|
|
|
|
|
by tmcb
440 days ago
|
|
The OSH Act was passed in 1970. I wonder why it doesn't have "for men" in its name... Pardon my laziness, but this is the best graph I could find on the reduction of workplace-related injuries: https://fitsmallbusiness.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Info... This policy was very effective, in the first place. I could eyeball a 70% reduction in the period between 1972 and 2019. Can it be reduced it even further? Probably. Would I find it off-puting if any piece of legislation is eventually passed that addresses a hypothetical issue that is disproportionally faced by men and helps reduce it even further? Certainly not. (I, for one, would approve of the "No More Balls Stuck in the Cogs Act".) |
|
But the left will never prioritize men.
The left believes that any metric where women are worse off needs urgent attention, and any intervention must prioritize women.
But any metric where men are worse off can either be ignored, or fixed with an intervention that is either gender neutral, or preferably, prioritizes women again.
The left is the Party of Women.