Not the case today, at least in my area. Social housing is primarily now restricted to women, those with children, migrants and those who served in the military. If you're single, male and childless, the council will just tell you to not bother to apply because it will take so long, if you're lucky. That wasn't the case a couple or so decades ago.
Worse still, private landlords are starting to refuse renting their property to single people on the basis that a couple provide more financial security (two incomes) and the social stereotyping that singles cause more issues for landlords.
You can't legally claim welfare or be employed if you are not registered at a residential address.
While councils have a statutory duty to provide shelter for the unintentionally homeless, you still have all the problems above. The likelihood is that we're going to see a clampdown on homelessness via the new Criminal Justice Bill that replaces the Vagrancy Act by criminalising it and jailing the homeless!
I was listening to a commentary on the key aspects of what keeps men in long term relationships and one of them was regular access to sex from a partner.
We also know that women have an aversion to men they don't find attractive and that is what leads to dead bedrooms. Women find it easier to forgo sex and have their libido disappear according to the situation they're in compared to men. There is a reality behind the jokes around marriage and sex.
All this article will do is lead to frustrated men. If anything, this could be considered the western sex strike.
a gynocentric, female-ruled order.
Always has been. Even when men were in positions of power. Any feminist who claims we live or have lived in a patriarchy is flat out wrong, by definition, by logic and by evidence.
I'm guessing they must have heard in Japan of the London landlords who unironically did this very thing - put out ads for women only tenants who could live rent free in exchange for sex - and that's what caused the furore.
That's my concern too. That we're seeing a moral panic being crafted against an outgroup whom no-one will come to the defence to. The more reporting I see, the more I am convinced of this.
And now with a second knife attack in Sydney, we await and see what the media makes of the perpetrator because I fear another "lone wolf" attack.
A counter article from his father:
He wanted a girlfriend
Male escort =/= men offering services to men.
Is there any proof he was gay (the male escort thing didn't bring up any hint his target clientele were men from what I could fathom)? All what I could find points to him dating women and failing at it because he was "sweet and kind", as one example:
Elliot Rodger killed just as many men as he did women and yet it was still labelled as him targeting women.
I guess it shows that facts and logic should not get in the way of a narrative and how much the media values men.
The media seem to be focusing on two aspects of him, his neuroatypical mindset (like you'd see with schizophrenia or autism that generally women see as a deal breaker) and his failure to attract a partner without using the term "incel". Namely marking his "sweet and kind" nature as a warning sign.
And with the current state of the dating market, it's likely that we'll see more men disenfranchised from the dating market and society. Their proposed solution of ending "femicide" (the security guards life does not count to the media) will not deal with the underlying root cause but will denigrate all single (unvetted) men as a threat and a danger in a western country intent on implementing safetyism.
Does not fit the narrative the media wants to play out.
Another thing to note, the female officer who shot him has been applauded and praised for her heroism yet the man who held a bollard up to the perpetrator to stop him getting into the kids play area and committing acts of horror to children has remained silent.
Not an incel narrative, they're all careful not to use that word, but they are heavily implying that he is a single male. That targets a broader range of men in any forthcoming legislation or policy by the Australian Government.
Awaiting the inevitable "radicalised by Andrew Tate/Pearl Davis/ Fresh 'n Fit" narrative to begin.
Eventually we'll see splinternets where every country has its own Intranet, regulated and licensed by the Government and sold to you as both digital sovereignty and protecting digital borders through monitoring and survelliance "for your own safety". While Internet access is restricted to the Government and companies for international trade and as a middle man for the public if they wish to communicate to someone outside of the country or purchase an item for import via said company Intranet portal.
We've also got the desire to abolish anonymity, likely through both Government photo ID and live (ongoing) facial recognition. The likelihood of VPN's, Tor and proxies being made illegal. And to "protect the children", proposals to ban technology for under 16's.
The powergrab to splinter off the Internet into manageable country wide chunks by states is beginning. We're a long way away from what the Internet used to be.
Increasingly going to apply to the new laws coming to the real world and online. It's actually a thing coming up on the UK's Criminal Justice Bill designed to expand laws criminalising homelessness could inadvertently if passed, make it illegal to be unattractive in public.
We don't want a software equivalent of Boeing but that's where I fear we are heading if they succeed. Might not be as deadly as a Boeing mistake but I'd rather not run the risk of having my data wiped because of a need to fulfil diversity quotas in contributors meant someone who didn't know what they were doing put in a critical bug (it's already happened in the Steam Linux client).
They thought of people forking code and have safeguards to ensure people can't work around their purity tests and policing. I think eventually we'll see licences implemented on code that will ban use or contributions to it on "ethical" grounds.
Fork the kernel before it had the Code of Conduct but the problem is, contributors will only ever contribute code to the mainline kernel plus you're going back years, would lose compatibility with modern day devices and programs. BSD has this ideology infecting it too.
TempleOS is fast becoming the only OS without this ideology infecting it.
There is a whole meme playing out at the moment that states this very concept in terms of strong, independent women. The satirical concept of the "soft guy era" with the tagline of "drizzle drizzle".