Beginning of the abstract:<p>> Despite well-documented disparities disadvantaging women (e.g. discrepancies between men and women in salaries and leadership roles), we argue that there are contexts in which disparities disadvantage men. We review the literature suggesting harm to women is perceived as more severe and unacceptable than identical harm to men...<p>Part of me says "wow, <i>really?</i>" - in a very cynical tone.<p>Another part of me concludes that their supposed academic discipline exists in some sort of theological bubbleverse, and needs to be re-classified as such (non-profit, but no public funding). Any young man who's been hassled by the police a few times, or any guy who has experienced the "everybody knows" assumption that his sex automatically makes him less qualified and less trustworthy for domestic duties, or anyone bright enough to connect the "conscription for combat duties is 99.9% male, and <i>lots</i> of people die horribly in combat" dots could have told you that their thesis was already "everybody knows" by 100 years ago. Or 1,000 years ago. Or 10,000 years ago.