeless didn't play into her equation then

I've never understood the reason behind intersectionality. It's just humanism with an agenda to shut people up.

It just causes division

It's essentially a way of telling white people to back off as [insert whatever group here] has it worse and it will have that effect until everyone is a victim of someone else so as to not be the oppressors of another.

Where are you based? @Dan da Dad

Just country and jurisdiction as there may be groups in your area

I'm pretty sure that's what this place is for

@InsaneCaterpilla I suffer with ideation very frequently but i don't think legalising it would make me want to do it any more or less. For me it's more about the current dread and weight of life. Some days I'm ok some days it's just a constant level of hopelessness, dread and regret. I think opting out would still feel as shameful. Although part of me wonders if there were "suicide pods" or whatever maybe there would be enough change in the conversation.

That being said i agree with a right to sue for the terminally ill but i think it shouldn't be extended to mental health

Well half the time I have "flashes" that I can't control where I watch myself do it. But other days it's more voluntary to think about.

That's fair. I know there are definitely arguments for it but I think that's a Pandoras box is rather not open. I just focus on silly things like survival skills and prepping. It's a good way to remind yourself that you actually do want to live. Plus zombies are a never ending genre

Did you see the video of the woman at dignitas?

She's a hilarious old lady who just ate a bunch of chocolate as she fell asleep

Hmm. That i don't know

Maybe not a mental disorder but definitely a lack of coping strategies

Which shouldn't just make suicide a viable option

I didn't say life is good. It's definitely not easy. That doesn't mean you can't cope or find strategies for coping

My argument assumes life is unknown. You can't know it's going to be good but you can't know it's going to be bad either

Doesn't mean it can't be turned around

That's basically mine too.

Also cows flying to the moon is awesome and I want to stick around to see it