[usename_Here]

I agree on some of the points about support structures for women that don't exist for men. I've seen it occur even at the professional level, female co-workers are reached out to, invited to groups, given networking opportunities that I would have to put loads of effort to keep up with. It's biased treatment in the now, even if it's trying to offset the errors of the past.

[zarkov99]

Its not that the support structures do not exist, after all they never did and men did fine without them, its that college is suffused with an ideology that is anti-men, anti-merit and, for the most part, useless for anything but its own self-propagation.

[long_time_gone]

==its that college is suffused with an ideology that is anti-men, anti-merit and, for the most part, useless for anything but its own self-propagation.==

I never felt like this kind of victim while in college (mid-2000s). I wonder if all colleges have changed or if society has changed. If it is society that has changed, maybe our colleges are simply reflecting the real-world change.

[usename_Here]

Sure, those structures didn't exist prior, but that doesn't mean their existing now doesn't provide an advantage to those who benefit from them.

And it's not that I'm against such structures or groups on the basis of shared identity that you're born with, but I think it would be beneficial for those structures ( especially when they're company funded ) to have niches for those who don't fit niches.

[Applejinx]

You've got a fundamental difference of opinion around the basic purpose of the exercise and can't be trusted to have a rational opinion about what's really going on.

What is 'merit' for?

If your answer is 'distinguishing between things of worth and things that are valueless' then there's a problem, and you are prematurely contextualizing. Briefly, you cannot be trusted to dictate the contexts of value for the whole world around you. You're missing far too much. And it matters. Not just morally, but practically.