When men try to discredit feminism and argue that men are just as oppressed—or more oppressed—than women, they always bring up two main points.
The Draft Argument
First is the draft. They’re obsessed with the draft. They’re always talking about how women don’t get drafted. Which is bizarre, because men don’t get drafted anymore either. Nobody does. But somehow, this hypothetical injustice still gets brought up as if it’s happening tomorrow.
The “Men Can’t Cry” Argument
Second, they bring up the idea that men aren’t allowed to be emotional. That they can’t cry without being judged. This point is equally flawed, because nobody is judged for being emotional more than women.
Women are explicitly told we are not fit for leadership. Women are told a woman should never be president because we are “too emotional.” Women’s emotions are used as evidence that we are illogical or inferior to men. So the idea that women can freely express our emotions without any societal punishment is so ridiculous that I don’t even know where to begin.
The Real Double Standard
I would argue that men’s emotions are actually more socially accepted—that emotion, of course, being anger. When a man gets angry and punches a wall, or fights another man at a bar because he bumped into him on accident, it’s not treated as evidence that men are all too emotional or unfit for public office. Women’s emotions are weaponized against us in a way that men’s emotions never are.
A Final Word
So please, give us a break with the pretend victimhood. “I’m not allowed to cry” and “I could be drafted tomorrow”—you live in a fantasy. The real oppression women face isn’t about who can cry or who gets drafted. It’s about being systematically dismissed, underestimated, and controlled. And that’s not something you can argue your way out of with a hypothetical draft that doesn’t even exist.
