Difference between revisions of "Curfew for men"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
* Only law abiding men would obey it. A man intent on harming women would go out and do so, unopposed by any men. |
* Only law abiding men would obey it. A man intent on harming women would go out and do so, unopposed by any men. |
||
* Most emergency services and after-hours workers are men. Having all these men home would increase risk for anyone on the streets. |
* Most emergency services and after-hours workers are men. Having all these men home would increase risk for anyone on the streets. |
||
| + | |||
| + | == 2023 == |
||
| + | |||
| + | [[Jameela Jamil]] has called for two hours a day when only women are allowed outside. |
||
[[Category: Misandry]] |
[[Category: Misandry]] |
||
Revision as of 02:23, 30 March 2023
2016
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2016/01/07/its-time-to-consider-a-curfew-for-men/
2018
2021
- https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/sarah-everard-missing-why-a-curfew-for-men-isnt-a-bad-idea/news-story/fc132409b1927ee4282b1801eb4a5eca
- https://news.sky.com/story/sarah-everard-green-partys-baroness-jones-suggests-6pm-curfew-for-men-12243194
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSJMlKxhXX8
A curfew for men would make women less safe, not more safe. This is because:
- Only law abiding men would obey it. A man intent on harming women would go out and do so, unopposed by any men.
- Most emergency services and after-hours workers are men. Having all these men home would increase risk for anyone on the streets.
2023
Jameela Jamil has called for two hours a day when only women are allowed outside.