[rewq4321]

I think the idea is simply to give resources to those based on what they need rather than to give to everyone equally. It costs more to educate a kid from a poor/disadvantaged background.

It doesn't really make sense to "treat everyone the same", since different people have different needs. Not everyone needs a wheelchair, but some people do, for example.

[OCASM]

So women need a wheelchair but not men? Doesn't seem like sex/gender is a good criteria here. Socioeconomic background would be far more applicable.

[rewq4321]

> So women need a wheelchair but not men?

That's a strange thing to pull out of my mouth, given what I said. If you're trying to say that gender shouldn't be a factor in determining a person's needs, then you're obviously wrong. Cis men don't need access to feminine hygiene products, for example.

You'd obviously want to take into account as many factors as possible when trying to work out a person's needs relative to someone else's. Socioeconomic background is a good start, but obviously doesn't capture all of the relevant variables. A trans person can come from a middle-class background, but be at a higher risk of bullying than the other middle-class children at a high school, for example.

[OCASM]

That sounds reasonable but you don't see mainstream feminism even acknowledge men being disadvantaged against women in certain contexts (family courts, homelessness, etc) and if they do they just blame men for it and continue to advocate for women and minorities only.