What can you do as an MRA?

• Can other people with less obvious MRA accounts like me i.e. more normal looking accounts, post stuff (this is a general comment, not just for this thread) post this on more mainstream threads e.g. Finland sub, sociology, etc.... MAKE SURE you are polite, factual, avoid emotive language, avoid talking about feminism, and post high quality stuff
• Comment here particular quotes, passages, excerpts that are relevant. Especially since its such a long document, this will be useful for all of us.
• You can make these excerpts into separate threads if worthy.
• Share this on social media? (set up an anon MRA twitter, Facebook etc... MRA is thriving on social media. It is good as its a lot more activism based)
• If you live in Finland, send some emails to journalists (you can search journalists who have already discussed mens issues), and send some to politicians etc. You can easily write one letter and send it to multiple people. Maybe the individual excerpts/issues you find would be better to send (and then you could also add the whole document summary as an addendum for reference for the reader) - Finland is a small country, I dont think many users will be from there here.
• NOTE: It is good that these issues are being increasingly recognised, and more people are doing this as projects in academia. This is only growing and snowballing as more people are red pilled. Look up Male Psychology Network, they are doing fantastic work, growing and have presented an ALTERNATIVE to patriarchy conspiracy theory and are working to dismantle the idea in academia. https://youtu.be/LHYRYKCIDxk?t=591

Main Body - Here it is:

This is a chapter-by-chapter summary of Discrimination Against Men: Appearance and Causes in the Context of a Modern Welfare State, a 2009 doctoral dissertation by Pasi Malmi (University of Lapland) that provides an impressively detailed and balanced investigation of discrimination against men in Finland (the theory and results actually give almost as much detail on discrimination against women, although men will be the focus here).
Chapters 5 to 8 are the most important. Chapter 5 explains six biases that cause gender discrimination, chapter 6 delineates the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems of Finnish society, chapter 7 examines the various discourses that justify discrimination against men, and chapter 8 analyzes a database of gender discrimination complaints made to the Finnish gender equality ombudsman, a third of which were made by men.
(Length: 1,800 words.)
Chapters 1 to 4 (introductory/background chapters)
Chapter 1 situates the perspective taken by the dissertation within gender studies. It rejects anti-feminist and anti-women perspectives, and the glorification of traditional masculinity and gender roles (e.g., the mythopoetic men’s movement). But it also rejects the “critical studies of men” paradigm, which sees men as the main causes of men’s and women’s problems, refuses to criticize feminism or women, and does not believe that discrimination against white, heterosexual, middle-class men exists (pp. 20–21).
Chapter 2 defines various relevant concepts, and explains that the findings from Finland are intended to be relevant primarily for the Northern European welfare states, and secondarily for other European and Anglo-American countries (pp. 32–34).
Chapter 3 gives a brief overview of current or traditional viewpoints on what causes direct or indirect discrimination or mistreatment of men: gender roles, hegemonic masculinity, industrial capitalism, feminism (specifically gender feminism and victimization feminism), and exploitative women (pp. 36-44).
Chapter 4 develops a theory of sociocultural evolution, which says that ideas that are simple, exaggerated, and coherent with popular paradigms generally win out over their rivals, regardless of whether they are true or backed up by evidence. This happens due to functional selection (p. 57), unintentional biases (p. 63), and interest group bias (p. 71), among other factors (see summary, p. 115).
Chapter 5: Applying the Theory to Gender Discrimination (p. 118)
This chapter develops a general theory of gender discrimination, centered on a typology of six different biases that cause gender discrimination (p. 127).
The masculine bias and feminine bias are unintentional gender biases caused by the processes that simplify, exaggerate, and mutate people’s mental memes or ideas according to their gender (p. 127). For example, a person’s conception of domestic work or childcare will be centered on their own experiences or contributions, which are partly determined by their gender, and so they will often downplay/exclude the other gender’s contributions (e.g., yardwork vs. housework) (pp. 135–138). As a result of these biases, segregated groups and networks of men or women tend to have a masculine-biased or feminine-biased culture of values, priorities, concepts, words, stories, jokes, stereotypes and beliefs that can lead to practices that discriminate against the other gender (p. 120). For example, a group of female social workers might decide that women are better custodians of children and default to recommending custody to them (pp. 141–142).
The masculist bias and feminist bias come from interest groups, networks, or movements seeking to advance the status of men or women, respectively. Masculism and feminism have sexist and anti-sexist branches (p. 143). The modern sexist branch of feminism includes theories like feminist standpoint epistemology (which gives special status to women’s feelings and intuitions) and the feminist theory of social work (interests of women and children are synonymous, social workers should identify with their female customers). It also includes stereotypes that women are unselfish, peaceful, responsible, loving, hard working, while men are the opposite (pp. 149–152). The anti-sexist branch of feminism by definition is less hostile towards men as people, but it is not necessarily able or willing to accept men’s issues: “[i]n general, the idea of the discrimination of men is perceived as bizarre by feminists” (pp. 155–158). The sexist branch of masculism is discussed primarily in the context of religion (pp. 144–129). The anti-sexist branch of masculism has little power, although it is discussed as sometimes being the source of biased statistics downplaying women’s issues (pp. 152–155).
The alpha male bias and alpha female bias are the biases of high status (wealthy, powerful, attractive, etc.) members of each gender against low status members of their gender. They are particularly apparent in high status men’s bias against male criminals (male judges giving harsher treatment, including sentences, to them compared to women) and high status women’s bias against female prostitutes (pp. 170–173).
A central point of this dissertation is that male-dominated and female-dominated organizations (the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems) are prone to predominantly discriminate against the other gender, but it’s important to clarify that they’re not guaranteed to do so. The masculine and feminine biases (the unintentional “own gender” biases) are just two of the six biases. An organization could be more influenced by the ideological biases (masculist and feminist biases) or the biases against low social status people of each gender (alpha male and alpha female biases).
Chapter 6: Locating the Patriarchal and Matriarchal Subsystems of the Finnish Society (p. 188)
This chapter identifies Finnish society’s patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems by looking at various measures of power, including raw numbers, managerial positions, control of knowledge, and informal positions of power (p. 222).

• Patriarchal subsystem: technology, commerce, state finances, defense, agriculture, transportation, trade, corporative labor and employer organizations.
• Matriarchal subsystem: healthcare, social services, social policy, equality policy, hotels, restaurants, and some cultural services.

Not all areas of Finnish society fall into one of these subsystems.
Chapter 7: An Empirical Examination of the Memeplexes, Discourses and Coalitions that Induce Discrimination against Men (p. 224)
This chapter analyzes the discourses that justify discrimination against men, coming from sources that include sexism and feminism.
Sexism: The development of the modern misandric versions of sexism is examined, including 19th century views of men as “barbarians whose urges had to be leashed in by the forces of decency—meaning women—if civilization were to survive” (p. 233), which it attributes to the joint interests of women and upper class men. Notions of chivalry and macho masculinity also lead to institutionalized belief systems where men’s comfort, health, and even lives are considered less important than women’s (p. 238). Macho masculinity, with its aversion to men “complaining”, tends to oppose talking about men’s issues or seeing them as relevant for gender equality (p. 306).
Feminism: Certain influential varieties of feminism see women as the disadvantaged and discriminated gender (p. 247). Thus the sole purpose of equality policy is women’s advancement (p. 256) and men are largely reduced to the role of defendant (p. 270). When faced with cases requiring a choice between promotion of equality and empowerment of women, many feminists reacted by rejecting equality as outdated or as a smokescreen for promoting men’s interests over women. Under these discourses, “the empowerment of women is more important than the advancement of gender equality in all contexts, including the matriarchal subsystem of the society” (pp. 259–260). That would apply even to women’s advantage in family courts and criminal courts (p. 305).
Also mentioned is a combination (and mutation) of difference feminism and equality feminism which says that “women are superior to men in many ways, but men are not superior to women in any ways” (p. 296)—which means that when men are ahead it’s because of sexism, but when women are ahead it is legitimate and natural.
The groups and alliances that justify misandry and discrimination against men (p. 334):
📷
Chapter 8: Gender Discrimination, According to the Complaints Sent to the Finnish Equality Ombudsman (p. 346)
Complaints: This chapter analyzes 800 complaints of gender discrimination made between 1997 and 2004 and sent to the Finnish equality ombudsman (p. 348). Men were 33% of victims, according to the author’s suggestion for the best measure of actual discrimination in these cases (outcome types 3–5, p. 356). Labour market discrimination, the largest category, primarily involved women (76%), while the second largest category, discrimination against customers, primarily involved men (~60%).
Another category, discriminative legislation, primarily involved men (77%). Few complaints were made, but due to active conscription policies (lasting 5-12 months), almost all men in Finland are affected by discriminative legislation. The author classifies these complaints as discrimination, although the equality ombudsman does not, “as the Finnish equality law is not applicable to men’s obligatory military service” (p. 354).
Bias: Per chapter 6, equality policy itself is in the matriarchal subsystem of equality (e.g., 90% of employees in the equality ombudsman office are female, p. 354). The ombudsman has a policy not to comment on complaints involving custody and divorce, purportedly to not interfere with the court system, but the author suggests that it stems from a bias against men, perhaps due to prioritizing women’s status over equality or wanting to avoid a flood of complaints from men (p. 354). This is made more explicit by another comment from the ombudsman’s office saying that it is not taking action on certain cases of discrimination against men because “the main purpose of the equality law is to improve women’s status especially in the labor market”, suggesting that the law should be applied more strictly to cases of discrimination against women (p. 381).
Patriarchal & matriarchal subsystems: 57% of discrimination cases in the matriarchal subsystem of society (as defined in chapter 6) were against men, compared to 31% in neutral domains, and 17% in the patriarchal subsystem of society (p. 358).
Discrimination examples: Many cases of discrimination against women (e.g., a workplace that only required women to do extra cleaning tasks on top of their regular duties) are recounted on the same pages but we’ll look at men here.

• In the labour market: At a mental hospital, only men were appointed to night shifts (p. 374). At a school, preference was given to hiring female teachers even though men are the “underrepresented” gender (p. 376). Many traditionally feminine jobs excluded men in their recruitment material (p. 377). A workplace allowed women to wear more casual and comfortable clothing than men (p. 377).
• As customers: Favourable pricing for women in boat cruises, discotheques & dancing places, dating services, gymnastics, a theatre, restaurants, horse races, and car insurance (pp. 380–382). Also more strict clothing standards for men at a casino, higher minimum ages for men to enter restaurants, and an apartment that only allowed women (pp. 382–383).
• Government administration: Subsidy for women’s osteoporosis medicines but not men’s (from pension fund), free public screening for breast cancer but not prostate cancer, higher retirement age for men (which has been changed) (pp. 387–389).
• Legislation: Men’s complaints were all about the obligatory military or civil service of six to thirteen months (those who refuse get six months in prison, p. 390).

Likely motives: Two alternative rating methods (tables 52 and 53) find that either (certain) feminist ideas are the most common motivators of discrimination against men, or sexism and the feminine bias are the most common motivators (feminine bias meaning unintentional gender bias of groups of women, counterpart to masculine bias of groups of men). Financial motives were also frequent (pp. 401-402).
SOURCE: https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/comprehensive-research-on-discrimination-against-men-in-finland/

https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/comprehensive-research-on-discrimination-against-men-in-finland/
This is a chapter-by-chapter summary of Discrimination Against Men: Appearance and Causes in the Context of a Modern Welfare State, a 2009 doctoral dissertation by Pasi Malmi (University of Lapland) that provides an impressively detailed and balanced investigation of discrimination against men in Finland (the theory and results actually give almost as much detail on discrimination against women, although men will be the focus here).
Chapters 5 to 8 are the most important. Chapter 5 explains six biases that cause gender discrimination, chapter 6 delineates the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems of Finnish society, chapter 7 examines the various discourses that justify discrimination against men, and chapter 8 analyzes a database of gender discrimination complaints made to the Finnish gender equality ombudsman, a third of which were made by men.
(Length: 1,800 words.)
Chapters 1 to 4 (introductory/background chapters)
Chapter 1 situates the perspective taken by the dissertation within gender studies. It rejects anti-feminist and anti-women perspectives, and the glorification of traditional masculinity and gender roles (e.g., the mythopoetic men’s movement). But it also rejects the “critical studies of men” paradigm, which sees men as the main causes of men’s and women’s problems, refuses to criticize feminism or women, and does not believe that discrimination against white, heterosexual, middle-class men exists (pp. 20–21).
Chapter 2 defines various relevant concepts, and explains that the findings from Finland are intended to be relevant primarily for the Northern European welfare states, and secondarily for other European and Anglo-American countries (pp. 32–34).
Chapter 3 gives a brief overview of current or traditional viewpoints on what causes direct or indirect discrimination or mistreatment of men: gender roles, hegemonic masculinity, industrial capitalism, feminism (specifically gender feminism and victimization feminism), and exploitative women (pp. 36-44).
Chapter 4 develops a theory of sociocultural evolution, which says that ideas that are simple, exaggerated, and coherent with popular paradigms generally win out over their rivals, regardless of whether they are true or backed up by evidence. This happens due to functional selection (p. 57), unintentional biases (p. 63), and interest group bias (p. 71), among other factors (see summary, p. 115).
Chapter 5: Applying the Theory to Gender Discrimination (p. 118)
This chapter develops a general theory of gender discrimination, centered on a typology of six different biases that cause gender discrimination (p. 127).
The masculine bias and feminine bias are unintentional gender biases caused by the processes that simplify, exaggerate, and mutate people’s mental memes or ideas according to their gender (p. 127). For example, a person’s conception of domestic work or childcare will be centered on their own experiences or contributions, which are partly determined by their gender, and so they will often downplay/exclude the other gender’s contributions (e.g., yardwork vs. housework) (pp. 135–138). As a result of these biases, segregated groups and networks of men or women tend to have a masculine-biased or feminine-biased culture of values, priorities, concepts, words, stories, jokes, stereotypes and beliefs that can lead to practices that discriminate against the other gender (p. 120). For example, a group of female social workers might decide that women are better custodians of children and default to recommending custody to them (pp. 141–142).
The masculist bias and feminist bias come from interest groups, networks, or movements seeking to advance the status of men or women, respectively. Masculism and feminism have sexist and anti-sexist branches (p. 143). The modern sexist branch of feminism includes theories like feminist standpoint epistemology (which gives special status to women’s feelings and intuitions) and the feminist theory of social work (interests of women and children are synonymous, social workers should identify with their female customers). It also includes stereotypes that women are unselfish, peaceful, responsible, loving, hard working, while men are the opposite (pp. 149–152). The anti-sexist branch of feminism by definition is less hostile towards men as people, but it is not necessarily able or willing to accept men’s issues: “[i]n general, the idea of the discrimination of men is perceived as bizarre by feminists” (pp. 155–158). The sexist branch of masculism is discussed primarily in the context of religion (pp. 144–129). The anti-sexist branch of masculism has little power, although it is discussed as sometimes being the source of biased statistics downplaying women’s issues (pp. 152–155).
The alpha male bias and alpha female bias are the biases of high status (wealthy, powerful, attractive, etc.) members of each gender against low status members of their gender. They are particularly apparent in high status men’s bias against male criminals (male judges giving harsher treatment, including sentences, to them compared to women) and high status women’s bias against female prostitutes (pp. 170–173).
A central point of this dissertation is that male-dominated and female-dominated organizations (the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems) are prone to predominantly discriminate against the other gender, but it’s important to clarify that they’re not guaranteed to do so. The masculine and feminine biases (the unintentional “own gender” biases) are just two of the six biases. An organization could be more influenced by the ideological biases (masculist and feminist biases) or the biases against low social status people of each gender (alpha male and alpha female biases).
Chapter 6: Locating the Patriarchal and Matriarchal Subsystems of the Finnish Society (p. 188)
This chapter identifies Finnish society’s patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems by looking at various measures of power, including raw numbers, managerial positions, control of knowledge, and informal positions of power (p. 222).
​

• Patriarchal subsystem: technology, commerce, state finances, defense, agriculture, transportation, trade, corporative labor and employer organizations.
• Matriarchal subsystem: healthcare, social services, social policy, equality policy, hotels, restaurants, and some cultural services.

Not all areas of Finnish society fall into one of these subsystems.
Chapter 7: An Empirical Examination of the Memeplexes, Discourses and Coalitions that Induce Discrimination against Men (p. 224)
This chapter analyzes the discourses that justify discrimination against men, coming from sources that include sexism and feminism.
Sexism: The development of the modern misandric versions of sexism is examined, including 19th century views of men as “barbarians whose urges had to be leashed in by the forces of decency—meaning women—if civilization were to survive” (p. 233), which it attributes to the joint interests of women and upper class men. Notions of chivalry and macho masculinity also lead to institutionalized belief systems where men’s comfort, health, and even lives are considered less important than women’s (p. 238). Macho masculinity, with its aversion to men “complaining”, tends to oppose talking about men’s issues or seeing them as relevant for gender equality (p. 306).
Feminism: Certain influential varieties of feminism see women as the disadvantaged and discriminated gender (p. 247). Thus the sole purpose of equality policy is women’s advancement (p. 256) and men are largely reduced to the role of defendant (p. 270). When faced with cases requiring a choice between promotion of equality and empowerment of women, many feminists reacted by rejecting equality as outdated or as a smokescreen for promoting men’s interests over women. Under these discourses, “the empowerment of women is more important than the advancement of gender equality in all contexts, including the matriarchal subsystem of the society” (pp. 259–260). That would apply even to women’s advantage in family courts and criminal courts (p. 305).
Also mentioned is a combination (and mutation) of difference feminism and equality feminism which says that “women are superior to men in many ways, but men are not superior to women in any ways” (p. 296)—which means that when men are ahead it’s because of sexism, but when women are ahead it is legitimate and natural.
The groups and alliances that justify misandry and discrimination against men (p. 334):
📷
Chapter 8: Gender Discrimination, According to the Complaints Sent to the Finnish Equality Ombudsman (p. 346)
Complaints: This chapter analyzes 800 complaints of gender discrimination made between 1997 and 2004 and sent to the Finnish equality ombudsman (p. 348). Men were 33% of victims, according to the author’s suggestion for the best measure of actual discrimination in these cases (outcome types 3–5, p. 356). Labour market discrimination, the largest category, primarily involved women (76%), while the second largest category, discrimination against customers, primarily involved men (~60%).
Another category, discriminative legislation, primarily involved men (77%). Few complaints were made, but due to active conscription policies (lasting 5-12 months), almost all men in Finland are affected by discriminative legislation. The author classifies these complaints as discrimination, although the equality ombudsman does not, “as the Finnish equality law is not applicable to men’s obligatory military service” (p. 354).
Bias: Per chapter 6, equality policy itself is in the matriarchal subsystem of equality (e.g., 90% of employees in the equality ombudsman office are female, p. 354). The ombudsman has a policy not to comment on complaints involving custody and divorce, purportedly to not interfere with the court system, but the author suggests that it stems from a bias against men, perhaps due to prioritizing women’s status over equality or wanting to avoid a flood of complaints from men (p. 354). This is made more explicit by another comment from the ombudsman’s office saying that it is not taking action on certain cases of discrimination against men because “the main purpose of the equality law is to improve women’s status especially in the labor market”, suggesting that the law should be applied more strictly to cases of discrimination against women (p. 381).
Patriarchal & matriarchal subsystems: 57% of discrimination cases in the matriarchal subsystem of society (as defined in chapter 6) were against men, compared to 31% in neutral domains, and 17% in the patriarchal subsystem of society (p. 358).
Discrimination examples: Many cases of discrimination against women (e.g., a workplace that only required women to do extra cleaning tasks on top of their regular duties) are recounted on the same pages but we’ll look at men here.
​

• In the labour market: At a mental hospital, only men were appointed to night shifts (p. 374). At a school, preference was given to hiring female teachers even though men are the “underrepresented” gender (p. 376). Many traditionally feminine jobs excluded men in their recruitment material (p. 377). A workplace allowed women to wear more casual and comfortable clothing than men (p. 377).
• As customers: Favourable pricing for women in boat cruises, discotheques & dancing places, dating services, gymnastics, a theatre, restaurants, horse races, and car insurance (pp. 380–382). Also more strict clothing standards for men at a casino, higher minimum ages for men to enter restaurants, and an apartment that only allowed women (pp. 382–383).
• Government administration: Subsidy for women’s osteoporosis medicines but not men’s (from pension fund), free public screening for breast cancer but not prostate cancer, higher retirement age for men (which has been changed) (pp. 387–389).
• Legislation: Men’s complaints were all about the obligatory military or civil service of six to thirteen months (those who refuse get six months in prison, p. 390).

Likely motives: Two alternative rating methods (tables 52 and 53) find that either (certain) feminist ideas are the most common motivators of discrimination against men, or sexism and the feminine bias are the most common motivators (feminine bias meaning unintentional gender bias of groups of women, counterpart to masculine bias of groups of men). Financial motives were also frequent (pp. 401-402).

https://becauseits2015.wordpress.com/2017/10/22/comprehensive-research-on-discrimination-against-men-in-finland/
This is a chapter-by-chapter summary of Discrimination Against Men: Appearance and Causes in the Context of a Modern Welfare State, a 2009 doctoral dissertation by Pasi Malmi (University of Lapland) that provides an impressively detailed and balanced investigation of discrimination against men in Finland (the theory and results actually give almost as much detail on discrimination against women, although men will be the focus here).
Chapters 5 to 8 are the most important. Chapter 5 explains six biases that cause gender discrimination, chapter 6 delineates the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems of Finnish society, chapter 7 examines the various discourses that justify discrimination against men, and chapter 8 analyzes a database of gender discrimination complaints made to the Finnish gender equality ombudsman, a third of which were made by men.
(Length: 1,800 words.)
Chapters 1 to 4 (introductory/background chapters)
Chapter 1 situates the perspective taken by the dissertation within gender studies. It rejects anti-feminist and anti-women perspectives, and the glorification of traditional masculinity and gender roles (e.g., the mythopoetic men’s movement). But it also rejects the “critical studies of men” paradigm, which sees men as the main causes of men’s and women’s problems, refuses to criticize feminism or women, and does not believe that discrimination against white, heterosexual, middle-class men exists (pp. 20–21).
Chapter 2 defines various relevant concepts, and explains that the findings from Finland are intended to be relevant primarily for the Northern European welfare states, and secondarily for other European and Anglo-American countries (pp. 32–34).
Chapter 3 gives a brief overview of current or traditional viewpoints on what causes direct or indirect discrimination or mistreatment of men: gender roles, hegemonic masculinity, industrial capitalism, feminism (specifically gender feminism and victimization feminism), and exploitative women (pp. 36-44).
Chapter 4 develops a theory of sociocultural evolution, which says that ideas that are simple, exaggerated, and coherent with popular paradigms generally win out over their rivals, regardless of whether they are true or backed up by evidence. This happens due to functional selection (p. 57), unintentional biases (p. 63), and interest group bias (p. 71), among other factors (see summary, p. 115).
Chapter 5: Applying the Theory to Gender Discrimination (p. 118)
This chapter develops a general theory of gender discrimination, centered on a typology of six different biases that cause gender discrimination (p. 127).
The masculine bias and feminine bias are unintentional gender biases caused by the processes that simplify, exaggerate, and mutate people’s mental memes or ideas according to their gender (p. 127). For example, a person’s conception of domestic work or childcare will be centered on their own experiences or contributions, which are partly determined by their gender, and so they will often downplay/exclude the other gender’s contributions (e.g., yardwork vs. housework) (pp. 135–138). As a result of these biases, segregated groups and networks of men or women tend to have a masculine-biased or feminine-biased culture of values, priorities, concepts, words, stories, jokes, stereotypes and beliefs that can lead to practices that discriminate against the other gender (p. 120). For example, a group of female social workers might decide that women are better custodians of children and default to recommending custody to them (pp. 141–142).
The masculist bias and feminist bias come from interest groups, networks, or movements seeking to advance the status of men or women, respectively. Masculism and feminism have sexist and anti-sexist branches (p. 143). The modern sexist branch of feminism includes theories like feminist standpoint epistemology (which gives special status to women’s feelings and intuitions) and the feminist theory of social work (interests of women and children are synonymous, social workers should identify with their female customers). It also includes stereotypes that women are unselfish, peaceful, responsible, loving, hard working, while men are the opposite (pp. 149–152). The anti-sexist branch of feminism by definition is less hostile towards men as people, but it is not necessarily able or willing to accept men’s issues: “[i]n general, the idea of the discrimination of men is perceived as bizarre by feminists” (pp. 155–158). The sexist branch of masculism is discussed primarily in the context of religion (pp. 144–129). The anti-sexist branch of masculism has little power, although it is discussed as sometimes being the source of biased statistics downplaying women’s issues (pp. 152–155).
The alpha male bias and alpha female bias are the biases of high status (wealthy, powerful, attractive, etc.) members of each gender against low status members of their gender. They are particularly apparent in high status men’s bias against male criminals (male judges giving harsher treatment, including sentences, to them compared to women) and high status women’s bias against female prostitutes (pp. 170–173).
A central point of this dissertation is that male-dominated and female-dominated organizations (the patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems) are prone to predominantly discriminate against the other gender, but it’s important to clarify that they’re not guaranteed to do so. The masculine and feminine biases (the unintentional “own gender” biases) are just two of the six biases. An organization could be more influenced by the ideological biases (masculist and feminist biases) or the biases against low social status people of each gender (alpha male and alpha female biases).
Chapter 6: Locating the Patriarchal and Matriarchal Subsystems of the Finnish Society (p. 188)
This chapter identifies Finnish society’s patriarchal and matriarchal subsystems by looking at various measures of power, including raw numbers, managerial positions, control of knowledge, and informal positions of power (p. 222).
​

• Patriarchal subsystem: technology, commerce, state finances, defense, agriculture, transportation, trade, corporative labor and employer organizations.
• Matriarchal subsystem: healthcare, social services, social policy, equality policy, hotels, restaurants, and some cultural services.

Not all areas of Finnish society fall into one of these subsystems.
Chapter 7: An Empirical Examination of the Memeplexes, Discourses and Coalitions that Induce Discrimination against Men (p. 224)
This chapter analyzes the discourses that justify discrimination against men, coming from sources that include sexism and feminism.
Sexism: The development of the modern misandric versions of sexism is examined, including 19th century views of men as “barbarians whose urges had to be leashed in by the forces of decency—meaning women—if civilization were to survive” (p. 233), which it attributes to the joint interests of women and upper class men. Notions of chivalry and macho masculinity also lead to institutionalized belief systems where men’s comfort, health, and even lives are considered less important than women’s (p. 238). Macho masculinity, with its aversion to men “complaining”, tends to oppose talking about men’s issues or seeing them as relevant for gender equality (p. 306).
Feminism: Certain influential varieties of feminism see women as the disadvantaged and discriminated gender (p. 247). Thus the sole purpose of equality policy is women’s advancement (p. 256) and men are largely reduced to the role of defendant (p. 270). When faced with cases requiring a choice between promotion of equality and empowerment of women, many feminists reacted by rejecting equality as outdated or as a smokescreen for promoting men’s interests over women. Under these discourses, “the empowerment of women is more important than the advancement of gender equality in all contexts, including the matriarchal subsystem of the society” (pp. 259–260). That would apply even to women’s advantage in family courts and criminal courts (p. 305).
Also mentioned is a combination (and mutation) of difference feminism and equality feminism which says that “women are superior to men in many ways, but men are not superior to women in any ways” (p. 296)—which means that when men are ahead it’s because of sexism, but when women are ahead it is legitimate and natural.
The groups and alliances that justify misandry and discrimination against men (p. 334):
📷
Chapter 8: Gender Discrimination, According to the Complaints Sent to the Finnish Equality Ombudsman (p. 346)
Complaints: This chapter analyzes 800 complaints of gender discrimination made between 1997 and 2004 and sent to the Finnish equality ombudsman (p. 348). Men were 33% of victims, according to the author’s suggestion for the best measure of actual discrimination in these cases (outcome types 3–5, p. 356). Labour market discrimination, the largest category, primarily involved women (76%), while the second largest category, discrimination against customers, primarily involved men (~60%).
Another category, discriminative legislation, primarily involved men (77%). Few complaints were made, but due to active conscription policies (lasting 5-12 months), almost all men in Finland are affected by discriminative legislation. The author classifies these complaints as discrimination, although the equality ombudsman does not, “as the Finnish equality law is not applicable to men’s obligatory military service” (p. 354).
Bias: Per chapter 6, equality policy itself is in the matriarchal subsystem of equality (e.g., 90% of employees in the equality ombudsman office are female, p. 354). The ombudsman has a policy not to comment on complaints involving custody and divorce, purportedly to not interfere with the court system, but the author suggests that it stems from a bias against men, perhaps due to prioritizing women’s status over equality or wanting to avoid a flood of complaints from men (p. 354). This is made more explicit by another comment from the ombudsman’s office saying that it is not taking action on certain cases of discrimination against men because “the main purpose of the equality law is to improve women’s status especially in the labor market”, suggesting that the law should be applied more strictly to cases of discrimination against women (p. 381).
Patriarchal & matriarchal subsystems: 57% of discrimination cases in the matriarchal subsystem of society (as defined in chapter 6) were against men, compared to 31% in neutral domains, and 17% in the patriarchal subsystem of society (p. 358).
Discrimination examples: Many cases of discrimination against women (e.g., a workplace that only required women to do extra cleaning tasks on top of their regular duties) are recounted on the same pages but we’ll look at men here.
​

• In the labour market: At a mental hospital, only men were appointed to night shifts (p. 374). At a school, preference was given to hiring female teachers even though men are the “underrepresented” gender (p. 376). Many traditionally feminine jobs excluded men in their recruitment material (p. 377). A workplace allowed women to wear more casual and comfortable clothing than men (p. 377).
• As customers: Favourable pricing for women in boat cruises, discotheques & dancing places, dating services, gymnastics, a theatre, restaurants, horse races, and car insurance (pp. 380–382). Also more strict clothing standards for men at a casino, higher minimum ages for men to enter restaurants, and an apartment that only allowed women (pp. 382–383).
• Government administration: Subsidy for women’s osteoporosis medicines but not men’s (from pension fund), free public screening for breast cancer but not prostate cancer, higher retirement age for men (which has been changed) (pp. 387–389).
• Legislation: Men’s complaints were all about the obligatory military or civil service of six to thirteen months (those who refuse get six months in prison, p. 390).

Likely motives: Two alternative rating methods (tables 52 and 53) find that either (certain) feminist ideas are the most common motivators of discrimination against men, or sexism and the feminine bias are the most common motivators (feminine bias meaning unintentional gender bias of groups of women, counterpart to masculine bias of groups of men). Financial motives were also frequent (pp. 401-402).

View this thread for the most up to date pubstomp list! This thread is updated everyday! Organizers, you can create an account and publish your event on Esports-Tickets.com if you plan to sell tickets, $0 fees promo for organizers
I tried to look for a pubstomp thread but couldn't find one so here it is! Usually Reservoir_cat creates this one but I haven't been able to get in touch with him/her. Here's the old TI7 and TI6 pubstomp threads.
There are a couple of threads made to ask for surveys/feedback/how-tos about pubstomps, feel free to PM me because I've organized several pubstomps in the past and partnered with sponsors such as RedBull, Logitech, GameVox, AMD, etc. as well and can offer a few tips and tricks!
Comment below with the country, city and description for your pubstomp, it helps a lot to include a link for additional details.

Country	City	Description
Australia	Brisbane	Event Link - Tickets $20 before 18/08, $25 after. Food and Drinks provided, giveaways and 1v1 tournament as well. luberk
Australia	Melbourne	Event Link - One amazing guy has rented a cinema in Melbourne, Australia if you feel like joining us at 3am! priorax
Australia	Sydney	Event Link - The same amazing guy that rented out a cinema in Melbourne, Australia has also rented out a cinema in Sydney, Australia if you feel like joining us at 3am.
Austria	Vienna	Event Link - HurghtRS
Belarus	Minsk	Event Link Official Secret Shop, bars , cosplay & sponspors giveaway. Velcom Cinema & Galileo Silver Screen RestorKa
Brazil	Belo Horizonte	Event Link - We will broadcast every game, including group stages, at WASD eSports Bar in Belo Horizonte, Brazil. For the finals we are planning a big event with giveaways and x1 with pros and semi-pros. The tickets are R$ 10,00 and you can check it out here. Urso_WASD
Brazil	Porto Alegre	Event Link - Venha assistir a final do The International 2018 ao vivo, em um telão, na Lends Club! Teremos comida, chopp e premios! Come watch The International 2018 finals on a big screen, at Lends Club! We'll have food, draft beer and prizes for atendees! esportsPOA
Canada	London	Event Link - We will once again host @ The Squire Pub & Grill in London, ON, CAD. RGBKnights
Canada	Ottawa	Event Link - At Click eSports Sat, 25 August 2018 12:00 PM – 8:00 PM EDT. Ticket types to only watch or to also use gaming PCs at same time (note that I am not the organizer) Cote-de-Bone
Canada	Toronto	https://esports-tickets.com/event-public/ti8ve - Join us again this year at the Cineplex Yonge and Dundas! We’ve always sold out every year for the pubstomp and the crowd is always awesome! Need more information? Information and tickets are on our Esports-Tickets.com event page and you can join the Canada Dota 2 group. Some ticket packages are limited in quantities, so if you can't purchase a specific ticket, it means that it has been sold out. chibista
Denmark	Copenhagen	Event Link - Cinema viewing party for the Lower Bracket Final and Grand Final of TI8 on 25. august 2018. 17:45-04:00 CET (or whenever it ends) with competitions, giveaways, free Coca-Cola at entrance, hosts, entertainment and a great atmosphere. Panel, interviews, and ceremony will all be broadcasted as well. OlLi_-
Estonia	Tartu	https://www.facebook.com/events/218604902140257/ - Hey! I'm organising a pubstomp in Tartu, Estonia. No ticket and proper pub food at the pub Illegaard. More info can be found at our FB event. dekamano
Finland	Helsinki	https://www.facebook.com/events/285584798893275/ - PHZ.fi in co-operation with Aalto Gamers are organizing a viewing party in the Helsinki metropolitan area (Espoo, Otaniemi to be precise). You can get there very easily by metro from Helsinki. Come enjoy the final day of TI8 with us! There's gonna be pizza & soft drinks available for free + there's a grocery store and a grill close by to the venue phzgames
Finland	Jyväskylä	Event Link - There's one here organized by JeSSe Ry: Jyväskylä, Finland. Ilokivi onstage. Facebook link for the event: This is 18+ event. Hallunder
Germany	Karlsruhe	Event Link - Since we have successfully hosted Germany’s biggest Dota 2 public viewing for a couple of years now, we want to try meet the expectations this year once again. We will be broadcasting the grand finals on August 25th on the AKK tribune starting at 7pm. There, we want to collectively experience the biggest spectacle in this Dota 2 year with all the fans from near and far. Not only Dota 2 players but also DotA veterans, Dota 2 newbies and everyone who wants to get to know the phenomenon Dota are welcome to join us. spcemarine
Germany	Regensburg	Event Link - The 4th year in a row we are organizing the Dota TI finals public viewing in the old town of Regensburg. The event will take place at Picasso Regensburg. Starting time is 18:00 at the 25th of august. Like the last years the entrance is free, we have a pubquiz and MEGA Dota related drink specials. This year we also organized a Fotobox (thanks to the Gamerverein Regensburg) were you can take fotos with your favourite Dota heroes or even become one yourself! For further details you can look up the event page or contact us via facebook. Kryptondifluorid
Hong Kong	Hong Kong	Event Link - Location is still to be determined. Dota2 HK is hosting one on Grand Finals Day. Aug 25, 10pm HK Time. cybuster2
India	Delhi NCR	Event Link - Dota 2 Delhi pubstomp is back sunnydiv
Ireland	Dublin	Event Link - It's in the same pub as previous years. Strictly 18+ unfortunately. Hopefully can get added to the list. KC252
Netherlands	Amsterdam	Event Link - Confirmed to broadcast as many of the games as possible, even after official closing times. No Facebook event yet. Razorya
Netherlands	Rotterdam	Event Link - Pretty sure there is one in Rotterdam in the Netherlands. I'm not sure it's a "pubstomp" but they're supposed to be hosting something. justanothrunistudent
Russia	Saint-Petersburg	http://dota2vo.ru/ti8 - Organizing pubstomp 6th time in awesome theatre with lounge zone, secret shop, 1x1 tournament and other stuff. Come to us on 25th of august finargot
Singapore	Singapore	Event Link - Singapore's one's at SAFRA Yishun, main atrium. Minimum spending of S$5 as per the post, for snacks pass. Cannot go because i booked a hotel somewhere else. nekosake2
Singapore	Singapore	Event Link - 2nd one is at Singtel Comcentre, with PMS nekosake2
South Africa	Cape Town	Event Link I think there's something happening in Cape Town (South Africa), I'm definitely gonna attend it :D meeposki
South Africa	Johannesburg	Event Link - Sparky_Naartjie
Sweden	Stockholm	https://www.facebook.com/events/206858336604801/ - I'm not entirely sure, but I believe it's an 18+ event. burger_stand
Thailand	Bangkok	Event Link - Not sure if this counted as pubstomp but we are having one in Bangkok, Thailand. Sponsored by Lenovo Thailand. It will be hosted at Siam Pavalai Theatre on the 6th floor of Siam Paragon shopping mall. Aug 25-26 10pm-10 am local time. Rawinza555
Thailand	Bangkok	Event Link - Another BIGGEST PUBSTOMP in BKK THAILAND is held by INVATE, Esport Specialist in Thailand (The best Live Broadcasting), who will bring the best experience to all Dota 2 fans!! discotechssss
Ukraine	Odessa	Event Link - there is pubstomp in Odessa, Ukraine if anyone even cares
United Kingdom	London	Event Link - This event is pending and not finalized JawnisBritish
United Kingdom	London	https://www.facebook.com/events/259335661345723/ - We are having one at the Carlsberg Esports bar in central London with free entry, food and drinks available and more to be announced. BanKseSports
United Kingdom	Manchester	Event Link - Over 18s only (they are Casino venues) epicWinbar
United Kingdom	Newcastle-upon-Tyne	Event Link - Over 18s only (they are Casino venues) epicWinbar
United Kingdom	Reading South	Event Link - Over 18s only (they are Casino venues) epicWinbar
USA	Acton	https://m.facebook.com/thepizzaplaceacton - Considering doing deals on pizza, apps, and Beer if we can get anyone out there. 85" TV and 6 TV'ss total in the sports bar. Pictures on Facebook. At this point its just me and my one friend. renorhino88
USA	Baltimore	Event Link - Hey, representing the Baltimore one as well! This event is 21+, food specials. It's the fourth year we've participated! Seanbiscuit
USA	Chicago	Event Link - If you're 18+ in Chicago and want to watch Grand Finals surrounded by fellow fans, come out to a FanHome hosted International watch party at Hi-Point, the gaming lounge of Highline in River North on Saturday, August 25th. Tickets are sold above, each ticket provides you entrance to the bar, food, giveaways from FanHome's beverage partner, and enters you into a raffle. Jayhawk2b
USA	Cincinnati	Event Link - I’m proud to announce the official TI8 Pubstomp this year in Cincinnati! I’ve been working with the owners of 16-Bit Bar+Arcade. We have a great venue setup, with our own reserved seating to accommodate however many people show up. We'll even have a signature drink just for the occasion! Please be sure to tell your friends and family (even those who haven’t watched or played DotA – they might leave a fan!).This event is for guests 21 and over, so please keep that in mind. Don’t hesitate to reach out if you have any questions and please RSVP if you plan on attending. Banana___Hammock
USA	Houston	Event Link - The International 8 Watch Party on August 25th In Houston, TX! Whether you love Dota, or have never seen a game this is going to be a great party for all gamers! We will have special guests, vendors, raffles, drink specials, food, hookah stands and much more! We will be raffling off a Hyper X gamer setup including a Mechanical Keyboard, Mouse, and Headset! LotharThrowaway
USA	Medina	Event Link - Welcome to the 6th year of me hosting Dota pubstomps in Medina Ohio. Last year was a great turnout but after many people saying that it was too small i looked for a new place again. Luckily the place i hosted in 2016 is back and that's where we are this year. As always the event is open to anyone of any age and no cover charge! I just strongly encourage anyone who attends to Eat and Drink there as they are giving us the place for the whole day for free. theaxel11
USA	Oakland	Cafe el Patio - In Oakland, California is going be showing everything from the group stages to the Main event finals! Address is 4030 International Blvd, Oakland CA. There is limited seating but there are three TVs. typicalhonduran
USA	Sacramento	Event Link - Come watch The International 8 at my house! Join us for our second annual Pubstomp! We host Friday and Saturday and setup a LAN party in the dining room to play between matches. Fairfield is located directly between San Francisco and Sacramento (North-East bay). Last year we had six viewers. Please RSVP so we can plan for food and message you the exact address. Amenities include: 75" 4k UltraHD stream with Pioneer 5.1 Surround Sound, Pizza, Beer, Nachos and More, Couches, Enthusiasm, Fast Internet, 420 Friendly josher777
USA	Seattle	Event Link - If you're over 21 and are in the Seattle area during TI, @FollowMe has organized a pubstomp in Capitol Hill for Saturday, August 25th. Sketches_Stuff_Maybe
USA	Washington	Event Link - Join us at Tenley Bar and Grill to watch the finals on their projection screen. This event is ALL AGES and cosplay is encouraged. There will be giveaways throughout the day of some Dota2 swag as well as 3 full event tickets for GEXCon (gexconvention.com) coming up at the end of the month. dmr83457
Vietnam	Hanoi	Pending details from 23 Creative VN ptaqll5
Vietnam	Hai Phong City	Event Link - Time 21:00 , day 25 / 08 , location : 21 Trần Hưng Đạo Street - Vườn Xuân Coffee butchimau_hp_95
Vietnam	Ho Chi Minh City	Event Link - Watch their full HD video for the event: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOLKzDDyNuU ptaqll5
Vietnam	Ho Chi Minh City	Event Link - Time: 21 h00 day 25/8-10 h00 day 26/8, location: Restaurant 68 lộc shots, number 213 to theme, Ward 15, District 10, TP. Ho Chi Minh. All details, please contact MEGA esports gaming house at 0909791809 ptaqll5
---	---	----

PS: Also still hoping Valve would ship this merch out to us pubstomp organizers :D
PS: Discount on ticket fees on esports-tickets.com, pm me for details.

I'm a 28 year old teacher, and I'm sick and tired of seeing the erosion of both our economy and the general pleasantness of the citizens in it. Children engulf themselves into the addictive screens of their parents' iPads instead of playing outside and breathing in fresh air (great job mom and dad). Parents make Facebook posts about how incredible their child is, ironically while ignoring their child because they too are addicted to technology. No one has a filter anymore. Road rage is ridiculous. Energy drinks are consumed by isolated and underdeveloped young minds. The expression "Thank You!" is gradually disappearing. The younger generation doesn't understand what a whisper is when they sit in a movie theater and watch a movie (Hell, I'll take the entire theater whispering over the kids that come into theaters thinking that it's OK to talk full voice). My generation will spend money on a monthly gym membership before paying off a credit card that is killing their credit. Priorities, folks.
People are (so) poor. Families who can't afford healthcare in a very pricey situation like cancer treatment are giving up hope. Our country seems to want to focus on the "now" rather than the future: credit cards, common core standards in education, taking money from Social Security. The collective group of politicians aren't noble anymore. Money can dictate/influence state/federal programs (i.e. Bill Gates' role in education). Parents get mad at the teacher when their child is disciplined in school, or performs poorly.
Simply put: I don't feel as patriotic as I did as a kid. I thought for awhile that it was just me getting older, and "mad at the world". Here's the thing though...I'm 28 years old and open minded on just about everything in life. Lately though, certain things I see are just simply getting under my skin. I was sitting in the dentists' office yesterday waiting to be called in. I looked around and saw four middle school aged kids, each with their own mother next to them. The kids were texting, never looking away from the screens, and lashing out every time the mothers engaged in conversation with them. Here's the thing, I'm young enough to know that this isn't just "a kid being a kid". Hell, I graduated high school just ten years ago and I wasn't this isolated. Do you want to know my theory? I think that when you give a child a piece of technology that 84% of Americans say they couldn't go a day without, load them up with sugar and caffeine (CAFFEINE!? ARE YOU KIDDING ME!? My parents would NEVER have let me drink a "latte" or have a cup of coffee in middle school) and barely socialize with those around them (mainly outside of school). And face it, we've all seen that group of people at a party or in schools who are all sitting around a table, texting people instead of talking to each other like human beings. That's truly a sad sight. It's really rude too. Have you ever been in a conversation with a person who, as you're talking, starts to look down to their phone and focus their attention on a tiny screen? That's like you and me sitting on a train, having an in-depth conversation, and right as you start to make a new point, I pull out a newspaper and put it up between us and start to read it almost as if you're not there.
OK, so it's not just the lazy and entitled youth that makes my skin crawl. I started thinking about the fact that I was the first in my family to graduate college. I did it. I had a dream and a goal, and I accomplished it. I was lucky enough to land a full time job and start building equity. When I took a step back though, I started to ask myself "why am I getting further and further in debt if I have a full time job?" Suddenly, I didn't feel as honored to be making a yearly salary. My 21 year old brother attended one semester of college and is a mechanic, making around 13 dollars per hour. Not bad at all for a guy doing exactly what he loves. 13 dollars isn't a whole lot in the grand scheme of things though. Which got me thinking...why is his credit better than mine? I make an annual income and he could get approved for a mortgage before I could. Ahhhh that's right, my student debt.
Not as many handshakes anymore. People don't seem to look you in the eye or smile when walking past you. Why? What has changed since the 1950's? No forget that...what has changed since the late 90's/early 2000's when I was a teenager? My friends and I (and most every kid I knew) were always outside, people were engaging and pleasant to each other and even those less fortunate that were around me weren't struggling by any means. Audible/visible stress and anger were not so outward and obvious. Well, this was right around the time that Clinton left with a surplus in our economy. Could this mean that money truly make us happy? The theme of many great novels has affirmed that money doesn't buy you happiness. But, does it at least help? Does a plethora of cash turn the top tier of wealthy Americans into Smaug from The Hobbit? Isolating themselves from society, sitting a top their mountain of gold?
See, I'm a realist at heart. I think that in life, we tend to over complicate things in searching for solutions. Psychiatrists over-prescribe medications for depression (I am a hypocrite because I fall into this) to patients who sit inside for more than half of the day watching TV and using their computers. We stuff data down children's throats and over complicate very basic and simple fundamentals through Common Core ELA Standards. So I find myself asking, "what simple steps could our country take to improve life for everyone? What could we do to get more money in the majority of our country's hands, and get back to a (real life) social culture, with interactions and enthusiasm?" Well, here are some ideas I have. Agree or disagree with me. I by no means "know it all". I just interact with kids everyday, and am learning through my very low bank account what's diminishing my daily drive:

1. FRACTIONALLY cut our defense spending: Please don't take this the wrong way. Lets say we spent 750,000,000,000 last year on our nation's defense. This year, we're going to cut that budget by TWO percent. That's it. That's nothing compared to the overall budget allotted. That minuscule cut would generate 1.5 BILLION dollars back into our economy.
   
2. Legalize and tax marijuana at the federal level: This honestly is not my bag. I'm asthmatic for starters. But I know one thing: you can make a KILLING on taxing the "drug" nationwide, while also fighting the war on drugs. We spend almost 20 billion dollars per year trying to fight the use of pot. Our tax dollars go toward the prison systems that house so many light offenders. Thousands of jobs are being created in states where pot is now legal. I think that opponents envision a country of dumb and lazy stoners if it were approved. Come on, this isn't Dazed and Confused. Plus how can we morally allow drinking but not marijuana? The annual rate of alcohol-related deaths in our country is pushing 30,000. With weed, it's less than the number of people who lose their life to tobacco use. I'm not saying people who smoke pot aren't going to get behind a wheel and get in an accident. But I am saying they are more likely to sit home, eat all of the food in their house and fall asleep. And I also am saying that science is telling us it's not addictive (like alcohol is). Where's the harm in that? They probably were giggling uncontrollably before they fell asleep too.
   
3. Put that "common core" spending into schools in general: Help schools LOOK better, and fund their after school programs. ENTICE kids to want to go to school. Don't push them away with a "one size fits all" standard.
   
4. Require drug testing for those on welfare: I teach in a high-needs school district, so I will be the first to tell you that culture plays a huge role in the standard of life for many. So many American's truly need assistance from the government and I believe they should get it. We all know though that there is a percentage of that group that takes advantage of the system. So, drug test them to ensure that said money isn't going toward illegal substances, and maybe those citizens will get back to work faster, and contribute to a stimulating economy.
   
5. Make the diagnosis of ADD/ADHD MUCH more strict: Again, I'm a teacher so I know that this sort of thing is no myth. Attention disorders are real. They plague our children in a time where it's hard to focus anyways. I myself did and still do suffer from ADHD. Here's the thing though. When I went into the doctor back at the end of high school to finally address this head on, all it took was a brief conversation to hand me a script for Ritalin and label me "ADHD". It's not so much the "lets not label them too quickly" that worries me. I've taken and still take Adderall. Truthfully, it helps me out a great deal. I'm on a very low dose of it. The doctor started me off on Ritalin though. It was great at first. I could get my work done and focus, and my god, I LOVED talking to everyone about everything. Most of what was around me started to interest me. As the medicine wore off though, I started to feel so angry for no reason. I locked myself in my bedroom, clenched my fist when a person walked past my bedroom, stayed away from conversation with virtually anyone. I never slept. It was awful. For those of you who don't understand what ADD medicine is, it's amphetamine salts. Simply put, it stimulates your central nervous system. Ya know, sort of like crack? So, we have these wired young minds, who could be suffering from the side effects that I went through, angry at the world and not knowing why, downing caffeine and getting more irritable. Focus all of their new energy and attention to video games and Smart Phone screens. This is our youth people. We need to encourage NATURAL development. Get them outside and fund the development of an ADD medication without the harsh side effects. Let kids be happy again.
   
6. A very large offense for texting while driving: Again, kids need to understand that the phone doesn't need to be in their hand 24/7. Do you know what the leading cause of teen death in this country is? It's not drugs and alcohol. That's right, it's texting while driving. I'm so sick and tired of watching a car swerve all over the road while tailgating the car in front of them. That's not OK. Make it a humongous number (lets say $1,000 first offense, $5,000 second offense, jail time 3rd offense). That may do the trick. Then, put those fines into something positive like our education system.
   
7. Start pulling people over when they go five miles over the speed limit or tailgate: I'm sorry, I know this will be an unpopular one. Let me explain...I got pulled over three weeks ago for speeding. I was pissed. I almost felt like "how dare you pull me over!?". Then I realized WHY I was mad. I'm so use to seeing people go 10-15 miles above the limit, past a cop, and not get pulled over. Why? THEY SHOULD get a ticket. That's not OK. You're driving 60 in a 55? Too bad, you're getting a ticket. There shouldn't be a "window of allowance" in the law. We live in an age where cars have cruise control. I realized after thinking about this that I was the jerk, and I absolutely deserved a ticket. Oh yeah, and THAT money goes back into the economy too. I'm an idiot? Well, society can benefit from it.
   
8. Require learning a foreign language, taking a music course and being involved on sports team/club at EVERY grade level up through graduation: Again, our country over thinks solving problems. "How in the world can we improve test scores and make kids smarter?!". Hmmm, how about we look at what activities naturally do this. Did you know that people who learn a second language and are bilingual students are better at prioritizing and managing multiple tasks? Did you know that by learning a second language, you actually improve your skills in your native language as well (ya know, all of that ELA improvement stuff?). Did you know that kids who learn an instrument have larger vocabularies and more advanced reading skills than those who don't? Did you know Children who study a musical instrument are more likely to excel in all of their studies, work better in teams, have enhanced critical thinking skills, stay in school, and pursue further education? Did you know that Schools with music programs have an estimated 90.2% graduation rate and 93.9% attendance rate compared to schools without music education, which average 72.9% graduation and 84.9% attendance? Did you know musicians tend to have an IQ score between 7-10 points higher than those who don't? Did you know that (across the board), kids involved in sports tend to have higher grades, greater personal confidence and self-esteem, stronger peer relationships and are more able to be a part of a team-oriented job after college? ....Are you kidding me?! Why are we not throwing tons of dollars at this stuff?!?!!? There's a huge part of the solution, people. Simple. Do you know what my favorite part of the day was when I went to school? Yup, all three of the activities that I listed. They seemed "fun" to me, but were challenging my brain more than I could have ever imagined.
   
9. Allow student loan deferment up until one year after obtaining a full-time job: I know I know, this seems like it will create more of a lazy culture. I beg to differ though. I think people my age are just tired. They are tired of graduating college with a plethora of ambition and enthusiasm to succeed, and very quickly becoming broke from the ridiculous 6 month deferment of their student loans. If we want to invest in our country's economic future, shouldn't we encourage college graduates to begin their life and start building credit/equity/savings while spending? I was responsible with my money and passionate about job searching right out of college, but the truth is, I could barely live on any substitute teaching income because of my student loan payments AND their interest rates. If I could have continued looking for a job, paid off my immediate bills and SAVED that money that went into loan payments, I would have had a much better shot at being a contributor to our economy. Isn't spending a large part of stimulating an economy? Well, lets get people spending! Buy a home, purchase a car for job searching. Whatever the spending is though, I assure you excessive interest rates that turn into corporate profits are not going to help our economy. I'm not saying people shouldn't be responsible for the money that they borrow in college. I'm simply saying give them a fair chance at succeeding.
   
10. Have a more well known federal student loan forgiveness plan: Some of you may know that if you teach in a high-needs district for a minimum of five years in New York State, you can have a portion of your federal borrowed money wiped out. I'm not complaining...that's awesome. Why not do this for all jobs? Forgive a percentage of a person's GOVERNMENT student loans if they hold down a job for five (maybe even ten?) consecutive years. They are showing that they are devoted to being an active member of society, while stimulating growth in our economy. After all, the government isn't GIVING you any money by offering this. It was already given. It was already borrowed. So, they aren't losing MORE money by forgiving that small percent. It's a win-win.
    
11. Get down on overseas profiting by large corporations: This a no-brainer. It's hard to stomach the idea that I have a great deal of taxes taken out of my pay check, but companies like Apple and Google can avoid the hundreds of BILLIONS in taxes that they should be paying by keeping their assets overseas. I'm not down with that.
    
12. Tax the rich ($400,000 annually) at a higher rate: When Clinton was in power (I know, he had his problems too as president, but hear me out), he raised the top two tax brackets to 36 and 39 percent. Look at our country when Eisenhower taxed the rich at NINETY-ONE percent! (Keep in mind, we still are under 40 percent right now). Everyone from an economic standpoint, was better off. A 90 percent top marginal tax rate doesn’t mean that if you make $450,000, you are going to pay $405,000 in federal income taxes. Americans have a well-documented trouble understanding the notion of marginal tax rates. The marginal tax rate is the amount you pay on your income above a certain amount. Right now, you pay the top marginal tax rate on every dollar you earn over $406,750. So if you make $450,000, you only pay the top rate on your final $43,250 in income.
    
13. Along with number 12, adjust tax rates based upon socioeconomic status: If I'm a middle class citizen, I see more benefit to our economy by paying a fraction higher in tax than those who are trying to get their life back on track, with little-no income.
    
14. Allow but STRICTLY regulate online gambling: During my Masters Program, I took a class called "The Ethics of Gambling" where you learn all of the cons that come from the addiction of virtual casino gaming. I wasn't totally against the country's ban until I recently was cashing out at my local Wegmans grocery store. I looked in front of me at three huge scratch off machines. Men and women were scratching tickets viciously, throwing away dollar after dollar, hoping to hit it big. It was then that I thought, "if I can throw away money here, why can't I do it from the comfort of my home?" If our government only allowed a certain amount of deposits and a minimum deposit amount, it could help combat the overly excessive spending for those who are awfully addicted. "Oh you want to play poker? Sure, but you can only deposit a maximum of $50.00 per year of your own money. Budget that how you will. Any money you make is fair game. Feel free to keep using that. But you cannot deposit ANY more and gamble away your families savings. Oh, and we'll track it, so don't try to pull one over on us." And hey why not require a tax and minimal fee (lets say 1.00 even)? If 20 million Americans deposit 10 bucks on the site, that's 20 million dollars toward the economy outside of the taxes.
    
15. Anyone on welfare must have their mobile phone deactivated: I'm sorry, but our world thinks we NEED a smart phone. We don't. It's that simple. Email them, write a letter or hell, just go visit. OR, you can pay a close-to-nothing bill for a landline that you pay for with your welfare fund (lets say 5 bucks a month). You are given the government landline phone, and you're still left with a large portion of your benefits. If you want your Smart Phone use back, go get a job. Simple.
    
16. Stricter guidelines by the FCC: Another one I doubt will be liked by many: Please keep in mind, I'm young and by no means a "perfect" ethical person. I watch The Walking Dead, Breaking Bad, True Detective, George Romero zombie movies, grew up on punk rock music like Bad Religion and NOFX, so I have a close relationship with poor messages and awful language. To me though, the problem is how accessible awful content is to VERY young kids. Every year, I feel like a "worse" word is being said on TV. And I'm not talking about late night TV. I mean right around the time that a family sits down to eat dinner. On top of that, every time I turn on a talk radio station on my drive into school or on my way home (local station too), the two DJ's get away with some seriously awful words. And, the songs they play seem to drop more and more censored words all of the time. Morals at an early age. Teach kids a strict way to live early on, and then let them decide what sort of life they want to continue after that. Set up a strong foundation, and then let them do with it what they want. Kids shouldn't get away with everything before high school. They should learn the rules and laws in a very scary way.
    
17. Category Spending Caps for federal assistance programs: Again, people NEED welfare. I know this and advocate for it myself. I think though that if the pre-loaded card had the amounts budgeted out for the recipient, it would lead to a less abused system. For example, "Sure Jon, you're approved for government assistance! We're giving 1600 dollars per month. We set this amount based on your necessary expenditures. Here is your breakdown sheet. It shows you how much you have on it. Be careful because once it's gone, it's gone until next month. You have the 500/month for your rent, 400 here for food and toilet trees, 100 for gas, 50 for job-interview clothes/supplies, 50 dollars for total family clothes, 475 for the utility costs you listed to us, and 25 dollars for whatever you choose. You can use this last 25 for whatever you'd like. Here's the thing though, you have a list here of activities or places you can spend it at. For example, we will let you use this to take your family out one time to do something as a family that you choose. It has to be on this list though. If you don't use it, it DOES NOT roll over". Some of you may say, "oh come on, that 'fun' money will leave people milking the system!!". Think about this though...how much do you spend PER MONTH on just entertainment? I can guarantee you it's more than $25.00. I'll bet you that small portion of people abusing the system will get sick and tired of being told HOW to spend the assistance money, and go find a job.
    
18. Stop over-crowding our prisons for God's sake: We have the world's highest rate of incarcerated people. In 2009 alone, 1.66 million Americans were arrested on drug charges, more than were arrested on assault or larceny charges. And 4 of 5 of those arrests were simply for possession. Our country spends over TWENTY THOUSAND dollars annually per prisoner. Are you kidding me? This statistic sickens me. The worst part is it leads people to blindly believe that prisoners have it SOOO good. It's not that though. It's the fact that it's costing our country SOOOOOO much to fund all of these prisoners.
    
19. Follow Finland's approach to education: That's right, Finland is the world's superpower in educating young minds. And guess what? They don't do it with standardized testing. They do not believe in a centralized education system with exam-driven evaluations. They hire the best teachers available, allow their teachers to go through a mentor program where older teachers help them adjust, create their own curriculum and use grade level meetings everyday, where teachers can discuss shared students and how to help accommodate their needs.
    
20. A required common sense proficiency test (with questions pertaining to the child's level of function/special needs of course): Do you know what saddens me? When kids tell me that the capital of New York (state we're in) is New York City. Or, when they can't tell me who the Vice President is, Or, they have no idea that the Erie Canal is the closest canal to us, and that there are 5,280 feet in a mile. Why is this stuff important? I don't know, honestly. I just find it hard to be OK with the fact that kids are being asked to show five steps to adding 3 + 3 on the NYS standardized tests, but can't tell me basic knowledge like this. Oh, and don't even get me started on cursive. I can't believe so many kids don't know how to sign their name in this country. Don't blame the teachers. How can they spend time on teaching the artistic skill and identity of signing your name, when they are cramming to vaguely cover everything that COULD be on their standardized final.
    
21. Increase the federal aid to poverty-stricken school districts: I teach in a district like this, and it's a beautiful little town. The problem is that the district is required to raise property taxes to help fund school programs, which then diverts any chance of families starting a life there. Families avoiding the village ultimately pushes business from starting up. So, you have a school district who isn't receiving much federal aid, raising their taxes, not receiving any corporate taxes from local companies and of course cutting programs left and right for children.
    
22. Provide an incentive for companies to start up in these sort of small villages: I don't know what the incentive would be. A first year tax cut? Something. Maybe then you'll see a new store locate here bringing jobs and funding to the school district. I hate fat-cat corporations as much as the next, but I love my school district more, and want to see it start to revamp itself.
    
23. Put a limit on the amount of credit cards/charge cards per family and per individual: I'm so sick of hearing about how badly in debt everyone is from credit cards. Meanwhile, their kids are barely able to eat because the family is broke. Why should I be allowed to open a Macys, Kohls, Target, Walmart, Visa, Capital One, Master Card all while paying six other bills? If we want to stimulate our economy, maybe we should start to put a limit on how many plastic cards we can get approved for, no matter how good your credit is.
    
24. Don't allow a child under 16 (by law) to have a Smart Phone: We know the health risks of them, the distracted driving rates, the detachment from society. If you are a parent who truly believes your kid needs a cell phone in case of an emergency, then they are only allowed to have a simple flip phone. No texting. When you sign up for your family plan, you must put their info in, including age, so that they are not allowed this distraction during the most important years of their brain development. If they are bored without the Smart Phone, tell them to go outside like other kids. Boom.
    
25. Give a federal government "gift" of some sort to couples that get married: When I say gift, I'm talking about like $25-$50. It's just one more incentive (on top of love of course) to increase the dismal rate of marriages nowadays. More families means more spending. If the government is praising and acknowledging marriage, maybe others will see it as an exciting thing to.
    
26. Last but certainly not least, universal healthcare: Do you know what I'm sick of? I'm sick of hearing about (and seeing in my own life) people dying from conditions that they couldn't afford the treatment to. I'm sick of families filing for bankruptcy because of their mountain of hospital bills. Every human being deserves the chance for survival when it comes to money. Every year 100 million people are pushed into poverty because they have to pay for health services directly. And then guess what? They have to apply for assistance, and we spend more on the program. In 2010, 79 countries devoted less than 10% of government expenditure to health. Why don't we raise the taxes even more on alcohol and tobacco purchases, and put that money into our universal health program funding?
    

Well, that's the end of my rant. I apologize if I offended anyone. I really hope we see a change in our society. I have always felt pride toward our country, but always find myself dreaming of living in the family times of the 1950's (maybe it's from the Steven King books I've been reading). I hope we get back to those good, happy, un-distracted times.