u/Both_Relationship_62

When I saw posts or comments like these, I've been saving them to a separate folder in my bookmarks, and now I've decided to make a compilation to show that hate speech against men causes real harm.

Sources of screenshots — in comments.

When I saw posts or comments like these, I've been saving them to a separate folder in my bookmarks, and now I've decided to make a compilation to show that hate speech against men causes real harm.

Sources of screenshots — in comments.

When I saw posts or comments like these, I've been saving them to a separate folder in my bookmarks, and now I've decided to make a compilation to show that hate speech against men causes real harm.

Sources of screenshots — in comments.

>Згідно з результатами опитування, майже половина опитаних (47%) не погоджується з тим, що нинішні правила є несправедливими, оскільки жінок звільнено від військової служби, а обмеження на виїзд за кордон під час війни стосуються лише чоловіків. З них 23% повністю не згодні з таким твердженням, а 24% – скоріше не згодні.

>Водночас 34% респондентів вважають такий підхід несправедливим і підтримують рівність прав та обов’язків чоловіків і жінок: 16% повністю погоджуються з цим, а 18% – скоріше погоджуються. Ще 19% опитаних не змогли визначитися з відповіддю.

>За статтю результати демонструють помітні відмінності. Чоловіки частіше погоджуються з тим, що існуючі обмеження лише для них є несправедливими: сумарно 43% чоловіків підтримують рівність обов’язків (22% повністю та 21% скоріше згодні), тоді як 41% виступають проти.

>Серед жінок переважає незгода з такою тезою – 51% вважають звільнення жінок від служби та обмежень справедливим (25% повністю не згодні та 26% скоріше не згодні). Підтримують рівність обов’язків 26% жінок, а 23% вагаються з відповіддю.

>Віковий аналіз показав, що молодь 18–29 років та респонденти віком 30–44 роки частіше категорично підтримують тезу про несправедливість існуючих обмежень: частка тих, хто «повністю згоден», становить 19% проти 16% загалом. Водночас серед молоді зафіксовано найнижчу категоричну незгоду – 16% проти 23% загалом – та найвищий рівень невизначеності: 23% відповіли, що їм важко визначитися.

Джерело: Слово і Діло

In a poll whose results were published on the analytical portal Slovo i Dilo in August 2026, respondents were asked to express their opinion on the following statement:

>“Women and men should have equal rights and responsibilities. Exempting women from the obligation to serve in the military and imposing restrictions on leaving the country during wartime only on men is unfair.”

47% of Ukrainians disagreed with this statement, while 34% agreed. The remaining 19% were undecided.

The poll represents Ukraine's adult population.

>According to the poll results, almost half of respondents (47%) disagree that the current rules are unfair because women are exempt from military service, while restrictions on leaving the country during wartime apply only to men. Of these, 23% strongly disagree with this statement, while 24% somewhat disagree.

>At the same time, 34% of respondents consider this approach unfair and support equal rights and responsibilities for men and women: 16% strongly agree with the statement, while 18% somewhat agree. Another 19% of respondents were unable to decide.

>There are notable differences by gender. Men are more likely to agree that the existing restrictions applying only to them are unfair: 43% of men overall support equal responsibilities (22% strongly agree and 21% somewhat agree), while 41% disagree.

>Among women, disagreement with this position prevails: 51% consider exempting women from military service and travel restrictions to be fair (25% strongly disagree and 26% somewhat disagree). 26% of women support equal responsibilities, while 23% are undecided.

>The age breakdown showed that respondents aged 18–29 and 30–44 were more likely to strongly support the claim that the existing restrictions are unfair: 19% “strongly agree,” compared with 16% overall. At the same time, young people had the lowest level of strong disagreement — 16% compared with 23% overall — and the highest level of uncertainty: 23% said they were undecided.

(Translation from Ukrainian by ChatGPT)

So it seems that Ukraine's gender-based mobilization reflects the public attitude.

I wonder whether the results would be different in other European countries. I guess they would be more or less the same, perhaps with a few exceptions, such as Sweden and Norway, where women are drafted too.

In 2025, Swiss citizens voted against a proposal to require women to do national service in the military, civil protection teams or other forms, as men must do already.

It seems obvious that all countries / societies are gynocentric. The question is to what extent, in which areas, and whether such attitudes are slowly changing.

У б’юті-барі G × KYIV, з якого після топтання прапора ЛГБТІК+ звільнили Юліану Казнодій, заявили про залякування, псування майна та погрози.

Там розповіли, що 21 липня біля входу в заклад невідомі залишили свинячі голови та нутрощі, а також облили поріг кровʼю.

Крім того, там показали фото та відео з інших днів, коли невідомі із закритими медичними масками обличчями збиралися під входом, а також псували майно всередині закладу, обклеювали вхід листівками та лишали гомофобні написи.

Джерела: hromadske, Посол Содому в Україні

Любов між людьми однієї статі — це «деградація і шкодить дітям», а відрізані свинячі голови і розмазана кров — це «традиційні цінності», які треба просувати серед дітей! Дивіться не переплутайте!

The World Bank's 2018 study on poverty in developing countries, covering 89 countries across all continents: original, archived copy.

The study reports the share of people living below the international poverty line (less than $1.90 per day) — overall, 12.8% of women and 12.3% of men. This corresponds to 104 poor women for every 100 poor men*. So women are slightly overrepresented among the poor, although the report notes that the gender poverty gap is statistically insignificant in all regions except South Asia (Screenshot 2, p. 9).

According to Figure 5 (Screenshot 1, p. 14), there are roughly 4 times more widows among poor women than there are widowers among poor men**.

This is because women are much more likely to become widows than men are to become widowers, as men have shorter life expectancy and higher mortality rates in all age groups except 80+, and also because widowed women are more likely to fall into poverty, as the husband is far more often the primary or sole breadwinner of the family.

This suggests that the small gender gap in poverty (104 poor women for every 100 poor men) exists at least to some extent (and possibly entirely) because of widows, that is, because of men’s deaths. It is impossible to calculate exactly how much of the gap is explained by widowhood (the report does not contain the data that would make such a calculation possible), but since the overall gender gap in poverty is very small (only a few percent), while the gap between poor widows and poor widowers is very large (about fourfold), and widows make up a substantial share of poor women (about 10% of poor women aged 15+), it is reasonable to assume that if we exclude widowed people, it will at least eliminate a large part of the overall gender gap and at most will reverse it (making men's poverty rate higher than women's).

I often say that the male and female sides of gender inequality are deeply interconnected, and this is a good illustration of that. If we want fewer poor women, we need fewer dead men. We also need a society where men do not carry most of the burden of being the family breadwinner, and women are less financially dependent on them — these are not two separate problems, but two sides of the same problem.

According to Figure 5, the share of poor women is also much higher (roughly three times) among divorcees, although this probably has little effect on the overall gender difference because divorced people make up only a small share of the poor (3% of poor women 15+ and 1% of poor men of the same age group).

Conversely, among those who have never married (aged 15+), there are almost twice as many poor men as women.

About half of poor women ages 25-54 are out of the labour force, which, as I understand it, mostly means they are housewives. In contrast, the overwhelming majority of poor men in the same age group are employed (but still remain poor). Only 12.5% of poor men aged 25-54 are not employed (Screenshot 3, p. 18).

The most common type of poor household is a household with a sole male breadwinner, children, and other dependent adults (mostly wives, as I understand it, screenshots 4-5, pp. 27, 29).

The struggles of these men remain largely invisible at the societal level. The UN and many other international organizations and public institutions that claim to promote gender equality consistently address women's economically vulnerable position (which is indeed vulnerable under traditional gender roles), but they ignore the other side of the same issue — the burden placed on men, which also puts them in a vulnerable position. It seems like no one cares that large numbers of men carry their children and wives on their shoulders, working, yet still remaining poor. This is rarely discussed and is almost never framed as a gender equality issue, even though it is clearly a manifestation of systemic gender inequality affecting men. When this problem is brought up, it is either a rare exception or men's rights activism, which remains marginal and is rarely (if ever) taken into account by policymakers.

____________________

* It should be noted that the ratio of 104 poor women per 100 poor men reflects the poverty rate, not the number, accounting for the sex ratio in the overall population. It means that a woman's probability of living in poverty is about 4% higher than a man's. If we compare the numbers (330 million poor women versus 325 million poor men), the ratio is 101.5 to 100.

** The two bars in Figure 5 represent approximately the same number of people (330 million poor women in the left bar and 325 million poor men in the right bar), so comparing the data from these columns shows an almost exact ratio.

The World Bank's 2018 study on poverty in developing countries, covering 89 countries across all continents: original, archived copy.

The study reports the share of people living below the international poverty line (less than $1.90 per day) — overall, 12.8% of women and 12.3% of men. This corresponds to 104 poor women for every 100 poor men*. So women are slightly overrepresented among the poor, although the report notes that the gender poverty gap is statistically insignificant in all regions except South Asia (Screenshot 2, p. 9).

According to Figure 5 (Screenshot 1, p. 14), there are roughly 4 times more widows among poor women than there are widowers among poor men**.

This is because women are much more likely to become widows than men are to become widowers, as men have shorter life expectancy and higher mortality rates in all age groups except 80+, and also because widowed women are more likely to fall into poverty, as the husband is far more often the primary or sole breadwinner of the family.

This suggests that the small gender gap in poverty (104 poor women for every 100 poor men) exists at least to some extent (and possibly entirely) because of widows, that is, because of men’s deaths. It is impossible to calculate exactly how much of the gap is explained by widowhood (the report does not contain the data that would make such a calculation possible), but since the overall gender gap in poverty is very small (only a few percent), while the gap between poor widows and poor widowers is very large (about fourfold), and widows make up a substantial share of poor women (about 10% of poor women aged 15+), it is reasonable to assume that if we exclude widowed people, it will at least eliminate a large part of the overall gender gap and at most will reverse it (making men's poverty rate higher than women's).

I often say that the male and female sides of gender inequality are deeply interconnected, and this is a good illustration of that. If we want fewer poor women, we need fewer dead men. We also need a society where men do not carry most of the burden of being the family breadwinner, and women are less financially dependent on them — these are not two separate problems, but two sides of the same problem.

According to Figure 5, the share of poor women is also much higher (roughly three times) among divorcees, although this probably has little effect on the overall gender difference because divorced people make up only a small share of the poor (3% of poor women 15+ and 1% of poor men of the same age group).

Conversely, among those who have never married (aged 15+), there are almost twice as many poor men as women.

About half of poor women ages 25-54 are out of the labour force, which, as I understand it, mostly means they are housewives. In contrast, the overwhelming majority of poor men in the same age group are employed (but still remain poor). Only 12.5% of poor men aged 25-54 are not employed (Screenshot 3, p. 18).

The most common type of poor household is a household with a sole male breadwinner, children, and other dependent adults (mostly wives, as I understand it, screenshots 4-5, pp. 27, 29).

The struggles of these men remain largely invisible at the societal level. The UN and many other international organizations and public institutions that claim to promote gender equality consistently address women's economically vulnerable position (which is indeed vulnerable under traditional gender roles), but they ignore the other side of the same issue — the burden placed on men, which also puts them in a vulnerable position. It seems like no one cares that large numbers of men carry their children and wives on their shoulders, working, yet still remaining poor. This is rarely discussed and is almost never framed as a gender equality issue, even though it is clearly a manifestation of systemic gender inequality affecting men. When this problem is brought up, it is either a rare exception or men's rights activism, which remains marginal and is rarely (if ever) taken into account by policymakers.

____________________

* It should be noted that the ratio of 104 poor women per 100 poor men reflects the poverty rate, not the number, accounting for the sex ratio in the overall population. It means that a woman's probability of living in poverty is about 4% higher than a man's. If we compare the numbers (330 million poor women versus 325 million poor men), the ratio is 101.5 to 100.

** The two bars in Figure 5 represent approximately the same number of people (330 million poor women in the left bar and 325 million poor men in the right bar), so comparing the data from these columns shows an almost exact ratio.

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

Скажу відверто, що мене поведінка земляків у цій ситуації з УПА дуже бісить.

Бачу купу дописів та коментарів про те, що, мовляв, які вони погані й тупі, ці жителі західних країн, що засуджують героїзацію УПА.

"Поляки тупі, вестерни тупі, всі тупі, одні тільки ми розумні".

Також дуже дратує рівень аргументації у стилі "Армія Крайова також вбивала українців / Пілсудський проводив пацифікацію".

"Не вказуйте нам, кого вважати героями"

"Ну ОК, не вказуйте нам тоді, кого приймати в Євросоюз"

Боюся, що ми тепер можемо просрати все і пересваритися зі всіма просто тому, що вперлися рогом і наполягаємо на героїзації тих, кого вся Європа вважає військовими злочинцями.

Просто майте на увазі, що пересічний житель західних країн спирається на ось цю статтю у Вікіпедії: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia

Саме звідти вони беруть дані. Якщо ви вважаєте, що щось у цій статті неправильно, і "вестерни" помиляються, коли керуються цією інформацією, то не кричіть, які вони погані, не обзивайте їх "російськими ботами", а наводьте переконливі аргументи. Тільки дійсно переконливі, а не "Армія Крайова також вбивала поляків" (і так, було б добре ознайомитися з тим, чому цей аргумент для них непереконливий).

Або ми будуємо дружні стосунки з країнами Європи, враховуючи почуття сусідів, та інтегруємося в Євросоюз, або продовжуємо говорити, що вони погані, і залишаємося відсталою країною без підтримки.

Я бачу коментарі, в яких жителі західних країн пишуть, що, мовляв, припиняю донатити на ЗСУ / я розчарувався в Україні тощо. Тобто ваша, любі земляки, впертість, буквально може коштувати життя нашим бійцям.

Серйозно, мені це не вкладається в голову: буквально ризикувати власною безпекою заради того, щоб героїзувати тих, хто вбив десятки тисяч мирних людей. Чому? Невже нема інших героїв?

Я не кажу, що поляки в цій ситуації повністю праві та нічого поганого не зробили. Я просто думаю, що навіть якщо поляки також щось роблять не так, то ми могли б почати з себе.

Росіяни зараз радісно потирають руки, спостерігаючи, як ми сваримося з поляками.

Просто не можу дивитися, як ми стріляємо собі в ногу.

This is cringey, disgusting and infuriating at the same time.

What's wrong with these people?

Seriously, what do you think makes them do things like this when they continue emphasizing women even when the data on the same page shows that men are so disproportionately affected by violence?

I feel gaslighted. I'm starting to think that maybe I am wrong. Maybe I don't understand something? Maybe something is wrong with my ability to reason and make logical conclusions?

Source: https://ukrstat.gov.ua/druk/publicat/kat_e/2021/2021_GEIndicators-MonitoringRepor_ENG.pdf