Well, when it comes to marriage, parenthood, reproductive rights, sexual crimes, domestic violence, selective service, jobs that involve working with children, affirmative action, men are legally discriminated against. But if that was the case, why would the SPLC have an "anti-white" category in their blog? Correct me if I'm wrong, but whites haven't historically been the victims of discrimination in the USA. This sentence makes me think. Knowing how to disagree is an underrated skill, I wonder if there's a book that teaches it.I think the rubric that the SPLC is using for their list of "protected classes" or whatever has to do with historic discrimination/hate towards these groups in the USA, and current concerted efforts to limit the rights of these people and defame them as a group.
I'm wondering how to approach this, since I think we disagree here.
I had no idea that there was an "anti-white" section of their blog. I don't know if I mentioned it earlier, but I had a hard time navigating their website. That is strange. I'd rather not get into a longer discussion about men's rights here, but I will concede that the SPLC's judgment is questionable. Thanks for changing my view.