I wish I was good enough at words to explain how any gender-based oppression MRAs claim they face is actually the result of living under a patriarchal system

seen from Singapore
seen from United States
seen from Russia

seen from Singapore

seen from Denmark
seen from Guatemala
seen from United States

seen from Singapore
seen from Hong Kong SAR China

seen from Italy
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Thailand
seen from Switzerland

seen from Singapore
seen from Poland
seen from United States
seen from Australia

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Russia
I wish I was good enough at words to explain how any gender-based oppression MRAs claim they face is actually the result of living under a patriarchal system
A preregistered meta-analysis, including 244 effect sizes from 85 field audits and 361,645 individual job applications, tested for gender bi
By: Michael Schaerer, et al.
Published: Nov 2023
Abstract
A preregistered meta-analysis, including 244 effect sizes from 85 field audits and 361,645 individual job applications, tested for gender bias in hiring practices in female-stereotypical and gender-balanced as well as male-stereotypical jobs from 1976 to 2020. A “red team” of independent experts was recruited to increase the rigor and robustness of our meta-analytic approach. A forecasting survey further examined whether laypeople (n = 499 nationally representative adults) and scientists (n = 312) could predict the results. Forecasters correctly anticipated reductions in discrimination against female candidates over time. However, both scientists and laypeople overestimated the continuation of bias against female candidates. Instead, selection bias in favor of male over female candidates was eliminated and, if anything, slightly reversed in sign starting in 2009 for mixed-gender and male-stereotypical jobs in our sample. Forecasters further failed to anticipate that discrimination against male candidates for stereotypically female jobs would remain stable across the decades.
--
As a meta-study, it's a study of studies, coming from the following locations.
==
So, the meta-study found systemic misandry.
Reminder: "the largest and most consistent evaluative bias [is] pro-women/anti-men bias," a "stable pro-women/anti-men and pro-upper-class/anti-lower-class bias across demographic groups," with "less consistent effects of targets' race, no effects of targets' age, and no consistent interactions between target-level categories."
Systemic Misandry Doesn’t Exist
One Story, Many Sides
Misantry: a comic.
Why do you hate men so much?: a tumblr post.
Misandry Exists: a tumblr post
http://chezapocalypse.com/shut-the-up-about-systemic-misandry/
I'm a Doctor Who fan, so I've been semi-following the hunt for the 12th Doctor. I knew that some fans were all for a woman Doctor, and some were vehemently against it...but I always thought the reason for all the nay-saying was canon related. Like, the Doctor can't be female because it's simply not possible for Gallifreyans to regenerate as a different sex. Etc. I found this editorial piece interesting because apparently some people (males) are against the switch because boys would no longer have any male role models.
Ummm....
But mostly it's against "systemic misandry" in general, which to be honest I wasn't really aware of. Makes me think I should do some more research. Or not, because it will probably just make me angry.