this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2025
349 points (89.2% liked)
Technology
71760 readers
3453 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And what about the women in that same boat? I'm confused by your argument
If a woman is going homeless there are resources. If it's a man there's almost nothing. I work serving the unhoused.
Having been homeless before, the resources were not different for me or my partner, male, at the time. Separate sleeping quarters obviously. But the same exact resources.
Genuinely what are you talking about...Where is this?
Ohio. Cincinnati, specifically. It's not 100 to 0 women resources to men, it's more like 55 to 5. There are some cold weather shelters for men, and places to eat, but mostly there are zero beds unless you're willing to sign up for a drug testing program, and even then there are costs and limited spaces. There are quite a few women's shelters in the area.
I would agree here. Shelters are hell for both genders.
I was homeless with a three months old. Without a kid, I would have done as I always did and couch hopped or slept on benches til I got back on my feet, but I had a baby and wanted to get stable fresh out of a DV situation.
The shelter I stayed at had a "single" floor with both men and womed (divided by rooms) and the top floor was families.
Everyone likes helping a single moms out. And I made it out, got stable and its been 12 years without homelessness. It was because of those programs.
I know a lot of men slip through the cracks. I have met a handful who chose homelessness because thats where they find thier community. I get that, the most community I ever felt was in low places surrounded by others also in low places.
I've also met men like my bio father, who after years of addiction, homelessness, violence and prison time, was able to reach resources and get housed and remains comfortable.
These resources, especially now, are being cut. It's definitely scary. I do think there are a lot of well, Walter Whites of the world, where rather than take help and admit vulnerability, they do it their own way, on thier own terms, fuck the consequences. All because being vulnerable and admitting you need help are like, anti-masculine traits in our current culture.
I think there are a lot of things that lead to men being homeless. There are programs, but usually worh strict requirements and some people, you just cant box them.
I will say for people with children, there are many more programs available.
To note, you don't see many homeless women, and there is reason you don't see them. When my mother was homeless she lived deep in the woods and moved around constantly as to avoid being detected. You wouldn't have known she was homeless, if only because she had a car, but still.
I mean, there are reasons that women need to be away from men sometimes. And it's not because we're having a wonderful time in life. And this "manosphere" is only creating more dangerous situations for us.
I had to do community service in Tennessee, i chose to help feed the homeless at a soup kitchen, anyone could eat there, but there were only permanent beds for women. It was nice they fed the men too but thinking back, where did they go at night?
This was not the case in North Carolina
Im glad to hear it! We have enough empty buildings and houses that there shouldnt be any homeless.
Exactly.....that's been the status quo for young white men only. People of color and women have been getting the shit end of the stick the whole time.
I'd suggest you read the entire thread.
I did and it seems to have gotten even more off track and deeply into this magical idea that women and other minorities (not sure why they were brought into it) somehow have easier lives?
Thank you for reading it.
There are two factors here in the US that correlate significantly with a person's lifetime earnings potential: their zip code of birth and attainment of a college degree. It's exceedingly significant (in a positive way) that women constitute the majority in college enrollment. I think that's a good thing, but it also demonstrates inequality.
I want to see policies here that mirror those in more progressive European countries: Free college, a federally-mandated living wage that adjusts with inflation, and universal health care. I also want to see universities' federal funding tied to expansion of enrollment rates, as there are many that keep them artificially low and yet still raise tuition rates every year. These benefits should target low-income communities without regard to race or gender.
In short, I want to see the economic ship lifted for the poor, and that's how it should be done.
Most young people, and in particular young men, have three choices when entering adulthood: Work for sub-standard wages and struggle alone and/or live with their parents, join the military, or take on permanent debt on the hope of a college degree and an elevated life. (If they're fortunate enough to land a spot in enrollment to begin with.)
Rampant misogyny has spread because people who consider themselves progressive have ignored these economic calamities and right-wingers have, conversely, highlighted those inequalities, created communities for young men, and gotten rich in the process. Currently the functional unemployment rate in the United States is 25%.
The solution, is creating an economy where prosperity is distributed among a more diverse population of people.
(But I suspect people will continue to vote Democrat and Republican and this conversation won't matter much in the grand scheme of things.)
Correlating education to wealth is fine overall but you are intentionally avoiding more direct metrics of wealth and inequality to make it seem as if this is direct causation for women having some upper hand.
Women absolutely make less and hold a significantly smaller portion of the overall wealth in this country.
Women routinely have to leave their careers to manage the home and their family (due to archaic misogynistic gender roles). There is also just straight up bias in management decisions about pay.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/03/01/the-enduring-grip-of-the-gender-pay-gap/
No. I'm illustrating that the machinery of government can and has elevated women and minorities in measurable ways.
What I've suggested above would benefit them as much as men.
Sometimes yes, hence why there needs to be more regulation, as I've suggested.
Your inference that I'm blaming women is projection. What I'm doing is essentially advocating for DEI, but income-based and not based on any one demographic with the dual goals of lessening poverty and improving the overall functionality of society. (So we don't have entire generations of people being radicalized.)