Actually, I completely disagree with that…it’s an invalid, and frankly, sexist. There probably is no sex that always ‘suffer’ more. But if we want to ‘score’ it what do you think men get up to during wars? I think it would be wrong to say that the women of World War II suffered more than the solders in the trench. And, while it’s slightly stupid to try to collate suffering I’m sure in the history of war more men have died horrible slow painfull deaths than women have been raped (now I know, that many women would choose a bullet in the gut rather than be raped but I think it’s fair to say that both options involve a lot of suffering).

the cost of getting your life together when there is no more men left

The cost of getting your life together is more suffering than actually dying, now, I can see how losing the people around you can be unbarable (your father, your brother, your son), but don’t you think that men suffer these loses too?

women in that sense are a lot stronger than men because even in the face of absolute desolation we can always go on

Which implies that men cannot do this? Well, I disagree this that. Men have just as much resolve as women.


Now, you could, argue that men cause wars therefore women’s suffering is worse because they didn’t bring it on themselves. But really Wars are started by the powerful. Women in power are just as capable of starting wars as men, it’s not the sex, it’s the position.

I really don’t think that you’ve looked fairly at both sides before you made up your mind on who suffers more.

edit:spelling