Do you think there is a war on white men?

Maybe "war" is a bit strong of a word, or maybe not. I don't think wars necessarily have to be large and everywhere to be a war, do they? If they do then maybe war is a too strong a word however it does seem like there is contempt for them. I get it that that all groups suffer from some sort of discrimination, we all have our problems. However it not only seems ok to target white men it seems politically correct to do so. I just got done seeing some things online about how "White men should never hold elected positions in British universities again, just needless bashing of white men. Stuff like people believing sexism and racism can't happen to white people or men. These are done in news articles, some pretty mainstream ones. It's always "white men are bad, white men do this, white men do that." and I'm just wondering why it's so acceptable to do it to an entire group of people. Isn't saying something bad is acceptable to do to a specific group exactly what discrimination is? I'm not comparing here even though some of the mentality I've seen can be compared but it's what I imagine the nazi mentality was to jews. I don't think many were saying "It's wrong to do that to the jews! So let's do it" and moreso saying "It's not wrong to do it to the jews."

Again, I'm not saying white men are facing the same type of suffering as the jews did just making an example.

Do you think there is a war on white men happening or that it seems more acceptable to do this type of thing to white men?

Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 33 ) Sort: best | oldest
  • There's no "war on white men"! But there is opposition to the power they hold all over the world, over women and kids and other races.

    It's wrong for anyone to state that "all" any group is anything, and I don't see any evidence of this happening to white men in my world.

    Presumably you're a white male yourself? If so you need to acknowledge that you're by birth you're a member of a privileged group and look at your own attitude to less privileged groups rather than choosing to believe someone (who?) is waging war on you and your fellow white males

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    • What power do they have over women and kids and other races?

      As a female you are also by birth, a member of a privileged group. Just sayin'.

      Well typically, the people who tend to openly condone sexism and racism against white men are feminists and SJWs.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      • Just how are women are privileged group? Men do have power over women and kids because society has given them that power as far back as we know, the difference now is that it's acknowledged at least in some quarters and a lot of us are trying to change it for the good of EVERYONE.

        White people (not just men, although they have much more) have had power over other races: eg slavery; colonisation and genocide against native peoples; exploitation of other races which still goes on today and on and on and on.

        Which feminists condone sexism and racism and what are SJW's?

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        • Right to genital integrity (someone else can't choose to have their genitals altered at birth like they can with male infants).

          Women got the right to vote without the societal obligation that men had to be given in order to vote which was to sign up to the selective services which allows the military to force them in to war to fight, kill, and die against their will or face the risk of being jailed for up to five years, charged $250,000, can't take certain government loans, can't drive, nor enter certain fields of work.

          Women get less jail time for equivilent crimes.

          Those are just three. You still haven't explained how men have power over women. I find it a bit ridiculous to say men have power over kids given that women win the majority of custody battles and get full custody far more than men.

          You are aware that white people haven't been the only group to enslave others, right? Regardless of that, what you're saying is that people have power by association, kind of like the guilt by association thing.

          Well there's that Jessica Valenti article writer, that person that made "S.C.U.M, Robin Urback, and so on. If you're going to say that there's no sexist feminists out there then just wow.

          SJWs are social justice warriors. It would be easier for you to Google search them. People called them social justice warriors to mock them as they view SJWs as people that claim to fight sexism, racism, etc, etc, while being those things or just stupid in their claims of what is sexism, racism, etc.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          • I don't understand what you're talking about with respect to voting. There were no draft or selective service requirements for voting for men. There have only been 3 drafts in US history, The Civil War, WW I, and WW II. The last draft continued through Vietnam, and selective service registration has continued through today. But in the previous 2, selective service system was discontinued shortly after the wars.

            So men were voting with no such requirement for almost 90 years before the Civil War without selective service. The WW I selective service was inacted in 1917 and disbanded is 1919. So when women got the vote in the 1920's selective service did not even exist.

            Even today, one has nothing to do with the other. You are required to register for selective service at 18, and may face penalties if you don't. But you can still regerter to vote regardless of your selective service status. The two things have nothing to do with each other.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            • OP is seriously misinformed and over-dramitising things.

              The original requirements to vote were property ownership and wealth. The right to vote was given to veterans eventually but it was never required to be military veteran.

              Selective Services is not much more than a database of names. Selective Services facilitates a draft, it doesn't initiate or hold power to create one. In order for a draft to occur, it would take a HUGE crisis that voluntary AND "backdoor draft" (stop-loss personell, since every voluntary soldier signs up to an 8 yr contract regardless of their active sign-up time) couldn't cover, and an act of Congress AND Presidential approval. Figure that all with the fact that most men are unfit for service or can get out of it by claiming "consciencious objection". There's literally NO chance of being drafted now since a law would have to be enacted before a draft occured.

              No one has been prosecuted for failure to register since the early 80's and there is no desire or move to prosecute anyone either. It's one of those laws that technically exists but is never used and never going to be used.

              He's whining about nothing. He doesn't even know what he's whining about in the first place.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
          • I'll reply in point form, it's easier for me

            1 I agree and do you campaign against circumcision? I have to point out that the genital mutilation inflicted on little girls in some cultures is far worse and usually done in unhygienic conditions which threaten life if not future health.

            2 Well, one thing at a time! Rightly or wrongly a lot of feminists campaigned for the vote, but others have since campaigned successfully for inclusion in the military on the same basis as men. I don't know why they want to but it has happened

            3 I don't think that's universally true: I've seen some Australian stats that indicate women (particularly Indigenous women) do in fact get longer sentences for some crimes than men do.

            4 Men have power over women both culturally and because usually they're bigger and stronger: admittedly this is a potential power over situation, but it's exercised far too often. The vast majority of sexual offfences are committed by men against women & kids, usually ones they know. In Australia so far this year, 24 women have been killed by partners or ex-partners, none the other way round.

            5 I know there are sexist feminists because as an Anarchist Feminist I've argued with them for years about that very thing on the basis of asking do they really want to abort all male foetuses, kill all boy babies and all male adults? That's a tiny minority of those who call themselves feminists and in my opinion they're very damaged and unhealthy.

            6 I can't see anything wrong with being a warrior for social justice - how else has the condition of oppressed groups ever changed? I guess I must be one and I don't see that as anything to mock except by those with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. I guess by that criteria Martin Luther King Ghandi, Margaret Sanger & all the people (female & male) who fought for everyone to be able to vote would be SJWs? That's just off the top of my head. I can see that I must be one too and am proud to be in such illustrious company.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            • 1. Ok, you agree. Do I campaign against it? Not really. I live on a relatively small island and don't have the cash to spare to travel. I do talk to people about the issue though.
              Yes, it happens to girls in other cultures. So? Obviously it's bad but we're talking about the cultures you and I live in. Your attempt to "one up" this point by saying it's worse for women does not change that it is illegal for women in our culture while still legal to happen to men in ours.

              2. Yes, they have campaigned to be in combat roles, not to be forced in to the selective services. Regardless of this the privilege women have here still stands.

              3. If you could show me these stats I would appreciate it.

              4. You're talking about illegal means. This only holds true for criminal activity which the vast majority of people do not take part in. So what you're saying is that men that break the law have this power, which can be said in regards to anyone committing a crime against another. For example, most victims of violent crime are infact male with statistics such as 76% of homicide victims being male. So if this is a privilege case then we'll have to say that women are privileged in the fact that women are less likely to be violently attacked than men are. I find it interesting that you exclusively make this a sexual thing rather than power in general as studies have found women make the majority of child abusers. So again we'd have to say that women have more power against children if we're factoring illegal aspects.
              As for the sexual aspect of men on women, that depends. Many studies do not factor in forced to penetrate as rape, in some states it still doesn't.

              5. I think most feminists are sexist in some regards. I won't say that the ones I view as sexist are the extreme sexist as you described, though. Perhaps even unintentionally but still sexist in some regards.

              6. You're taking the label too seriously. It's supposed to be ironic, much like the "white knight" insult. Again, it would be far easier and better for you to know more on this if you Googled it.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
          • "win the majority of custody battles"


            Fathers who actually seek custody have excellent chances of getting primary or joint custody.



            "and get full custody far more than men."

            True, (replace "full" with "primary") but it's because the fathers don't want it, don't ask for it or simply agree to it. Courts aren't responsible for over 95% of all custody arrangements. Parents are making these decisions on their own. Noting that more mothers have custody does not prove a court bias when the courts had nothing to do with the arrangement.


            You've made several other misinformed statements but I don't have the time right now. Perhaps tomorrow.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            • Well firstly, your first two links are dated two decades and a half ago. That said, I'm not going to read through all that, so if you could tell me exactly what parts highlight the custody aspect then that'll be appreciated.

              There's this:
              That shows more than half of the judges do have a bias against fathers.

              I also wonder if what you said is true, does it go in to detail of the rulings of men and women that aren't responsible for the arrangements?

              Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Reverse racism exists and it is much more tolerated due to bitter resentments of the past.

    yall know what i mean and what im referring to, dont act like ya cant see it

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • What exactly constitutes a 'white man' to you? Is it socio-economic, geopolitical or just the color of their un-suntanned skin?
    Who is it that has declared 'war' on 'white men'?
    Why would you believe that your 'whites' are targeted more than any other group, when you look at the world as a whole? They certainly aren't being targeted more than various muslum sects in the Middle East or more than black Africans in Africa, are they?
    Bigotry, intolerance and hatred are pretty much evenly spread throughout the world these days, IMO.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    • A white man? As in, white and are male? Someone that isn't Latino, Asian, or black?

      As I said, if "war" is too strong a word then just disregard that aspect however people that are targeting them tend to be feminists and SJWs.

      "Why would you believe whites are targeted more than any other group?"
      - Meh, I didn't say "more", did I? I said it's condoned more because certain types of people don't believe you can be sexist towards men or racist towards whites. I'm not saying white men are facing the biggest war against a group or anything, just that it seems that being sexist and racist to white men seems more acceptable, not that it's the biggest war against a group of people in today's world.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      • I gather from your rant that you consider yourself to be a 'white male'? So, before we go any farther with this, how about you read the dictionary definition of a 'white male' if it exists or Caucasian as I believe they are universally known, then return to tell us if you are indeed the unsullied, racially pure 'white bigot' you thought you were?
        By the way, what is a SJW?

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        • Ok, European. I am simply refering to the title I have seen people criticize and insult on the grounds of race.

          An SJW is a social justice warrior. A Google search would do better for you than me.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I do not believe that there is a war on white men. Every race faces needless bashing of some sort. That's the world we live in

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I love white men!

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I think there is a war on men as a whole. At lease in the Western world.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Yes, white men are considered fair game for negative racial and sexist generalisations. This does not mean there aren't unfair systems that make it harder for women, for there absolutely are. It just means every ideology needs an enemy, and unfortunately that means people who don't know me personally will say I'm greedy and over entitled and basically an inherent rapist.

    I think feminism and multiculturalism is fine, of course. Just try to remember people who know they have it worse than a given white male have feelings too, and they've felt oppressed and picked on and overlooked for a long time.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • People thinks it's okay to slam and stereotype white men because other races and women are stereotyped and slammed, especially in the past, but also today...
    ...but SERIOUSLY PEOPLE. White men are people like everybody else. They are not all rich, powerful and xenophobic. My dad is a white man and he is, to be honest, very kind and somewhat poor. An eye for an eye makes the world go blind.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Yeah, when you go onto the internet you kind of envelop yourself in your own informational bubble, and it's hard to tell if something is worldwide, or just in your particular niche of internet. So I think that globally, white men face the least discrimination. However, in the richest, most politically correct first world countries (the USA, much of western europe, etc), there's been a recent trend that's kind of scary. People that have a higher level, more objective education (especially history) are associating people of higher socioeconomic staus, including white men, with their historical counter-parts, which tends to result in negative backlash. However it's very small, and like the anti-vaccination movement, I expect it to be a short-lived phenomenon.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
Add A Comment