Who suffered more throughout history, men or women?

Who suffered more throughout history, men or women?

Well women lived longer than men so they suffered for longer. Men also killed themselves more so women suffered more and longer. So women.

with shit threads we all suffer

You choose to make a thread good or bad bitch

define suffering

Is all the suffering was turned into water which ocean would be bigger? The man ocean or the woman ocean

> look mom I posted it again

Woman ocean.
You know why.

okay let me rephrase my point

the "suffering" that some have ascribed to women is at the expense of men, yet for men that same "suffering" was the entire goal of the "suffering" that they went through (labor, war, etc.) so some parameters have to be laid out

>last thread immediately gets turned into a shit hole
>decides to do his part to turn this one into a shit hole as well
THANK YOU

That was pretty deep. Of course, that assumes that living is suffering. Do you really believe this?

Childbirth is the single most painful thing known to man

probably women since while men had to do heavy lifting women could not do or rather that they were perceived better at doing, they received lots of privleges. Often,disproportionately since the men at the tip top rarely had to put in the amount of labor the average man OR women in the past did.
Also I'm pretty annoyed that a similar thread I posted comparing historical hatred towards teenage girls in society and now was takened down. It was well argued and I didn't even assume I was correct. I was asking for arguments for or against the idea.
The mods on this board are so stupid sometimes.

You’re a great troll you really are

Men. fought in more wars, labored harder, sufferer in all respects more and died more.

that and passing a kidney stone. Though yes, I admit it is much less common than childbirth.

Getting shot in the gut is far worse.

>this shit again
Kill yourself faggot

Bullshit

Nah cluster headaches are, I believe they did research on that

>Who suffered more throughout history, the peasants or the royalty?
Daily reminder that men are literally a slave class biologically designed to serve their female masters, and unless a war declared on MOTHER Nature culminating in the total extermination of all females happens, it will forever stay that way.

As in people have clawed out their eyes to stop the pain

Getting shot in general is one of the most painful things.

I'm really notnot though.
Anfer about my deleted post aside. What do you find wrong about my assessement?
Our female ancestors weren't just sitting at home knitting all day(unless they were high class) in a world with no automated manufacturing and fancy appliances. They were doing back breaking work in the fields and around the house with their babies fastened on their backs, while their men were out doing similar back breaking work that was easier for them to handle but also risky.
Don't get me wrong, they probably knitting on their "down time" because you need clothing for the family, but most of the time they were working just as hard.

are cluster headaches as common as child birth user? Are the even as common as kidney stones?

>implying both threads were created with the express intent of shitting up the board

yet it wasn't a common occurrence until about 700 years ago. While bearing was always there. Also, you to die soon after that. Child birth can last hours to a whole day.

yeah wars they created (assuming you incluse upper class men in your argument). If you don't you're still stupid see the second paragraph of

Childbirth isn't as painful as washing your mother's cervix with sulphuric acid though.

Women have cluster headaches too, I wasn't arguing about OP(fag)'s shit topic

I didn't realize that men can give birth.

Women and men experience suffering differently. While objectively speaking, men have always been disposable, I would say that most men don't complain as much as women. Women probably experienced more stress or suffering in a more subjective way.

Even to this day, men have it worse off in every society yet there are hardly any legit organizations advocating for men. It's mostly groups of people advocating for women

I know, but women also have child birth. It's also much more common so I would worry about that before cluster headaches if I was a female who wants to have kids.
Why reply if you don't care about the discussion at hand?

>Women probably experienced more stress or suffering in a more subjective way.
In a "first world problems" kind of way. Like an aristocrat suffering a breakdown when her tea is too sweet while people outside are dying of starvation.

you haven't experienced childbirth and monthly periods so you really can't extrapolate wheather or not the suffering females experience is truly benign or not.
Yes women respond to stress differently than men but whose to say which stressor is actually diminutive? It's hard to prove unless were walk in one another's shoes.

all women were atistocrats?
Really user? this,entire post was dumb and not well thought out. I'm disappointed.

again, how often dies that happen?
stop being silly

See Women as a whole are an aristocratic class.

Far less often than it should.

but that's wrong because ofand child birth.
Get your unsubstantiated mra theories out of here.

but not as often as child birth. And it's pretty prevetable.
If you want kids(which post people do) child birth us not.

>muh child birth
Nobody cares nigger.

so you didn't read the post.
At least put effort in your trolling. Notice no one was replying to you stupid bait post until you forced it on me.
get lost.

I'm not trolling at all you vomit inducing cunt slave.

you didnt read shit and all you're using as an argument is shit you heard from MRA forums, /r9k/ and /pol/. You have no real data or citations. Actually, neither did they, so I'm not surprised.
I'm bored talking to you. bye.

>shit you heard from MRA forums, /r9k/ and /pol/
I developed my theory independently of others.
>I'm bored talking to you.
Don't care, subhuman.

IIRC it's actually some neurological condition. The pain of childbirth can depend on different factors.

>le ebin Pareto distribution meme

Not all women give birth and women can get put on birth control to stop having periods. Not really an issue anymore

>which wasn’t a common occurrence until 700 years ago
Yeah but getting stabbed in the gut was, and that’s objectively more painful
>and you die soon after that
How is that not worse?
Idk, as a dude you would have a much higher chance of dying in an extremely painful and violent manner.

And not all men have to get hard labor jobs and join the military (at least not in my country)? What's your point?
Most women want to have kids eventually and not all women go on birth control or can (it has many side effects).
Again, it's hard to measure.

a quick death is better than a slow painful one? It's also much better than torture.
what are you even arguing now?

>than a slow painful one
Dying of stab wounds is about as slow and painful as it gets outside of maybe dysentery or the bubonic plague, in terms of cause of death. Who said anything about pregnancy being a slow death anyways?

It really depends on time period desu. I would rather be an obedient housewife who shits out twenty kids than a man during World War One.

You are wrong

>Also, you to die soon after that
If you get hit in an artery. If you're less fortunate it can take hours or even days to die and you can get a nasty infection.

We’re arguing about who suffered more, not who caused the most suffering, you fuckin jackass.

Men without question

Why is there even an argument?

Men suffered more physically. They died more due to violence than women by a margin of 1:1000000 (probably more but lets just put it at a conservative number)

Women suffered more emotionally as they are survivors of the family and thus subject to single parentage.


Time heal emotional wounds. Death is permanent. Men suffered more.

>they were doing back breaking work in the field
A counterpoint, if I may. Agriculture was not a yearlong activity; in fact, farmers had a lot of downtime outside of regular bursts of extreme manual labor, especially when it was time to bring in the harvest. In those areas of downtime, I would argue that men did more of the manual and dangerous labor required to keep things running, such as construction, logging, hunting, and warfare especially.

>decide to have a baby
>waah it hurts wtf

I've been shot multiple times in the gut and I would still choose that over being a woman in labor. Call me a puss or whatever, but birthing just seems like prolonged torture.

And i’ve given birth multiple times and would much rather do that again than be shot in the gut

Men.

Food from hunt was nice but it wasn't the main staple for the average person. Reliance on grains(which can be easily stored once harvested) is what allowed many people to survive after the agricultural evolution. It's how population and civilizations florished.
Men would chop the trees down and bring them home. Women would chop them into smaller pieces for fire.
Also domestic chores are no easy task without modern appliances and conveniences. And c'money men wouldmt always do all the home repairs/construcution. Women aren't useless at crafting. Churning butter is hard work too.
Also, if we are talking hunter gathers,too, women would hunt small game usually with traps and that would be an important source. There is a sources I read a while back that explained this based on modern day tribes.
My point is, the average women then probably worked much hard than the average man abd women now.
The average man probably a bit more due to taking on the danger but relatively the same amount. Of course, these gender roles themselves probably weren't even absolutes at all times.

Counterpoint: the loss of male providers often plunged families in destitution, which lead to economic hardship and starvation.

While chores are by no means easy work they cannot at all compare to craftsmanship and construction, roles which were mostly performed by males. Chopping down a tree and hauling that shit back to the village is far more labor intensive than breaking it up for firewood. Women certainly did more than men do now, yes, but men still did more manual and dangerous labor than woman did if we’re not just focusing on a few months during the harvest season.

death some argue, also frees you from the suffering of this world, especially if it is a quick death. And don't act like wars never affected women directly too. women would be raped and taken into slavery in many cultures if their side lost. A side they often didn't even get to have a say in btw
I recognize rape as a form of torture. Probably not the worst imaginable but still torture.

>also frees you from the suffering of the world
Death in combat, especially in the ancient world, was almost never quick, and I would argue that spending your last moments on earth in incredible agony as you feel your consciousness slowly fading is a suffering far worse than anything else imaginable.

Didn't say hauling a tree back was easy. definely easier for men than women but yeah not easy. Hell if you're not careful the tree could fall on you're lol.

Men often had more dangerous jobs(as in you can die more easily if not careful) but not necessarily harder labor relatively.
.

>but not necessarily harder labor relatively
I disagree, but that’s irrelevant anyways since the fact that men and women did similar amounts of labor, but the labor the men did having a higher chance to kill them, means that men suffered more.

people go their heads cut off or smashes a lot though
Cutting your heart kills you in minutes.
bleeding our major arties kills yyou in less,than an hour too.
Women could be killed after rape too if youre,really going to soup up death so much so what's your point anyway?

>people got their heads chopped off
Decapitation strikes were pretty rare
>heads crushed
Same
>stabbed in the heart
REALLY fucking rare, stab wounds that weren’t immediately fatal were far more common
>killed after they were raped
Actually not true, most rapes didn’t end with murder.

>Men died more frequently than women.
>user, death is quick, is not suffering.
>Death in wars was mostly never quick.
>But womens suffers too, what's your point? (You are here)

proof? Women are raped and murder today. What stopped anyone during war in the past? Her being noble maybe but outside that? Muh honor? mean fuck all well fighting different cultures. And Slaves yes, but when that fell out of favor?
Bleeding out from major vessels still lasts less time than labor on average Iike I said. Oh and you could still die from that a lot back then. Post partum hemorrhage anyone? Let's not even speak of infection and generally bad practices.
You could die in labor often. And after. It's not like women had much choice then either. it was" their duty" as was a warrior/men at arms serving. And men could chose that sometimes.
Alright, let's at least agree they both had it damn near equally bad. I'm getting sick of the back and forth.

womemes have always had it easy. dont be as slut, get married, and do nothing but make sure your kids have something to eat. Or be a slut, get syphillis and die as a concubine.
Its only recently that women are bitching about wanting to work.
Yeah havings childrens is painful but so is dying in a battle with pikes and bows. Which is what a lot of men did for a good percentage of history.

>making shit up: the post

>proof
I don’t need to provide proof against your fucking asinine assumption that most blows suffered in combat were decapitations or hits to the heart.
>what stopped a woman from being killed after she was raped
Most rapes do not end in murder in any jurisdiction, not even the fucking Congo
>women could die during childbirth
Most deaths were due to infection after the fact, something men would have been equally exposed to due to the fact that they handled more dangerous labor.
>bleeding out from major vessels still takes less time than I said
And generally has a much higher chance of death than shitting out a child
>post party hemmorrhage anyone
First of all, you type like a fag, second of all post part in hemorrhage is rare.
>you could die in childbirth often
The absolute worst child mortality rate is in extremely underdeveloped Sierra Leone where the vast majority of births are not done in a hospital, and even there the mortality rate is 1.36%, your average soldier had a higher chance of dying from disease alone than your average woman did during childbirth.
>it’s not like women had much choice than either
And the men fucking did?
>it was their duty
Yeah like it was a woman’s duty to shit out kids
>men could choose that themselves
Are you actually retarded? Conscription, whether by feudalistic or tribal societies, has been the norm for time immemorial, you did not “choose” shit.
>can we agree
No, we can’t, because you are fucking wrong.

Man you're so far out of the loop.
Why are you on this board when you don't know history preWW1 abd modern era. The average women did more than you and your dad on an average day.
even user's who think men had it worst know this

*rapes you* whoops sorry Stacey, try not to kill yourself now after you kill your baby

I said proof for the no death after rapes not for decapitation. You gave me sources from one war.
I didnt say rapes weren't shit terrible btw that's just you still assuming that death is the worth form of torture than actual torture and that everyone would rather die than be brutally raped.

I didn't say all men chose I said that they could some times. Most werent choosing shit, but some who could decided a life as a warrior instead of a trades men because of the pay off(spoils amd glory) despite the risk. You're not reading right.
No women decided child birth.
By the time infections stopped being an issue most of the hard labor that men and women had to do on average drastically deceased(1800s). All there was left was war. btw you really make it seem like people were always at war at all times. Regardless, men weren't the only major sufferers from war period as I explaied.
Again, I would maybe cut even and say it was equal.

But are there any girls on Veeky Forums?

I don’t know, l’ve taken some pretty big poops before

>idiot cunt slave thinks he's in charge

this is a shit post but I'll bite
poop is free of bones and much smaller than an infant.
Just stop.

>proof for the no deaths after rapes
The Congo has a rape rate of 619 per 100,000 and a homicide rate of 35 per 100,000, this is about as close to medieval levels of violence we can get, assuming that literally 100% of homicidesare due to women getting raped, that’s 5.6% of rapes ending in homicide.
>no women decided child birth
Yeah no woman ever came to the decision with her partner to have a child right? Literally every sexual interaction men and women had before the 20th century was rape right? Retard.
>by the time infections started dropping in the 1800’s the amount of hard labor men and women had to do decreased
Nigger, what? Labor during the industrial revolution was just as backbreaking as agriculture and a million times as deadly, and the most physically intensive dangerous jobs were done by MEN.
>they weren’t the only major sufferers of war as I explained
They are far more likely to be killed in combat in a war they might not want any part of, and they have the same chance at being violently murdered or enslaved as women did if their side loses the battle.

First off, I didn't say women who had kids with their husbands were all raped. wtf?? I said they had no choice because it was seen as their duty. All the time, since babies died alot. Whether they liked it or not. It was "feminine" (gender role). They could in fact like it. I didn't say they didn't. That's you putting words in my mouth and not reading well.
You don't want to be a bad woman right? So do your duty. Plus, deciding to have kids as a couple back then was EVERYTHING. People got married because that's just what you did and you needed kids to help around the home and the village. Don't put modern sensibilities into it. It's not: "dear I think it's time we finally have kids." Thats the only reason they were together in the first place! Eitherway, it was still dangerous and suffering . Bad practices too: teenage girls (14-15) being pregnant when science shows the most ideal for safety is reasons 17/18-30. Having consecutive births (births should be separated at least 2 years to minimize complications).
>congo
You're extrapolating from a modern war. bullshit.
That's hardly my only point anyway;rape is a form of torture. Many people would rather be killed than raped(most victims attempt suicide for Christsake)

Industrial revolution work was much easier with machines. And women were still doing agricultural work before that and during(in the remaining farms) too so that says a lot.
The most dangerous jobs were mining and rail road construction. They're more dangerous than excessively labor intensive. There were and still are other jobs men did though so don't make it look like all or most men were doing that. People had a few more choices then(not a lot though).
Wars in the past or present didn't happen all the time and when they did both men and women were suffering on one side or the other. Even the Vikings "warred" but once a year. Ancient Greeks too. And they both mostly chose.
I'll maybe agree it was equally hard but definitely not less.

>they had no choice because it was their duty
Kind of like how serving in the army and performing dangerous and more intensive manual labor was seen as the job of the men, huh?
>you don’t want to be a bad woman right? So do your duty
Literally what happened to men who went off to war.
>you’re extrapolating from a modern war, bullshit
Please explain to me how an event which sees higher instances of female rape than peacetime in any way invalidates the data, which is meant to demonstrate that most rapes do not end as murder in the first place.
>most people who were raped attempted suicide
Literally not true whatsoever, where the fuck are you getting that from?
>industrial revolution was much easier because of machines
Lol no, it wasn’t, it still required massive amounts of heavy lifting from the overwhelmingly male workers who worked bringing-in-the-harvest-level-hours throughout the entire year.
>the most dangerous jobs were mining and railroad construction, they were more dangerous than labor intensive
Lol you have absolutely no ducking idea what you’re talking about, those jobs operated at the same level of intensity as agriculture except ALL YEAR ROUND instead of a few months per year.
>wars in the past or present didn’t happen all the time
They didn’t need too, they were deadly enough even infrequently.
>and they both mostly chose
Because it was seen as their duty :^)
>i’ll Agree it was equally hard
Men objectively had the more labor intensive and dangerous jobs when we look past the few parts of the year when the harvest was brought in and consider the bigger picture. You are wrong.

You’ve never taken my poops

...

I wonder what do these people expect to happen once they have sex. Do they really put pussy in such a pedestal? Do they think it will magically solve their problems?

SPOILER: If you are socially ackward, having a girlfriend won't make you popular. If you are ugly, having a gf won't make you pretty. If you are jobless, having a gf won't make you rich.

And more importantly, if you are clinically depressed having a gf won't make you happy.

It will just be another burden on your life. Someone that can't appreciate how lucky they are to have families who love them, won't appreciate nor know how to manage a gf either.

Most likely scenario is that they will still be depressed and socially ackward.

>known to man

I think you've answered your own question.

The root of their problem is loneliness, as you say. If they complained about how society treated them when they attempted to socialize, get a job, get an education and never mentioned sex they would garner more sympathy for their cause (and in the course of gaining a social life they would likely finally get laid). They don't because they are so detached and oblivious.

Many women and feminists view unattractive men with a sex drive as a problem and are working to marginalize them in complete hypocrisy to their own constant complaining about marginalizing women. They would not shed a tear if they were lonely for the rest of their lives. They are not powerful enough to impose their will on them though so it is not really an issue.

Is this relevant? As long as I know, if it was men: my grandpas were my sister's grandpas too; if it was women, my sister's grandmas were my grandmas too.

You must admit that there's no inheritance of pain, and if there is, we all share both males and females ancestors, so it's not rational to stand with your male or female ancestors depending on your personal sex.

G

>gurls

>yet it wasn't a common occurrence until about 700 years ago.
Too bad that has fuck all to do with your statement.

Men, dude. I can't believe we still have to defend these whores today.

>OP(fag)'s
Jesus Christ why try to fit in this hard when you clearly don’t
>I’m getting bored don’t talk to me anymore
>ok yeah but we can both agree
>my personal example trumps actual statistics
>proof proof proof
The way you argue is so disingenuous and hypocritical. You’re a pseudo intellectual cunt on top of it all. Discussing things with a woman like you is pointless because you don’t care even slightly about the truth.

The size equivalent for men would be pushing a tennis ball through your dickhole, have you ever taken a shit that big? Do you have pictures?