Man here. It took me a lot of therapy and help to understand that my (or someone’s) suffering doesn’t mean less just because there are a lot of others who are suffering more.

I used to say crap like this too, if someone said ‘X group of people have this problem’. I’d be like ‘but Y has the same problem but to higher extent’. I didn’t say it out of malice, at least I don’t think so. lt was natural to think ‘how can you be complaning about X when Y has the same problem but more’. Maybe I just believed that first you address the problem with bigger statistical number, then we do the smaller one after that and so on, but I dont know. I know now, that is a shitty way to think about things.

I guess it has something to do with how I was raised, ‘your problems aren’t that great, there are people with bigger problems and in comparison your life is a luxury. So chin up and carry on’. And I lived by it and parroted the same rhetoric for a long time. I believe most people (men?) do the same not out of malice but because of this shitty view of life and the world, because how they were raised, because how people told them how their problem can be ignored because someone else has a bigger problem. and they don’t know any better. At least I didn’t for a long time.

It’s just All Lives Matter again isn’t it? They don’t care, they just want you to stop talking about it.

I think it’s partially due to the relatively small population and quantity of posts. Anecdotally, I never browsed r/all, but that’s my primary mode on Lemmy. I usually don’t notice the community a post belongs to unless someone brings it up.

Maybe that will change with time.

So just to clarify, when you start talking about a subject, you don’t want us to chip in with anything relevant. OK, got it.

And I think it’s rather sexist of you to assume we’re always thinking about football. If we assumed you were always thinking of housework we’d be it some right hot water.

Anyone corrected her grammar to whom* yet?

That 1 gorilla

Female bears with no cubs to protect, practically docile.

Came to say spiders.

Unless women learn to bring them outside and release them on the lawn… Then Im fucked.

Women could clone each other. Also ‘no men’ probably doesn’t exclude all people capable of providing sperm. So I think if they were to mysteriously disappear we’d be ok.

The percentage of lesbians would only increase by about 50% though.

Seriously though, so many people have been spouting numbers here and I don’t believe half of them. (Though I could probably go through the effort of checking myself, but really this is a place where I like to hang around and chat) Saying things like ‘can’t deny’ should imply that it’s quite obvious or has an irefutable source or reasoning behind it. But to me none of those fit here.

Sorry I got a bit complainy about things.

Well I guess it is a good thing that married lesbian couples account for less that 1% of all marriages. And that violence against women isn’t only in cases of spousal abuse. An interesting bit of information, do you have any that relate to this post?

Aside from these not being representative of the populations, do you have a source?

Naw. Wolves don’t attack people.

I was thinking about this like, right now, jar lids are in our favor.

But if men didn’t exist to invent jar lids that require upper body strength and strong wrists to open, how will they be shaped?;

Then humanity would have been extinct from the beginning. Women can’t reproduce by fucking themselves or other women.