@treos2: I did read the rest of it, but it was clear that you know what neither he nor I were saying. What you said had nothing to do with what he and I were talking about.

"then kindly go away and stop wasting other peoples time"

You came here, responding to me talking to someone else, remember? You are the one wasting my time responding to things I didn't say, defending someone who didn't at all say what you think he did. You are the one who needed to go away, or not butt-in on a discussion you weren't reading in the first place.

Edit: How about this, if you can quote the section of his comment that said it had ever been about equality at all, I will say I am sorry for coming here and wasting your time (despite the fact that you are the one who jumped in).

Edit again: Hey, so it does say "to implement equality", how about that. It is still absurd to say "prostitution, rape, forced immolation of widows, abuse" are the only things that count in that regard, as from the beginning it was also about equality in politics at the very least.

Okay, last edit: These edits do suggest that I have no way of knowing if his comment was edited to included the word "equality" after I commented. Certainly, if you took out the phrase "to implement equality", it would seem like he wasn't talking about "equality" at all. The things he points to aren't about equality, just basic protections.

@treos2: "like gamefreak215jd said, there used to be a time when it was about equality"

Proving beyond a reasonable doubt that you aren't paying attention. Thank you, that will be all.

@treos2: Okay, so you jumped into a discussion without understanding what was going on. Whoops.

@treos2: So you're saying it was about that in the past, so you agreed with my point?

@gamefreak215jd: That's absurd. It has always been about equality. Even Plato wrote about how women should be considered equal, not just that they shouldn't be raped or burned alive. How far back are you going, exactly? Pre-historic times? Are you talking about pre-Homo Sapien feminists?

@SavageEvil: You know, if it was more acceptable for women to be out working too, men wouldn't be on the line as much for alimony. The main reason men take the fall is that they tend to be the ones making money, because that is what has been socially acceptable for a long time. It isn't just a bias that men should pay women; my friend caught her dad cheating, and now her mom has to pay a considerable sum in alimony because she was the one who made the money. That kind of flies in the face of "discrimination against men", considering he was the one cheating also.

@FinalPreator: Yes, I like how most of the people here say "feminism" is the problem, but have no qualms with how quickly they assume this is the result of reverse-discrimination. They think "real feminism" worked and the ones still complaining are being ridiculous, but are completely closed to the idea that these enrollment numbers are fair.

@nurnberg: "The problem is that they force women into gaming development by openly discriminating against males. They hire women just because of their gender. Women were never prevented to work into gaming development, but now we are preventing men to work into gaming development in the name of "equality". So to counter fictional discrimination, they use real discrimination."

Evidence, please.

"They claim a male hero is ;wrong'."

Evidence, please.

"Based on what?"

Very good point about the importance of evidence.

@coop36: "Doesnt take a genius to figure they have more female students now because theyre simply turning away most male applicants. Gotta meet that superficial political correctness quota."

Correct, it doesn't take a genius to jump to conclusions to support their own beliefs.

@CatAtomic999: Good point.