109
Women's rights vary
(piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2025
109 points (91.6% liked)
Political Memes
10148 readers
963 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is just blatantly false, men's rights do vary wildly state by state. I get what this is saying and I agree with the message but presenting a good message behind a lie doesn't make it any less of a lie.
I am also very supportive of women's rights but lying is not helpful.
Honestly the point that it tries to make is not the point that it makes either. It could be understood as "let's ban abortion everywhere", and I don't think that is the point that it tries to make.
I am in favor of bodily autonomy and I don't care what the law currently is anywhere, it should be a given.
Worth knowing: although they attract a lot of anti-feminist losers, the "men's rights" activists are absolutely correct that men do not universally have the same support programs or even legal presumptions that women do. These can vary widely from state to state and even from court to court.
It's not nearly as big an issue as "they want her to die from a miscarriage", but "they presume he's the inferior parent" or "they presume he caused the violence even if he's the one bleeding" are also sexist oppression.
(Comparisons to the anti-woke "all lives matter" bullshit are apt -- men can and should recognize that relatively minor slights and injustices are not nearly as urgent as denying pregnant humans life-saving care!)
To be fair, the vast majority of these are societal standards and not rights, they are still absolutely important and we need to do more for equality both for women and for men, but strictly speaking they are not by definition rights.
But I am in agreement with you that I think a lot of why the younger generation are being pulled in the wrong direction is because men, of which I am one, have not done enough to create an environment that addresses issues that primarily affects men in a way that is not based on misogyny.
Don't get me wrong, the alt-right have absolutely tried to exacerbate these issues (either knowingly or unknowingly) and use them for their own gains, but we as a society have also not prioritized emotionally healthy solutions and that has led us to where we are.
I think we have a right to be judged fairly and not because of our gender or sex. But that's a semantic point and I don't want to quibble.
I do want to push back on excusing from women their responsibility for the society we live in, however. (Or just underline an implied point we may both share.)
Nearly every man I know values the opinions of women at least as much as those of other men. When a boy sees his mom belittle his father for being insufficiently manly, he hears a lesson that sexism is bad. When a man tells a boy that the way to get a girlfriend is to be a sexist jerk the boy listens, not because he cares about the con artist, but because he's desperate for a girl who cares about him.
Men have a lot of the big levers of power, and do bear a proportionate share of our own blame, but we shouldn't excuse women who use the power they have in ways that make our society worse.
We're all in this together, and all need to do what we can to make the world we pass to our children better than the one our parents passed on to us.
if they assume he's the inferior parent, why do the men win custody almost every fucking time they try, whereas the woman involved gets the kid dumped on her, completely, with no child support orders unless she fights for them, anytime the guy doesn't want anything to do with the kid he knocked her up with?
I know where you're getting this from. Just so you know, it comes from a deliberately misleading interpretation of "winning custody", where if a man seeks any amount of custody, and is granted anything more than nothing at all, it's 'counted' by those spreading this propaganda, a "win". This is as opposed to what any reasonable person would call a "win", which is when one gets at least as much custody as one seeks. That's like calling me a "lottery winner" because I won $5 after spending $1000 on tickets, lol.
If the mother of my child is abusive and I try to get full custody, but the judge gives me every other week supervised visitation, that is obviously not a "win", but it is, by the definition of the misandrists who propagated that particular piece of bullshit around.
Men winning custody? Surely you jest
I would agree and disagree.
You are right but I think "ignoring" "men's issues" harms the feministic cause and consequently the "dying of miscarriage" problem. As sad as it is PR is sometimes very important and e.g. the lie in the post doesn't help the PR and a lot of young men don't feel supported but attacked by the current framing of feminism.
I think we agree and agree.
I was careful not to use the word "ignore", because the answer to anyone sharing how they were harmed by sexism should never be anything less than "that's horrible and I hate that it happened to you."
Sexist women who claim to be "feminist" and yet feel free to denigrate men or dismiss their perspective are terrible advocates for the cause.
(Not "their" cause, because sexism is an evil that harms everyone and everyone should be against it.)
(And sealions who claim to be "men's rights activists" but just want to be sexist anti-feminist trolls are at least as bad.)
The irony is that the issue they're talking about involves women losing, in some states, rights that men have never had in any state; men have zero legal means of opting out of parenthood, full stop.
If this was about women losing something that men aren't already without, they might have the foundation of a point. But it's still a fact that women haven't really given a shit about advocating for giving men the equivalent rights, throughout the decades that they had them nationwide.
There is quite a big difference between parenthood + possible life threatening situation + all the "normal" changes that are part of pregnancy; and parenthood.
If it would be purely about parenthood, you would have a point but it is not. And maybe a conversation about the ability to opt-out of parenthood should be had but the conversation about abortion rights is not about parenthood.
I strongly encourage you to inform yourself about the consequence of the recent changes of abortion rights in America. It is not about parenthood, but health care.
Agreed, this message makes a valid point with good intentions, but it will likely face harsh criticism from misogynists - without actually achieving anything meaningful.
Why do you think it's not possible to both acknowledge that women have it worse and also that there are things they negatively impact men as well? They're not mutually exclusive.
Trying to fix men's problems doesn't mean women don't have problems or the shouldn't be fixed. Oppression Olympics aren't productive for anyone.
This will also face criticism of normal people, and that kind of is the point.
If you put up messages like these, then automatically call valid criticism mysogenistic, then you can't call yourself the good guy/gal anymore
This is like politicians making some bullshit argument about protecting kids from abuse and anyone trying to give criticism automatically is in the "are you a pedophile, then?" camp.
If you have an argument to make, make a valid one and keep your auto judgement system off.
I'm not American, can you say what those rights are?
I think they're being a "technically Andy" and saying that different states have different laws for everyone.
The original post is clearly talking about laws that apply specifically to those assigned female at birth. So the comment your replying to is just purposely ignoring that. It happens all the time to liberals that are more concerned with being "correct" than actually just.
Now, trans men's rights DEFINITELY vary state to state. But I highly doubt that's what they were talking about.
The only other possible thing I could think of would be how divorce and child support is handled state by state (which is just another thing pushed by the right wing politicians). Maybe some obscure differences between access to TRT? But, again, it's just a comment that is giving no context to the original post and then just ignoring the fact that there is no law towards men, and their rights to their bodies, that is anywhere near what abortion laws control. (Again, excluding trans men. But if the comment you replied to cared about that they would have mentioned it.)
Clearly the original post isn't debating about how it's unfair that in Kentucky the passengers in cars can drink alcohol but in other states they can't. It's not a law about gender/sex. The top comment in this thread is just critizing the original post in bad faith for no real reason but being "technically correct". And for some reason it's being up voted without mentioning literally any law comparable on the level of anti abortion laws.
I'm welcome to be proven wrong. But, seriously, there is a reason they didn't mention a specific law targeting men in certain states.
if you're going to be pedantic then you're sort of right. however, no state bans men from potentially life saving medical procedures when you need them.
Yes they do? There are all kinds of potentially life saving procedures that are illegal in various jurisdictions. There's no state with a blanket ban that says women can't get medical care. (Yet? Ugh.). And generally, abortions you're referring to are equally illegal for men and women when they are banned. OPs post is intentionally and pointlessly divisive, badly tainting their message by basing it on a clear lie
Um... so, first and foremost, I know trans people exist, however, I'm not sure how many men are rushing to get an abortion...
Does the number matter? This should be about equal rights for all people regardless of race gender, sex, genetic make-up, age, or governing body. Feminism is for everyone. Treating men like feminism is not for them keeps men from backing feminist causes.
Feminism being misandrist and transphobic is what keeps men from backing feminist causes
Absolutely, but some laws can specifically impact the needs of a particular gender, historically pretty much always women. Treating everyone completely equal in cases like these tends to marginalize groups of people, which is why equity is more important than equality.
Ugh. I mean shit guy really? Making the argument that it's equally illegal for a man to get an abortion as a woman therefore it's not different is the stupidest fucking argument I've ever seen in my life.
Still not as stupid as trying to say OPs post is true
Men can and do get pregnant and can and do need abortions.
The comment that was using this as justification isn't talking about trans men. Its just arguing in bad faith.
Which state is it illegal to get a vasectomy?
The post does not specify reproductive rights, it just says rights.
As far as I know none. But barriers to being able to get one is wildly different. I know in New York, there's a 30 day waiting period after having a consultation with the dr before they are allowed to operate.
Is a life-saving emergency vasectomy a thing? I feel like this whole comment section is just incapable of understanding the degree of the law being discussed and the impact on an individuals life.
Like, it would be unfair if in California men were not allowed to jwalk but women were. Kind of odd. But, like, what the fuck are we even talking about if we're comparing that to something on the level of a often life saving medical procedure?
I'm autistic. But this comment section is making me feel neuro-typical for how incredibly hyperfocused it is on trying to act like the OOP is "technically wrong". And the best example I can find talking about cis men is your comment. I gotta be missing something. Are people really saying there is some law comparable to anti abortion laws that target cis men? I really hope it's not a 30 day waiting period for a vasectomy when the same thing probably applies for non medically necessary hysterectomys as well. Seriously, did you even look up the laws on hysterectomys in the the same state? Because that's a much more risky procedure that likely has even more restrictions.
Wow u really gottem
It seems like the same people that get mad about black lives matter, screaming white lives matter are here.
The message "black lives matter" was intentionally amplified to sow dissent along racial lines.
If someone posted "white women's rights don't vary state by state, but black women's do", they would rightfully be called out for posting nonsense. But you'd be there saying "no but black women have it worse tho" That's the equivalent. It's a clearly false statement intended to make one group an enemy instead of an ally and you shouldn't be defending it so blindly
Spicy analogy but valid
No, this is very different than that. This is about supporting one group without intentionally putting down another.
Women have a long history of having less rights than men.
When did they allow women to start voting? That is just one example
First, sorry, but it's fewer rights, not less rights, since it's countable.
Second, sure, that's true. That's not what this is about though. There's no reference above to which group is more privileged. It's only talking about the fact that, in some places, the rights of men (and all people) do differ. I'm sure you can recognize this is true, right? Some states protect (or, rather, don't infringe on) some rights more than others, for all people, right? If you agree then the statement of the OP is definitively untrue, and the comment above is accurate.
Does anyone in this thread disagree with that? I haven’t seen a single example.
Y'all always tell on yourselves lol
They didn't say it was that right specifically
No they are comparing men's rights to women's.
Women's rights to life saving medical care (abortion) is being denied.
That is true, but it doesn't mean the person you originally replied to is wrong. What they said is also true. Presenting what you did as a counterargument makes no sense.
Which state is it illegal to get a tubal ligation?
Well I don't know, but have you had six separate $150+ appointments with your doc who asks you questions ranging from "well what does your boyfriend of two weeks want" to "are you really sure?" to "we're going to have to ask you attend this six week course on why it's important to produce a legacy before we can sign off on this. Then we'll see what your insurance has to say"
Which states is abortion, a life saving medical procedure illegal?
Sorry, I don't have a direct men's version of this.
Texas has been murdering people over it.
I don't know.
Which world is a vasectomy and tubal ligation the same as an abortion? Because that was the comment that I responded to.