Sg3 on 26/6/2012 at 19:55
Papy raises an invaluable point: women choose to have children. (Often against the wishes of the father.) It takes two to tango, but it is the women who are given the entirety of control over the consequences. The man alone is punished for the deed which both engaged in. This is yet another injustice which feminists enjoy.
I'm out. I never should have participated in this thread to begin with--it does no one any good, and all it's doing is making me angry. I loathe injustice and wrongness of any sort--unlike most people, who seem to only hate it when it harms them. Perhaps I am misjudging intention, but I've seen too much to trust in a basic goodness of people. Sg3 out.
faetal on 26/6/2012 at 20:04
Quote Posted by Papy
Oh, I know the difference, but it doesn't change the fact that I don't believe for a second that talking about sexism will make it disappear.
What you believe is irrelevant. Sociology and group psychology have characterised clear mechanisms where changing attitudes cause cultural drift
over time. You know you can't see plants grow when you watch them either, but that doesn't change the fact that they do. Cultural drift works similarly, only punctuated by events, such as controversies.
Quote:
Women right to vote were often an indirect consequence of World War I and World War II. Men went to war so women went to work (and since they were cheap labor, companies kept them). This was one of the main cause for the change of the social culture, not some kind of cultural enlightenment due to talking.
What. The fuck. Women's suffrage was a movement which started in the late 19th century. SO you think that women magically gained the idea that they might be able to have a say in things when all the men went away and they got jobs!? You actually think people are that 2-dimensional?
Quote:
I do have a point (actually it's not mine, but that's irrelevant) and you didn't answered it. Having a child is only a personal choice. It is not a part of the job duty, not even a requirement imposed by society and so it shouldn't give any privileges.
So, our species continues its existence because of choice? I think you'll find that the words "biological imperative" have a great deal of meaning. Penalising women for being the one's with the womb? That is sexism 101. Fulfilling our primary biological purpose, as programmed into all sexual reproducing species by evolution, is not a choice, like buying a new car or building an attic extension and women should not be treated as second class citizens for continuing the species. This actually astounds me.
Quote:
Women not doing as much overtime as men is pretty much facts, not sexism.
Show me these facts. Show me that for each job type, there are more male overtime hours than female overtime hours. Also tell me why this affects how much women are paid per hour, which is on average less than men.
Quote:
And men who doesn't look as much as women after their household is also pretty much facts.
Possibly due to the fact that many men still behave as though they are IN CHARGE. I'm saying that it isn't mandatory - men can fucking look after sick kids and clean a home too.
Quote:
Me? Again, what I think is irrelevant. The discussion is not about me, it's about society. And again, it's not that dads can't do this, it's that dads choose not to do this.
Which would be why people claim women are not given equal opportunities to make more of themselves, held back by men assuming a position of superiority.
Quote:
My point is that women have statistically less value for an enterprise because of the constraint their personal life impose upon them. It's not because of an assumption, it's not because of a positive feedback loop, it's simply because women choose this role.
Wow, you are a real throwback. The point is that if a woman decides not to choose this role, any attempt to limit her opportunities based on the idea that she'll do x, y or z is sexism. She should be given the same opportunity, pay, benefits and respect as a man. Basically labelling women off as only good for cooking, cleaning, fucking and raising children IS sexism. There should be no barriers if a woman wants to have a family and a career and any employer discriminating against a woman because of Jurassic arguments like those you have used, should be prosecuted and fined.
Papy on 26/6/2012 at 20:41
Quote Posted by faetal
any employer discriminating against a woman because of Jurassic arguments like those you have used, should be prosecuted and fined.
My first point was that it's a bad idea to talk about sexism because the only thing it achieves is a polarization of ideas. You are now using the threat of a fine. If it doesn't change my mind, what will be your next threat?
You proved my point.
faetal on 26/6/2012 at 20:51
You just shit the logic bed. Cart goes AFTER the horse.
CCCToad on 26/6/2012 at 21:13
Quote Posted by faetal
Testosterone not only allows for more muscle growth, it also creates a more aggressive and violent phenotype. Bear in mind that women secrete testosterone too, just at far lower amounts and with far fewer target tissues. Not sure how this applies to equality of opportunities though. So men and women are not equal in a fight - so what? Doesn't mean anything to debate about equality of opportunities.
That's an accidental strawman. My post was in response to a comment on social norms, and I pointed out that some of these social norms arise from physiological differences from in the sexes rather than being oppressive.
nbohr1more on 26/6/2012 at 23:48
Solution to sexism:
1) Men will do anything to get laid
2) Women are the sexual gate-keepers
3) Women breed bad behavior by "selecting" sexual mates who are sexist
4) Instead, women should select sexual mates who are less sexist
5) Once the key to getting laid is "not being sexist" then men will do this in droves
The problem is most women prefer "makes lots of money" over "less sexist". Therefore
men must be bread-winners to win the game.
When surveyed for what they would like in a mate, women overwhelmingly stated that they
prefer their mate to make more money (even highly paid female CEO's said this). How would there be any candidates for the attribute of "makes more money" if all women made equal pay to men?
The real sad truth is that the figures for male verses female pay overlook the vast swaths of low-wage males who are the majority of the population and are instead comparing the wages of the small office worker niche that makes up the top 10% of earnings. Those low paid males are all fodder to fuel the high paid CEO's and their harem of adoring ladies. It's the same old caveman bullshit since the beginning of time and women just want it to keep on going but the want to up the ante by earning nearly as much as the top males so they can push the low-wage males farther into their evolutionary grave.
If women want change, the solutions are simple:
DO NOT DATE MEN WHO MAKE MORE MONEY THAN YOU!
DO NOT DATE MEN WHO WILL NOT DO HOUSEWORK!
DO NOT DATE MEN WHO ARE STRONGER THAN YOU!
DO NOT DATE MEN WHO ARE SMARTER THAN YOU!
The results will be weakened male offspring who can be more easily competed against by women and\or males who pretend to be lesser to give more "opportunity" to women to thrive.
I'm sorry, evolutionary selection is the ultimate seat of power and women control it.
Until those simple concepts can be adhered to, I will go to sleep :bored:
:joke:
nbohr1more on 27/6/2012 at 00:11
What?
You don't believe in evolution?
I will try to formulate this concept in an "Intelligent Design" compatible language:
1) God created Man and Woman
2) He built them with different attributes according to a divine plan
3) To change the plan, Women must pray to God for less sexism
4) They can help this process by following God's will and marrying the "less sexist" men that God chooses for them
5) Any of the above changes to the plan are an illusion because God is omnipotent and omniscient
:erg:
Scots Taffer on 27/6/2012 at 00:51
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
Solution to sexism:
The problem is most women prefer "makes lots of money" over "less sexist". Therefore
men must be bread-winners to win the game.
:joke:
:joke:
<img src="http://www.ttlg.com/forums/images/smilies/joker.gif" height=100 width=100 />
<img src="http://www.ttlg.com/forums/images/smilies/joker.gif" height=250 width=250 />
<img src="http://www.ttlg.com/forums/images/smilies/joker.gif" height=400 width=400 />
Papy on 27/6/2012 at 02:07
Quote Posted by faetal
You just shit the logic bed. Cart goes AFTER the horse.
And where did I just shit the logic bed?
Quote Posted by dethtoll
...
It may be "stupid", but the sad truth is that most young women are more attracted to men with power a lot more than they are attracted to men who are sweet and attentive. This is something boys learn very quickly.
