What feminists look like

[BlueWolf47]

I am not making fun of anyone.

As I posted earlier, how can feminist demand equal pay and equal rights for women, but turn a blind eye to child labor?

Because they want to? There are groups that protest exclusively on child labor and they dont advocate a feminists agenda. Im not sure why you feel they are connected.


Those pictures you posted were a nice touch to your argument.


If only i could find a redneck banging a goat so that you can be properly sterotyped for the discussion.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Sweet, a misogynous campfire sing-a-long thread.

Keep on shaking the tree boys.

 

[brycejones]

I am not making fun of anyone.

As I posted earlier, how can feminist demand equal pay and equal rights for women, but turn a blind eye to child labor?

Why do you think they do?

 

[Texashiker]

Because they want to? There are groups that protest exclusively on child labor and they dont advocate a feminists agenda. Im not sure why you feel they are connected.

I feel they are connected because females are being exploited.

 

[East56]

Women gaining the same rights as men have in society does not make them have any "more" rights than men, nor are men disadvantaged or threatened by this in any way. The traditional white male has enjoyed an easier ride through society than any other group of people and it's hilarious and sick to see what happens when minority groups or traditionally oppressed groups try to gain some respect and equality.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Women gaining the same rights as men have in society does not make them have any "more" rights than men, nor are men disadvantaged or threatened by this in any way. The traditional white male has enjoyed an easier ride through society than any other group of people and it's hilarious and sick to see what happens when minority groups or traditionally oppressed groups try to gain some respect and equality.

What a ridiculous statement. Wake up, it's not 1950, or even the 70's / early 80's any more.


Decision makers are not sitting down and saying ok, we can't hire these women because they're inferior. Nowadays, if someone is getting paid less, or not getting hired, then there is almost always a legitimate reason.

You may not like it, but the fact is that on a pure money input production output level women TEND to not be as productive. From the possibility of pumping out kids to other unpopular reasons, a woman is a high risk employee compared to a male.


Traditional white males certainly do not have an "easier ride through society" anymore, at least not as a function of their penis and skin color.


And that's really the issue, is so many modern progressives are blinded by penis' and skin colors and unable to have an intelligent debate on what's REALLY wrong with our society. Probably because it would require them to look in a mirror and accept some blame.

 

[Spungo]

Women gaining the same rights as men have in society does not make them have any "more" rights than men, nor are men disadvantaged or threatened by this in any way. The traditional white male has enjoyed an easier ride through society than any other group of people and it's hilarious and sick to see what happens when minority groups or traditionally oppressed groups try to gain some respect and equality.

What easy ride? Historically, most men were slaves. Only about 40% of men reproduced whereas 80% of women reproduced. Right now is the most peaceful time in human history; it was normal for every generation to have major conflict, and men would be drafted and killed during those conflicts. When a village was raided, women would be raped and taken as wives, but men would be killed on the spot. Men have always had much higher mortality rates than women because women would do things like work in the field while men were in coal mines or doing other dangerous jobs. During an emergency, women and children would be saved while men were left to die. The Titanic is a good example of this. Women in third class had a survival rate of 46% but men in first class had a survival rate of 33%. That means the poorest woman on the ship had a better chance of survival than the richest man on the ship. Women with no children have extremely low poverty rates because men with money will still associate with waitresses and cashiers. Men do not have that option; a woman with money will not associate with a guy who works as a cashier. Roughly 2/3 of homeless people are men. Higher rates of poverty among men is also the reason most criminals are men. 1 in 18 men are under "correctional control" whereas only 1 in 89 women are under correctional control. The suicide rate among men is 4x higher than the suicide rate among women. This gets even more unbalanced after a divorce. The suicide rate for men roughly doubles after a divorce, but not for women. Men have always received much harsher punishment and longer jail sentences for committing the same crime.

 

[nehalem256]

Decision makers are not sitting down and saying ok, we can't hire these women because they're inferior. Nowadays, if someone is getting paid less, or not getting hired, then there is almost always a legitimate reason.

Somehow the progressives that will say the decision makers that only care about corporate profits, and will therefore send jobs to China to save $1/hr, or use inferior quality bolts, that result in cars exploding, to save a nickle... will also pay men 30% more to do the same work

:hmm:

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Spungo watch out coming in here with facts and logical opinions, a lot of these progressives can't debate with that sort of thing.

 

[nehalem256]

What easy ride? Historically, most men were slaves. Only about 40% of men reproduced whereas 80% of women reproduced. Right now is the most peaceful time in human history; it was normal for every generation to have major conflict, and men would be drafted and killed during those conflicts. When a village was raided, women would be raped and taken as wives, but men would be killed on the spot.

This is what male privilege looks like

Men have always had much higher mortality rates than women because women would do things like work in the field while men were in coal mines or doing other dangerous jobs. During an emergency, women and children would be saved while men were left to die. The Titanic is a good example of this. Women in third class had a survival rate of 46% but men in first class had a survival rate of 33%. That means the poorest woman on the ship had a better chance of survival than the richest man on the ship.

Ironically I remember reading articles about men not letting the women go first for the Italian Cruiseship wreck and there being articles complaining.

I guess feminists are like atheists. You can't find them in "foxholes"

Women with no children have extremely low poverty rates because men with money will still associate with waitresses and cashiers. Men do not have that option; a woman with money will not associate with a guy who works as a cashier. Roughly 2/3 of homeless people are men. Higher rates of poverty among men is also the reason most criminals are men. 1 in 18 men are under "correctional control" whereas only 1 in 89 women are under correctional control. The suicide rate among men is 4x higher than the suicide rate among women. This gets even more unbalanced after a divorce. The suicide rate for men roughly doubles after a divorce, but not for women. Men have always received much harsher punishment and longer jail sentences for committing the same crime.

A disproportionate number of blacks in prison equals racism. A disproportionate number of men in prison equals sexism?

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Somehow the progressives that will say the decision makers that only care about corporate profits, and will therefore send jobs to China to save $1/hr, or use inferior quality bolts, that result in cars exploding, to save a nickle... will also pay men 30% more to do the same work

:hmm:

Oh I know, and you say that in sarcasm, but they actually do make those sorts of claims.


Another unpopular topic.... That the "modern progressive" movement that pushes gender based labor laws down to companies are the ones causing women and minorities to become "Toxic to hire".

It's sad that on a societal perspective the vast majority could not care less about penises or skin tones, only job performance. However, we have been 'trained' to handle certain people with white gloves.... Which is actually pushing society back, creating divisions, and conflict... And making it dangerous to hire them. Again, these progressives need to look in a mirror and see what they've created.


So the next time you have a vajayjay and dark skin, and you are not hired, perhaps consider that it may be due to the fact that the modern progressives have put you on a false pedestal where no one wants to touch you instead of blaming the "evil white penis" or "big business".

 

[Texashiker]

it's hilarious and sick to see what happens when minority groups or traditionally oppressed groups try to gain some respect and equality.

I want women to have equal rights, but they should also have equal responsibility in our society.

Lets start by requiring women to register for the draft.

For that matter where do feminist stand on the draft?

Do you think feminist would approve of a 50/50 ratio of men and women in combat?

 

[SpatiallyAware]

<snip>



A disproportionate number of blacks in prison equals racism. A disproportionate number of men in prison equals sexism?

Yes, but only because that's the easiest argument which also passes blame on to someone else.

 

[nehalem256]

Do you think feminist would approve of a 50/50 ratio of men and women in combat?

Interesting point. Clearly there is a disproportionate number of men in combat positions.

Why are feminists not calling for government action through quotas (filled by the drafting of women if necessary) to ensure that there are equal numbers of women in all areas of the military.

 

[Spungo]

A disproportionate number of blacks in prison equals racism. A disproportionate number of men in prison equals sexism?

Sexism is part of it. Men get longer jail sentences for the same crime and are more likely to be found guilty. In cases of statutory rape, communities will actually support the rapist as long as it's a female rapist. Male rapists will get life in jail for the same crime. You can see the difference by looking at the wording uses in news articles. A male teacher will "rape" his students. A female teacher will have an "affair" with her students. This really bugs me because it means some rapists are getting away with it. That could easily be one of my future kids who is raped by some crazy woman.
Some of it is biological as well. Depressed women often get sad and hurt themselves. Depressed men are often angry and violent. Cutting yourself is not a crime, but cutting someone else is a crime.

Why are feminists not calling for government action through quotas (filled by the drafting of women if necessary) to ensure that there are equal numbers of women in all areas of the military.

Because feminists are retarded. I remember feminists celebrating on their blogs when some new data showed that a record number of women were the breadwinners in their home. That's not a good thing! What that stat really means is that lots of men are unemployed or underemployed and the economy is still horrible. A movement that was at one time about getting equality for women somehow turned into a war against men. When men started to make groups supporting male rights, feminists actually protested against those groups. The modern feminist movement is just another hate group.

The modern feminists have done a lot of damage to the way men and women interact. I've all but given up on the idea of ever finding a good husband because modern men refuse to get married. They know that the court is against them and they have almost zero chance of getting custody. The kind of man I'm looking for is one who understands things like laws and taxes. Unfortunately, men like that know all about divorce, they know all of the statistics, and they don't think they will beat the odds, so they refuse to play the game. There are still lots of men out there willing to get married and have a family, but most of them are idiots. The ones who think they can beat the odds when it comes to divorce also think they can beat other odds. They smoke but say they will never get cancer, they drive fast and say they'll never get caught, they cheat on taxes and say they'll never get caught. There's no way I'm going to marry a ticking time bomb like that.

 

[Orignal Earl]

I always got to fight the urge to start defending and protecting the weaker posters from all the evil and scary things.
I can't help it, I guess it's apart of being a man/father

 

[Texashiker]

The modern feminists have done a lot of damage to the way men and women interact. I've all but given up on the idea of ever finding a good husband because modern men refuse to get married. They know that the court is against them and they have almost zero chance of getting custody. The kind of man I'm looking for is one who understands things like laws and taxes. Unfortunately, men like that know all about divorce, they know all of the statistics, and they don't think they will beat the odds, so they refuse to play the game. There are still lots of men out there willing to get married and have a family, but most of them are idiots. The ones who think they can beat the odds when it comes to divorce also think they can beat other odds. They smoke but say they will never get cancer, they drive fast and say they'll never get caught, they cheat on taxes and say they'll never get caught. There's no way I'm going to marry a ticking time bomb like that.

That is most honest post in this thread.

With the difficulties facing todays young men and women, a lot of them give up.

If the marriage fails men know the deck is stacked against them in both alimony and child support.

The stress of going to school, or learning a skill/trade that will allow the family to buy a home, car, and have extra money adds up.

There was an article a month or two ago about couples who are not having children. The population across the united states is mostly being supported through immigration. I feel that a lot of men do not want to get married, much less have children is because of the war that has been waged against them.

With Texas now being an alimony state, I will never remarry. But then again, I have no plans on getting a divorce either.

 

[nehalem256]

Because feminists are retarded. I remember feminists celebrating on their blogs when some new data showed that a record number of women were the breadwinners in their home. That's not a good thing! What that stat really means is that lots of men are unemployed or underemployed and the economy is still horrible. A movement that was at one time about getting equality for women somehow turned into a war against men. When men started to make groups supporting male rights, feminists actually protested against those groups. The modern feminist movement is just another hate group.

I think part of that was also single mom's with kids working at Walmart, with their baby-daddies in prison, being considered a breadwinner. Not sure what they are winning exactly.

Especially when they are probably getting their bread provided to them by the state.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I think part of that was also single mom's with kids working at Walmart, with their baby-daddies in prison, being considered a breadwinner. Not sure what they are winning exactly.

Especially when they are probably getting their bread provided to them by the state.

IIRC it was calculated by acting like a stay at home mom is equivalent to a $150k+ year job.

 

[Spungo]

IIRC it was calculated by acting like a stay at home mom is equivalent to a $150k+ year job.

Breadwinner simply means you bring home most of the money. Right now, it is something like 40% of households are lead by women. That would be a great step toward equality if there were no kids involved, but that's not the case. When kids are involved, it's usually the woman who would rather stay home or work only part time. In addition to that, women often jump into low paying careers that are social instead of technical (the lower pay is one of the reasons women stay home with kids at higher rates). I think it's great that women are doing better than ever and we no longer need men in our lives, but let's keep it real. For something like being a janitor, that can be done by both men and women, so it doesn't pay much. Working on an oil rig or fighting fires is hard as hell, most women can't do it, and even most men can't do it. I would expect those jobs to be high paying, and since it's mostly men doing those jobs, one would expect more male breadwinners. The same is true for thinking jobs. An engineer can do a secretary's job, but a secretary cannot do an engineer's job. For whatever the reason, things like engineering are mostly done by men. In a system with true equality in every way, I would still expect men to make more money. 40% of households having women making the most money should set off alarm bells. Are men unemployed? Are men no longer able to work overtime? Is construction slowing down? Is engineering slowing down? Is there less demand for welders, plumbers, electricians, and other jobs that are mostly done by men?

The original women's rights movement was aimed at equal opportunity. There was a time when women virtually couldn't be engineers because men would laugh at us. That's mostly in the past. The problem is that some people made a career based on fighting for women. Rather than getting a different job, the focus changed from equal opportunity to equal outcome. This happens to any kind of charity or cause. When someone's job is on the line, people will say or do the most ridiuclous things to keep that job. A good example of this is how charities for cancer compete against each other. You can be sued if you create your own fundraiser and use the words "for the cure" in the promotion. Walk for the cure, dance for the cure, run for the cure, etc. Something that started as a noble cause, raising money for cancer research, has turned into a business of raising money to pay salaries. When it comes to feminism, feminist groups need to find problems in order to justify their existence because the main goal has already been accomplished and it's all about money now.

 

[Texashiker]

The original women's rights movement was aimed at equal opportunity.

Men and women should have the same opportunities, however, men and women handle jobs differently.

The vast majority of women can not compete with men on a physical level, and nothing will ever change that.

The vast majority of women are better caregivers then men, and nothing is going to change that.

It all goes back to men forming hunting parties to bring down wild game. Men take the risk, fight the wars and take the dangerous jobs - we are just programed to do that kind of stuff.

The feminist movement can not undo millions of years of evolution and selective breeding.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

<snip>


The feminist movement can not undo millions of years of evolution and selective breeding.

I know it's not really the point you were going at, but I actually think it has undone millions of years of evolution.

It's eerily very similar to the forums.... A VERY small subset of VERY vocal people tend to push these changes. While it may not be beneficial to the majority, everyone just keeps their mouth shut and watches it happen.

And by the time the unforeseen consequences are happening it's way too late, too many lemmings are brainwashed, too many handouts/benefits have been promised, and it's simply not something you can undo within a few years.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

<snip>

The modern feminists have done a lot of damage to the way men and women interact. I've all but given up on the idea of ever finding a good husband because modern men refuse to get married. They know that the court is against them and they have almost zero chance of getting custody. The kind of man I'm looking for is one who understands things like laws and taxes. Unfortunately, men like that know all about divorce, they know all of the statistics, and they don't think they will beat the odds, so they refuse to play the game. There are still lots of men out there willing to get married and have a family, but most of them are idiots. The ones who think they can beat the odds when it comes to divorce also think they can beat other odds. They smoke but say they will never get cancer, they drive fast and say they'll never get caught, they cheat on taxes and say they'll never get caught. There's no way I'm going to marry a ticking time bomb like that.

Fantastic post. It's really too bad that more people won't speak their honest mind like you do. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Texashiker]

I know it's not really the point you were going at, but I actually think it has undone millions of years of evolution.

It's eerily very similar to the forums.... A VERY small subset of VERY vocal people tend to push these changes. While it may not be beneficial to the majority, everyone just keeps their mouth shut and watches it happen.

And by the time the unforeseen consequences are happening it's way too late, too many lemmings are brainwashed, too many handouts/benefits have been promised, and it's simply not something you can undo within a few years.

I agree, and at the same time disagree.

Just because society frowns upon something does not mean it is not hiding in the shadows. Men are still sexist, we just talk about it less.

But then again, Japan went from a nation of warriors to a nation of furries in a matter of a few decades. Is that warrior instinct hiding under those costumes? We will have to wait and see when the next war comes along.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I agree, and at the same time disagree.

Just because society frowns upon something does not mean it is not hiding in the shadows. Men are still sexist, we just talk about it less.

But then again, Japan went from a nation of warriors to a nation of furries in a matter of a few decades. Is that warrior instinct hiding under those costumes? We will have to wait and see when the next war comes along.

It's definitely an opinion sort of thing and not provable.

That being said, I do agree that there are plenty of "issues" hiding in the shadows, but my point is that these people will ALWAYS exist.

It doesn't matter what type of legislation is passed, or how much mainstream society has changed, you will ALWAYS have some 5% or whatever of society who are just nutjobs and will think what they want to think. We will always have some men who bitch about working with women, and some women who bitch about working with men.


My specific point is that I strongly feel like mainstream society shuns racism and sexism, and that the small minority of VERY vocal 'modern progressives' who want inequality in the name of equality are actually doing a great disservice to their cause and "group".