Under “provocations”.
So, one writes an article on deaths at work, and here they tell you “this is not hate, there is nothing systematic, and they are not two weights and two measures”. Then you go through the papers and see this.
of Veronica Mazza 
I also take a screenshot of them, you never know they take it off:
Now, I agree that we are on a lighter subject than 1100 deaths at work every year. True. And maybe that's also why I'm going to talk about it while having fun.
But let's try to imagine if it was "Antonio: I cheated on my wife to give vent to my sexual fantasies and so I saved the marriage".
I don't need a lot of imagination to understand how gentle feminist ladies would respond: the answers would range from "leave him" to "castrate him" to "kill him".
And I don't even want to imagine the names he would take, Antonio. Let's say they border on "sexist insults".
But then comes the second yardstick: go to any newspaper that has a women's column and find out two things:
- If it is the man who is cheating on his wife, it is necessary to immediately clarify the faithless, and in any case he is a bastard who has cursed God and whatever is good, from tiramisu to Kant's Categorical Imperative.
- If it is the wife who is cheating on her husband, it must be the husband's fault in some way. She is not to blame, and even if she does, you must say thank you: she saved your marriage.
Now, I'm not a moralist. With my past and my present I cannot be. What is on my balls is that I am told that there are no double standards and that "women's liberation" is a form of equality.
Because we're saying that if he has a lover because she's boring in bed (and there are boring women in bed), then it's a – let's start everything they throw at him here.
But according to the same newspapers, if he does it she "saved the marriage". Fuck. Say thanks, huh. In other words, this one comes home from Paris a little unsteady, kisses you with a faint salty taste in her mouth, and if you ask what she ate she replies “Salvation. Twenty-six centimeters of salvation ".
I know very well that there are couples where this happens, and consciously. They have always been there even without coming up with modern words like "cuckold", "bull" and swinger couples "at home". (those who exchange by sending their spouses to sleep at each other's house for a few days, in short, instead of doing it all together or in a private club). Even "polyamory" was not born when the Americans discovered it.
But the problem is that in this case everyone agrees, and it's not judgment.
Here we speak instead of a situation in which there is not only the judgment, but if Stefania is caught she gets the divorce wrongly, that is without alimony and all the benefits. If the same rules apply as for men.
But the point is the double standard: why is it different if a man does it?
Imagine that the “man” column of Repubblica exists, and that Stefano writes about when he was away for work in Paris and saved his marriage by meeting Celine, who raised his eroticism and all that.
What would he take on himself?
Could you do it, Republic? Would your audience tolerate it? Would the female audience tolerate it?
Sometimes I am tempted to take one of these letters, send them to a women's newspaper but change Stefania with Stefano, and see what happens.
I did it. Here is the result.
The story, as you will have understood from the answers, is of a Stefano who wrote the same thing (even if he does not claim to have "saved the marriage") as when he cheated on his wife. Except she found out and he's sorry.
Curious example of a double standard: apparently, in the journal of feminist self-righteousness (Repubblica) it seems that the double standard exists.
Obviously it is not as serious as in the case of deaths at work, in the sense that we are no longer talking about hatred, we are simply talking about contempt.
And so, what for men is "sucking", for women is "saving the marriage".
It is quite clear that the feminist agenda, in addition to hatred, also includes contempt, and the desire to humiliate men: as the latest indignant says, it is a question of taking away their dignity.
Don't tell me it's a question of dignity or equality, because this agenda is only about humiliating men, in this case husbands.
Oh, far be it from me to call "Stefania" with names like "whore". I lived away for 6 years, he continues. I went away on Sunday night and came back on Friday night. The hotels are full of "stefanias" who "save the marriage". But they are also full of Antonio "saving the marriage".
The real problem is the double standard: the standard whereby if he "saves the marriage" it is all you read above, while if he does it you have to say thank you.
So, feminist ladies, I have a proposal: progressive advertising.
In Germany, a special type of venue is legal, where marriages are saved for a fairly small amount. A man can enter and save his marriage at will, with rates ranging from 130 euros / hour onwards.
A bargain, huh?
But to save a marriage, this and more.
Sacrifice yourselves, COWARDS!
Or, laugh in the face of feminist self-righteousness.
It costs less, and maybe saves the same marriage. In the sense that you remain single.