Male Privilege. | MensRights

I do. That's great that you have a friend that has a support group. Most of the military wives are young women (ages: 18-24) that 'married up' to receive the military benefits. They can usually be seen cheating on their spouse at the local bar/club (of course on his bill) or sleeping off that hangover the next morning at the house he pays for. All of course, while he's out risking his life and general physical well-being. Is this all military wives? No, certainly not. But a large amount of them, yes.

And no, I don't feel very bad for the 'full time nurses' out there. If you were to tell me that I could either 1) lose my arms/legs and have a caretaker or 2) be a caretaker to a loved one that has his/her arms/legs missing, I would take option 2 without any further ado. People in this country do NOT respect the sacrifices men make enough in this country. If a man goes into a military it's a statistic, if a woman goes into the military she's paraded around on shows like 'Oprah' or 'The View' like the next coming of Christ.

[–]NightAria -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]NightAria2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NightAria2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well, I will agree with you that Tom Leykis isn't the most 'civil' in his discussions about female infidelity and the like. He is a 'shock jock' after all and he has to be 'shocking' in order to get viewers at times. My point was that that doesn't make him WRONG about everything else... he clearly presents data/statistics and hard facts about how men are actively screwed in the Western world and warns/teaches men how to deal with it. If you listen to him for long enough, you'll notice this. This is PARAMOUNT to males everywhere and, in my opinion, overlooks the fact that he makes outrageous claims at times to get viewers. I can definitely see how you as a female can be easily turned off by him, but he has done A LOT of good for men everywhere and he is one of the ONLY that has been brought up these issues with the popularity he has.

As far as bashing women goes, I have yet to see this... I'm far from a 'misogynist' and I really haven't seen any female bashing here. I actually gave up my adminship at another forum due to a flood of 'masculinists' who were just as emotionally-driven as the feminists. I also have never received any actual examples from women claiming it does bash women. Maybe its because you live in a society which consistently PRAISES women and promotes women being praised for nothing, so seeing a subreddit that doesn't do that suddenly makes you feel like its bashing women? Either way, thanks for actually giving a shit to a degree about men's issues.

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I have been following TJ (The Amazing Atheist) for quite some time and I am literally COMPLETELY oblivious to any of this 'threatening to rape some girl'. Definitely doesn't sound like something TJ would do, ableit in some very jokingly tone. As far as appraisal goes, all you have to do is turn on the lower echelon of channels during normal work-hours on week-days. Women are CONSTANTLY celebrated about how they should be 'proud to be women' within modern society whilst, of course, men are shamed and taught to be 'reprogrammed' against their natural instincts since it 'oppresses women'. There are MANY 'women only' groups at my school but not a single 'men only' group in sight, where they talk about how great it is to be a woman and go over 'herstory'. As far as being a 'specific type of woman' goes, these 'specific type of woman' are generally nothing to be praised about. Example: Oprah stating that 'mothers have the most difficult job on the planet', as if men drilling holes to the center of the earth to provide for those mothers are deserving of less praise than mothers. Example 2: Oprah bragging on about how some woman that went through boot camp in order to join the military is amazing. As if men haven't done the same thing since the beginning of time, not to mention make the ULTIMATE sacrifice. Which leads into example 3: Hillary Clinton saying that 'women are the real victims of war' because they lose their fathers/husbands/sons, is pure appraisal for absolutely doing nothing.

Hope that helps :)

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's 2 women just stating things so far.

PLENTY more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoNhrY_fM

I honestly see the herstory thing as the same thing my parents told me when I asked why there was no Kids day but a Fathers and Mothers day. "Everyday is kids day".

Sorry, but I don't understand this point whatsoever.

What is this reprogramming against men's natural instinct?

Constantly telling men that 'masculine' traits are 'negative' traits. Telling boys they need to be more 'feminine' and that feminine traits should be praised over masculine ones.

I also see men going to war more often and being put into combat more is due the misconception that women are too weak to be in combat.

Personally, I don't see this as a misconception but truth feminists pretend doesn't exist like most of biology. Men being FORCED to go to war because they want to PROTECT women shows how much MEN sacrifice for just that. Instead of getting praise, they come back home to feminists telling them that womens problems are more important than theirs.

A lot of these inequalities between women and men are perpetuated by outdated views on them both.

To an extent. Some things however, such as biological components, feminists seem to dismiss unless it BENEFITS women.

Instead of going after women for not being in combat Id first complain about going to war over nothing in the first place.

I disagree. Feminists have fought to allow women to vote on issues that could potentially send our country into war, albeit women will not have to suffer the consequence of actually GOING to war due to there being no mandatory draft for them. This is completely sexist and shows the true essence of feminism; the belief that women should be benefitted but not receive the consequences of said benefits. Men die for women's decisions. THIS needs to be addressed before war is even mentioned.

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes there are lots of outlying crazies in the movement just like in political ideologies and many other ideologies so feminism isn't the only ideology that gets the crazies on their side. What I was saying is that almost all history is male history so what's wrong with women talking about the females who made history? Now a days women are just as suited for combat cause anyone can shoot a gun. You are putting down women for not being in war but then saying they aren't suitable for it. Yes women are biologically weaker than men but does that make us second class in your eyes?Are we simply to go back to being like men's servants and property because you are stronger than us? I don't believe anyone should be forced to go to war. There is just as many army dodging men in politics in your country are you just as mad at them for making decisions on war? It was not feminism that made the rule for only men being drafted. That rule is definitely brought to you by sexism. I've never seen a feminist say guys should be more female. I've seen them saying that it isn't right to put down people and characteristics that are feminine. To end this rant fem·i·nism the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men. There it is, it is a simple belief that women and men should have equal rights. Anything outside of that is different.

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Yes there are lots of outlying crazies in the movement just like in political ideologies and many other ideologies so feminism isn't the only ideology that gets the crazies on their side.

Of course there are crazies in all ideologies, difference is that feminists don't DENOUNCE these people like most other ideologies do (ie. Westboro Baptist Church). Crazies of the MRM are immediately excommunicated in our movement while feminist crazies are praised and made REQUIRED reading for most feminist courses (Valerie Solanas, Andrea Dworkin, etc).

What I was saying is that almost all history is male history so what's wrong with women talking about the females who made history?

Yes, I agree. Men have made history and we get very little praise for it even though nearly everything that you use in your everyday life was invented by a MAN. Instead we get shamed for being 'war mongers' and 'paedofiles/rapists'.

Now a days women are just as suited for combat cause anyone can shoot a gun. You are putting down women for not being in war but then saying they aren't suitable for it.

I tend to utilize biology and personal experience over feminist rhetoric for my reasoning, so no, I don't believe women aren't suitable for it. I just believe MEN are BETTER at it. If you want to just write me off as a 'sexist' without any other reason than that, then go right ahead, you are entitled to your opinion. I believe men are more 'logical' and less 'emotional' which allows them to handle stressful situations better than women (speaking in generality, of course).

Yes women are biologically weaker than men but does that make us second class in your eyes?

It depends on the situation. Men have developed the technology (and still continue to do so) to allow women to work hand-in-hand with men. There were times when women COULDN'T work with men (due to a lack of technological advancement to suit women) and wouldn't be able to. Of course feminists, instead of looking into logic/reasoning, would chalk this up as 'oppression' and something men should be blamed for.

Are we simply to go back to being like men's servants and property because you are stronger than us?

Alright, look. There was a time (you may have read about it in history class years ago) when men would forced to be the breadwinners and endure back-breaking labor in order to provide for their family (ie. you). Believe it or not, cooking/cleaning isn't the most difficult job on the planet, especially when you compare the ridiculously laborous occupations men had to take in order to make their family SURVIVE. Females have generally been 'caretakers', that doesn't make you 'servants'. If anything, you should be thankful that thanks to the efforts of MEN, you didn't have to BREAK down your body doing difficult labor in order to support yourself. You had somebody ELSE support you by their BACKBREAKING labor. Who looks like the 'servant' now?

There is just as many army dodging men in politics in your country are you just as mad at them for making decisions on war?

Kind of hard to dodge the 'army' when you have a MANDATORY draft for your gender. Not saying its impossible, but certainly the minority. And I'm more upset at the sexist law, not the people involved.

It was not feminism that made the rule for only men being drafted.

You're right, it wasn't. They just set up an institution in which women are ONLY benefitted and refused to support men's issues (and created the hateful misandry nonsense we see in society today) all while hiding behind the veil of 'equality'. In other words, they allowed women to vote but only (very minorly) pushed for women to be drafted as well. Feminists never wanted 'equality' and utilized this lie as a way to attain the benefits women now enjoy in modern society without any of the responsiblities that come with it.

That rule is definitely brought to you by sexism.

Well, yes. Feminist sexism.

I've never seen a feminist say guys should be more female.

I've seen (and spoke to) plenty.

To end this rant fem·i·nism the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men. There it is, it is a simple belief that women and men should have equal rights.

Feminism seems to not mind men being circumcised and being drafted into the military too much, now does it? As TJ beautifully put it, feminism is the belief that all of societys issues can be solved by focusing on the issues of one genders. If feminism was actually about 'equal rights', then all 30,000+ of us would never be here.

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Be thankful for being seen as unable to work? I want to work, I've been turned down for jobs because I'm a woman and apparently I can't lift a 25 lb box. Men gets shit tones of praise in history that is just simply not true that men get no praise for what they've done in history. You say that outlying feminists don't get shunned but that video you showed me was in response to women telling a crazy feminist that her views are wrong. It seems like you are complaining that women don't treat men like their our saviours. Like the years of treating us like property yeah we are sooo fucking grateful. The reason why a lot of women don't try and fight for men's is because of this type of rhetoric from guys like you. Yes I don't believe in circumcision and I don't believe in drafts. I don't believe in majority custody going to just the mother and many other mens rights issues but when guys say we should be grateful that because society didn't see woman as useful human beings that we got out of work, I'm sorry but that's when I stop trying to fight for your battles and start trying to defend myself from people calling me irrational and weak.

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Be thankful for being seen as unable to work? I want to work, I've been turned down for jobs because I'm a woman and apparently I can't lift a 25 lb box.

You see that part when I was talking about 'history'? Your worries in living in industrial America were far heavier than lifting a 25 lb. box. Would you like to work on a railroad where little boys developed crooked spines while working 10+ hours a day? Would you like to work in a mine which (if you were lucky enough to survive long enough without having it collapse) got 'black lung' by the age of 40? Would you like to work in filthy sweatshops where little boys would develop cancer from the fumes? Didn't think so. Life wasn't always as EASY as it is today.

Men gets shit tones of praise in history that is just simply not true that men get no praise for what they've done in history.

Certain men get praise (ie. Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, etc), but MEN as a whole NEVER get praise. Whereas women get to sit around and talk about hard it is being a woman when men were (and still are) wearing out their joints to support them.

You say that outlying feminists don't get shunned but that video you showed me was in response to women telling a crazy feminist that her views are wrong.

I don't believe I ever said that...

It seems like you are complaining that women don't treat men like their our saviours.

No, I'm complaining that instead of being praised as a gender, we're looked upon as a bunch of guys sitting around drinking beers while makign our 'female slaves' do all the work. Which is quite erroneous...

Like the years of treating us like property yeah we are sooo fucking grateful.

Yes, because only women had to do 'hard work'. You do know that men were also 'property' of their employers as well, right? This whole 'property' debate is a large feminist paradox to begin with since laws weren't advanced enough at the time to decipher different laws for different people. EVERYBODY was essentially property of somebody, but utmost, the King/Queen/Monarch of the time.

The reason why a lot of women don't try and fight for men's is because of this type of rhetoric from guys like you.

And what rhetoric is that exactly? Logic/reasoning rather than made-up conspiracy theories about 'male power' and 'patriarchy' created to blame all of societals issues on males in the first place? Get real. When 'guys like me' weren't around in large numbers, they didn't seem to give a shit about men then either. I doubt ANY of us 'stopped' the feminists from doing any good for men.

I don't believe in majority custody going to just the mother and many other mens rights issues but when guys say we should be grateful that because society didn't see woman as useful human beings that we got out of work, I'm sorry but that's when I stop trying to fight for your battles and start trying to defend myself from people calling me irrational and weak.

Once again, you simply are incapable (or unwilling) to notice that society wasn't as advanced as it is now throughout history. You've been force-fed so much feminist rhetoric that it is impossible to for anybody to tell you that society wasn't as simple as 'men controlling women'. So instead, you refer to the feminist defense method of just calling us 'sexists' and that 'we don't see women as useful human beings'. It's far easier than actually debating with us. And nobody asked you to fight 'our battles', but you see... there's a little wording in your little movement that states that you are for 'EQUALITY' and that means EQUALITY of all sexes, not just women. The fact that you admit that feminists don't care for the equality of men shows that feminism, as a whole, is basically a lie to begin with. Now, do you understand why so many people are frustrated with feminism?

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I told you I care but when my time is taken up by defending my own gender then I can't fight for either. You are strawmanning me to all over the place here. You are generalizing feminists saying we only see men as our oppressors and that you are all beer guzzling apes. I haven't been saying anything bad about men in this era and haven't been saying anything bad about men in general. You've been spending this whole time calling women weak and irrational. I've never met women that hate men as much as these apparent women you know do. I can see how you bring the male hate out in them thought lol. Contrary to popular belief you don't have to hate men to be a feminist. Feminism is simply what I showed you before. I don't believe it was just men that decided that woman were to follow men and speak when they are spoken to and that a woman should not teach that's more of a bible thing. Stop putting other womens beliefs in my mouth I have not said patriarchy or male power once. Yes I don't like the male hate that goes on within feminism but I also don't like how women are looked down upon here.

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I told you I care but when my time is taken up by defending my own gender then I can't fight for either.

Kinda hard to imagine you spend much 'time' really 'defending your own gender' when you have your own national gender organizations defending yours already along with the courts/politicians lobbying for you. Who exactly stands up for men? Pretty much nobody, either due to fear of offending feminist/feminist-lobbyists or because they've been brainwashed into believing that men deserve less rights over women due to feminist fallacies.

You are strawmanning me to all over the place here.

You have to be fairly hard-pressed to call anything I've said so far 'strawmanning'.

You are generalizing feminists saying we only see men as our oppressors and that you are all beer guzzling apes.

Well, I sort of have to generalize considering it'd be impossible for me to separate each and every feminist when I'm describing them as a whole. And I will say, that the majority of real feminists (especially the ones that are heavily praised) generally DO view us as such. And I also speak from lots of personal experience of directly speaking with feminists myself.

I haven't been saying anything bad about men in this era and haven't been saying anything bad about men in general.

I never really said you did. However, most 'feminist fallacies' generally put men in a negative point of view and never highlight the good men have done for society and our gender. Instead, we're blamed for all of the bad of history and erased from the good. This is the sort of extremist behavior that people should fight against, not support. MRA's do not wish to 're-write' history to please our movement.

You've been spending this whole time calling women weak and irrational.

No. I said I believe men TEND to be stronger and more rational/logical as a whole, mostly due to basic biological factors. There are certain women that are both stronger and more rational than certain men, but an exception to a rule doesn't necessarily make a rule untrue.

I can see how you bring the male hate out in them thought lol.

Clearly, I've insulted women (and you) SO many times during this discussion. I mean, I don't know what to do with myself bottling up all this woman-hate all the time. Must be dat dere patriarchy!!!11111

Contrary to popular belief you don't have to hate men to be a feminist.

No, but it definitely helps. Especially if you're one of those well-regarded-within-the-feminist-circles called 'radical feminists'. You know like Hillary Clinton, Valerie Solanas and Andrea Dworkin. Clearly no man-hate amongst those 'intellectuals'.

Feminism is simply what I showed you before.

And I simply showed you many ways in which it is not.

I don't believe it was just men that decided that woman were to follow men and speak when they are spoken to and that a woman should not teach that's more of a bible thing.

Um.. okay?

Stop putting other womens beliefs in my mouth I have not said patriarchy or male power once.

I apologize if you thought I was insinuating otherwise, I was utilizing an extreme example as a joke to how ridiculously illogical feminism belief is. Which, as I'm sure you know, 'patriarchy' and 'male power' are pretty HEAVY topics with feminists.

Yes I don't like the male hate that goes on within feminism but I also don't like how women are looked down upon here.

As I've said before, I really don't see how 'women are looked down upon' here especially since we have so many female members. If MRA's had such a low opinion of women, I'd doubt they'd stay around. Either way, if we spouted the same gender-hate that feminists spread about our gender to women, NOBODY would take us seriously. You can always re-watch that video I sent you and replace 'men' with 'women' or 'male' with 'female' and see how you'd view our movement then. Or just type 'radical feminist quotes' into google and do the same thing.

One thing I will admit though is that you are certainly more logical and understanding than the vast majority of your fellow feminist compatriots I've had the (mis)fortune of debating with.

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Would you like to work on a railroad where little boys developed crooked spines while working 10+ hours a day? Would you like to work in a mine which (if you were lucky enough to survive long enough without having it collapse) got 'black lung' by the age of 40? Would you like to work in filthy sweatshops where little boys would develop cancer from the fumes? Didn't think so. Life wasn't always as EASY as it is today.

I wouldn't have liked it but it would have been fair and if it meant being treated as equals I'm fine with that.

MEN as a whole NEVER get praise. Whereas women get to sit around and talk about hard it is being a woman when men were (and still are) wearing out their joints to support them.

No one should get any praise unless they've earned it in the first place. I'm not going to look highly upon some moronic guy or ditzy girl for them just simply being male or female. Anyone who would think all males or all females are just saints is an idiot. Furthermore It may have been that way in the past but nowadays unless you are making a good amount of money women are working as well. I don't know too many girls these days being supported by their man.

Yes, because only women had to do 'hard work'. You do know that men were also 'property' of their employers as well, right? This whole 'property' debate is a large feminist paradox to begin with since laws weren't advanced enough at the time to decipher different laws for different people. EVERYBODY was essentially property of somebody, but utmost, the King/Queen/Monarch of the time.

I'm not talking about in the legal sense property but the biblical texts that basically told men that believe in it that their wives are to remain [subservient to their husbands.] (http://nobeliefs.com/DarkBible/darkbible7.htm)

Kinda hard to imagine you spend much 'time' really 'defending your own gender' when you have your own national gender organizations defending yours already along with the courts/politicians lobbying for you.

You are kind of right there because spend most of my political fighting time towards better labour laws for everyone.

However, most 'feminist fallacies' generally put men in a negative point of view and never highlight the good men have done for society and our gender.

See that's the thing, men have been the makers of society up until recently in history with few women being able to shape it or have a say in how it was made. For good and for bad it's been men throughout history making history. I'm just saying maybe if women hadn't been looked down upon due to what the bible says or due to being generalized in the silly, irrational category(I quite resent the notion that women are generally irrational, I'll concede to weaker but not more irrational "when a man does it he's passionate when a woman does it she's over emotional or a bitch.") maybe we could of made history with men instead of beside them.

Well you've been calling most women irrational this whole time and irrational is just another word for crazy. I'm sorry but calling all women crazy seems kind of hateful. You saying all women are crazy is like me saying all men are violent because its in mens biology to be more aggressive. I do like debate and to talk about important inequality issues but its kind of hard to ignore my whole gender being called crazy. I saw the link you sent and yes its wrong for those women to be laughing about a guy getting his junk cut off.

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I wouldn't have liked it but it would have been fair and if it meant being treated as equals I'm fine with that.

Well, chances are you wouldn't have been 'equal' in labor efficiency to begin with. If the men around you were stronger (which, biologically, they would TEND to be), then hiring you over the average man would virtually ensure that efficiency would be lowered, now wouldn't it? And something tells me that after a week of working ONE of these jobs, you'd GLADLY work a 'traditional' mother job over them. Not to mention, SOMEBODY needed to take care of children as well (particularly in less-technologically-advanced periods of society) and tend to the house.

No one should get any praise unless they've earned it in the first place.

I agree, but feminists clearly don't.

I'm not talking about in the legal sense property but the biblical texts that basically told men that believe in it that their wives are to remain subservient to their husbands.

Religion is a completely separate entity on its own and certainly wasn't gender-biased. Religions (and society) have traditionally condemned men to death for stupid and irrelevant crimes. It's silly to nit-pick phrases from biblical texts when both genders were GREATLY affected by it.

You are kind of right there because spend most of my political fighting time towards better labour laws for everyone.

Lol, and what 'labour laws' are you 'fighting for' exactly? Putting more women in more 'favorable' job positions and, in return, putting men in less favorable (and more dangerous/laborous) positions? One of the biggest hypocrisies within feminists is how they're constantly meandering about how there's so many males in the 'white collar' world, when there are probably ten times that many in the 'blue collar' world. But oh no, feminists don't want women working dangerous 'blue collar' jobs, no no no, anything but that!

See that's the thing, men have been the makers of society up until recently in history with few women being able to shape it or have a say in how it was made. For good and for bad it's been men throughout history making history.

There have been 'matriarchical' societies within history for women to make their mark, like Queen Elizabeth. It's just that most successful societies have been 'male-dominated' and instead of receiving gratitude for this success, men are force-fed stupid feminist fallacies like "there would have been no wars had women been in power" and the "world would have been more advanced had women been in power". In other words, civilization would've been better off if 'your gender' wasn't in power.

Well you've been calling most women irrational this whole time and irrational is just another word for crazy. I'm sorry but calling all women crazy seems kind of hateful.

Looks like this has turned into a game of semantics. Irrational generally means illogical. I believe that men TEND to be MORE logical and women TEND to be MORE emotional. It's the same reason men still DOMINATE the fields of engineering, mathematics and computer science even though women DOMINATE college campuses (mostly due to there being MULTIPLE female-only scholarships/grants but ZERO male-only scholarships/grants). These are the same fields that were utilized to develop, engineer and build the civilizations we call home today and it just shows how little things have changed biologically amongst the genders, even with feminists trying to 're-program' society into their grossly sexist views.

You saying all women are crazy is like me saying all men are violent because its in mens biology to be more aggressive.

Do you see how you used the word 'crazy' and I didn't? Do you see how I used the word 'tend' and not 'all'?

I saw the link you sent and yes its wrong for those women to be laughing about a guy getting his junk cut off.

My point wasn't only that it was just wrong. Tell me what issues your gender faces that are anywhere near as disgusting as this one? If I was to be drugged up, tied up and have my penis cut off by some cunt tomorrow, women (yes, YOUR GENDER) would be laughing, poking fun and PRAISING my violent attacker. But if a fucking woman is raped or even TOUCHED, it's the worst thing that's ever happened and the national organization of whiners would be up in arms about a panel of men laughing about it. How do you think that makes MEN feel? Do you not see the sheer inequality of that? When is violence towards your gender ever LAUGHED ABOUT on national television? When is a violent male attacker towards a female (even if the female is deserving of the violence) ever praised? It's absolutely disgusting that we have to sit here and endure this sort of garbage, yet we have to listen about how your gender has sooo many more issues when cruel/barbaric violence perpetrated against us is JUST FABULOUS. I'm going to end it right here, because the fact that I am sick to my stomach right now reillustrates why I'm an MRA in the first place and things need to change.

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well, chances are you wouldn't have been 'equal' in labor efficiency to begin with. If the men around you were stronger (which, biologically, they would TEND to be), then hiring you over the average man would virtually ensure that efficiency would be lowered, now wouldn't it? And something tells me that after a week of working ONE of these jobs, you'd GLADLY work a 'traditional' mother job over them. Not to mention, SOMEBODY needed to take care of children as well (particularly in less-technologically-advanced periods of society) and tend to the house.

So women should be grateful to men because we were simply deemed not fit to work? Apparently we should have kept our mouths shut like good girls and stayed in the kitchen.

Religion is a completely separate entity on its own and certainly wasn't gender-biased. Religions (and society) have traditionally condemned men to death for stupid and irrelevant crimes. It's silly to nit-pick phrases from biblical texts when both genders were GREATLY affected by it.

Where in the bible does it literally call men inferior? Well it says they are to remain subservient to god and the church. In the bible god gave man reign over women and all animals. Show me a quote from the bible that talks badly about all men.

Lol, and what 'labour laws' are you 'fighting for' exactly? Putting more women in more 'favorable' job positions and, in return, putting men in less favorable (and more dangerous/laborous) positions? One of the biggest hypocrisies within feminists is how they're constantly meandering about how there's so many males in the 'white collar' world, when there are probably ten times that many in the 'blue collar' world. But oh no, feminists don't want women working dangerous 'blue collar' jobs, no no no, anything but that!

Wow so fucking condescending, do you ever think feminism is but one piece of what I am as a person and that maybe I have more than one kind of injustice that makes me angry. I'm a member of our local ACORN right now the project is actually trying to get regulations on landlords that rent out slums.

There have been 'matriarchical' societies within history for women to make their mark, like Queen Elizabeth. It's just that most successful societies have been 'male-dominated' and instead of receiving gratitude for this success, men are force-fed stupid feminist fallacies like "there would have been no wars had women been in power" and the "world would have been more advanced had women been in power". In other words, civilization would've been better off if 'your gender' wasn't in power.

Civilization would of been better if women were treated as equals instead of the wives that are there to only take care of my kids and to clean my house. I have a feeling that you are going to say basically that females input wouldn't have made a difference or made things worse which makes me wonder why I'm participating in this discussion.

Looks like this has turned into a game of semantics. Irrational generally means illogical. I believe that men TEND to be MORE logical and women TEND to be MORE emotional. It's the same reason men still DOMINATE the fields of engineering, mathematics and computer science even though women DOMINATE college campuses (mostly due to there being MULTIPLE female-only scholarships/grants but ZERO male-only scholarships/grants). These are the same fields that were utilized to develop, engineer and build the civilizations we call home today and it just shows how little things have changed biologically amongst the genders, even with feminists trying to 're-program' society into their grossly sexist views.

Here ya go. Notice it also says there is a national movement to get boys back on track to getting better grades.

So is it ok for me to say men tend to be more violent and men tend to be rapists due to their DNA?

My point wasn't only that it was just wrong. Tell me what issues your gender faces that are anywhere near as disgusting as this one? If I was to be drugged up, tied up and have my penis cut off by some cunt tomorrow, women (yes, YOUR GENDER) would be laughing, poking fun and PRAISING my violent attacker. But if a fucking woman is raped or even TOUCHED, it's the worst thing that's ever happened and the national organization of whiners would be up in arms about a panel of men laughing about it.

I'm sorry but the internet makes rape jokes all the time. Yea praising a woman for cutting off a guys ding dong is awful behaviour and this is not what feminism should be about. Trust me next time I see such behaviour I'll speak up. Like I said I go by pure definition of what feminism means not the literature or bs just the simple fact that women and men should be treated equally and if you think that women shouldn't be treated equally then I shouldn't be talking with you.

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So women should be grateful to men because we were simply deemed not fit to work? Apparently we should have kept our mouths shut like good girls and stayed in the kitchen.

Yes, you were not deemed fit enough to have to work yourself to chronic arthiritis and death.

Where in the bible does it literally call men inferior? Well it says they are to remain subservient to god and the church. In the bible god gave man reign over women and all animals. Show me a quote from the bible that talks badly about all men.

I'm not going to pretend to know the bible well enough to quote it. However, in ancient far-more-religious-times, men would be KILLED for stupid silly crimes and were FORCED to be the 'breadwinners'. With rights, comes responsiblity. Just as women were FORCED (within biblical/religious text) to support their husbands, men were FORCED by the same mechanisms to PROVIDE for their wives, by any means necessary.

Wow so fucking condescending, do you ever think feminism is but one piece of what I am as a person and that maybe I have more than one kind of injustice that makes me angry. I'm a member of our local ACORN right now the project is actually trying to get regulations on landlords that rent out slums.

Well, excuse me for assuming that when you said you were too busy fighting FOR YOUR OWN GENDER to care about my genders issues, you were actually talking about non-gender specific labor laws. Maybe next time you should try not to imply such things, yeah?

Civilization would of been better if women were treated as equals instead of the wives that are there to only take care of my kids and to clean my house. I have a feeling that you are going to say basically that females input wouldn't have made a difference or made things worse which makes me wonder why I'm participating in this discussion.

No. Women's input was PARAMOUNT to civilization, people NEEDED to be raised and TAKEN CARE OF by somebody. Men and women both WORKED TOGETHER to hold down their family, especially at a time when technology wasn't ADVANCED ENOUGH to have jobs that were physically-lenient enough to ALLOW women to work as efficiently as men. Once again, instead of analyzing history, feminists just make up fantasy-utopia-stories about how if women worked life wouldn't been SOOO much easier for everybody, when in fact it probably would've hindered civilization.

Here ya go. Notice it also says there is a national movement to get boys back on track to getting better grades.

Funny how feminism, which caused this initial problem with boys needing 'get better grades' by pushing hateful rhetoric about how girls are more intelligent and have more worth than them, is suddenly (supposedly) trying to help 'boys'. For every one feminist 'movement' pushing to help 'boys' in any way, there are at least 50 other ones trying to make girls exceed boys in some way. I've even read feminist literature in a common women's magazine describing how boys and girls should be SEGREGATED in schools because boys delinquence LIMITS girls potential. After reading garbage like this (and about a billion other articles VERY similar to it), I REFUSE to believe feminists are, in any way, trying to help 'boys' more than just cover their own ass when asked about their lack of empathy towards them.

So is it ok for me to say men tend to be more violent and men tend to be rapists due to their DNA?

Men do tend to be more violent, just as women tend to be more manipulative/vindicative. And rape depends largely on your definition of it.

I'm sorry but the internet makes rape jokes all the time.

Maybe you forgot to mention that I already stated that this was BROADCASTED on national FUCKING television. These are just the responses after Sharon 'Cunt' Osbourne was forced to make a half-assed apology for making fun of this poor man. Of course, the fucking internet has 'rape jokes', but for 1) Genital-fucking-removal is NOWHERE NEAR as severe as ANY rape imaginable, 2) Rape jokes are generally not directed at a specific person/incident, but more as a general over-the-top joke, 3) Rape jokes doesn't involve PRAISING criminal actiosn but making comedy out of them and 4)If men were sitting on a panel laughing, joking and praising a man who tore up some woman's pussy then THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN FUCKING FIRED and have their careers RUINED. Do you not get this? This isn't about 'jokes' on the internet, its about women not having to suffer consequences for anything in this god-forsaken society because there's always some excuse ready for them by feminists.

Yea praising a woman for cutting off a guys ding dong is awful behaviour and this is not what feminism should be about.

Then why don't feminist organizations, you know, SPEAK OUT about it? ALL feminist organizations shut the hell up when this shocking behavior occurred on NATIONAL TELEVISION, but oh no, some stupid milk commercial labeling the effects of PMS was DEFINITELY more important to go after, right? Feminists don't care for men, men's suffer and have ABSOLUTELY no empathy for men. If they cared in the least, they would've DONE SOMETHING about it, but they remained silent. Maybe you feminists should start judging people on their ACTIONS and not what they PROCLAIM.

Trust me next time I see such behaviour I'll speak up.

You'll probably just be told to shut up and learn how to take a joke. Violent jokes about men tend to be pretty common 'giggling ground' amongst feminists and modern women (as demonstrated by that CafeCunt website).

Like I said I go by pure definition of what feminism means not the literature or bs just the simple fact that women and men should be treated equally and if you think that women shouldn't be treated equally then I shouldn't be talking with you.

Alright, you see, this is EXACTLY what your problem is. Yes, let's go by feminism by its pure definition which feminists THEMSELVES don't FOLLOW. Are you really this dense? It's like if I was telling you to go by the 'pure definition' of the KKK movement and said all they say is that they want to "benefit individuals whom they deem as 'white'". This is actually the 'pure definition' they utilize, but that doesn't mean I'm going to judge them by this 'definition'. Their actions speaks louder than words and I could care less what they say. Do you just listen to politicians and go "Oh yeah, she said that she's doing this" and believe it 100%? OF COURSE they say that, because it makes their organization seem 'reputable' when it is a hate group just like the KKK. If you actually 'believe' feminists have actually ACTED upon their 'pure definition', then you know about as much about feminism as my pet rabbit. And nice try on shaming me with the 'treated equally' bit, you do know people have completely different definitions of 'equality', right?

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What's your definition of equality then? Also I don't pay attention to feminism as a movement only as an ideal. The KKK is an movement, feminism is the ideal that men and women should be equal. So when I talk to people that are anti feminist I see it as that person being anti equality.

And rape depends largely on your definition of it.

what kind of other definition is there of rape? Having sex with someone without their consent.

I went to can all girls school in high school, there is something to be said for going to an all girls school. Some girls have a tendency to act different around guys. Without girls constantly trying to compete with one another over guys attention there is more room for actual learning and less of girls being bitches to each other. May I remind you, you are fighting with a person that just simply wants to treat each gender equally and you talking down to me and about my gender is not making a good case for your cause.

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What's your definition of equality then?

It would depend on the circumstances. 300 years ago my opinion on gender 'equality' would be different than that of today. Today, I would consider gender equality to mean 'equal opportunity', which feminists are vehemently against.

Also I don't pay attention to feminism as a movement only as an ideal. The KKK is an movement, feminism is the ideal that men and women should be equal.

Feminism is definitely a movement. Just because you don't see it as such doesn't mean it isn't.

So when I talk to people that are anti feminist I see it as that person being anti equality.

Feminism is anything but equality and if they were for equality, they certainly wouldn't be called 'feminists', but something like oh.. I don't know... 'Humanists'. The name 'feminism' implies emphasis on a SINGLE gender, how can you even tell me it's for equality? Because the 'pure definition' you read on some feminist-inspired literature told you so? I've already given you NUMEROUS examples of feminists acting out of this 'pure definition' (pretty much all of the mainstream ones, actually). However, I'm sure if I mentioned the word 'masculinist' you'd get the image of a chauvinistic male wanting to 'subjugate' women.

what kind of other definition is there of rape? Having sex with someone without their consent.

I guess you haven't been hearing all this fuss blowing all over the 'gender issues' boards about the FBI changing the definition of rape: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-01-06/fbi-rape-definition-adds-men/52398350/1

The definition of rape is very varied and feminists have worked EXTREMELY hard to have anything from an un-wanted advance to ANY drunken encounter as 'rape'. They also work VERY diligently to make up excuses for women making false rape allegations, going as far as to say 'men could benefit from a false rape claim by discovering what its like to be raped'. Yeah, I couldn't make this shit up if I tried. Feminists have also stated numerous times in the past that women CANNOT rape men; that its completely impossible.

I went to can all girls school in high school, there is something to be said for going to an all girls school.

That there's a higher chance of becoming a feminist? ;)

Some girls have a tendency to act different around guys. Without girls constantly trying to compete with one another over guys attention there is more room for actual learning and less of girls being bitches to each other.

That's really funny, because last I checked... BOYS act the same way when women are present... Are you really trying to justify segregation of genders over this? Should boys and girls really not be allowed interact socially with each other because of this? This actually seems like it denigrates society by not allowing men/women to properly interact with each other until they're already adults. Social skills amongst the genders are also VERY necessary skills needed in the 'grown-up' world, much in the same way a home-schooled child generally ends up socially inadequate due to not honing in on these skills in his/her youth.

May I remind you, you are fighting with a person that just simply wants to treat each gender equally and you talking down to me and about my gender is not making a good case for your cause.

1) I'm not fighting you and if you think I am, you have every right to stop this discussion. I'm also not 'talking down to you'. This is called a 'debate'. Don't worry, this male isn't trying to 'subjugate' or 'bring you down' in any way.

2) I don't think you're some 100% batshit insane feminist, which is why I've continued this discussion. I wouldn't waste my time 'fighting' some nutter-butter feminazi.

3) You're talking about how you want gender equality, yet support a hateful group which is anything but. Most of this discussion had been on this issue and you trying to sell me on following a 'pure definition', which I 100% refuse to do so until I see ACTION behind this definition (as should ANY intellectual for that matter). Mind you, this is NOT limited to feminism, but ANY group/movement.

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

First off the definition is from dictionary.com. lol I went there read the definition and from that definition I concluded I was a feminist thought I did think that feminism was a very exclusionary term for equality between men and women. I don't belong to any sort of feminist group or anything like that, just read the definition and agreed with what it said. I want equal opportunity for women and men to do what they want. I don't want anyone assuming a woman is illogical on the basis that she is a woman and I don't want anyone to assume a man is a rapist or violent just because he is a man.

I guess you haven't been hearing all this fuss blowing all over the 'gender issues' boards about the FBI changing the definition of rape Wow that's terrible. I'm not from America so I dunno if our definition up here is any different.

Are you really trying to justify segregation of genders over this? Should boys and girls really not be allowed interact socially with each other because of this?

No I'm not trying to say it should be mandated but it's a good option for parents or students if they like. I for one had a much better time in my high school than I would have in the the regular schools and I felt more comfortable there because my value wasn't as much being pinned to how attractive I am to men.(In the student body not by teachers of course)

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

First off the definition is from dictionary.com. lol I went there read the definition and from that definition I concluded I was a feminist thought I did think that feminism was a very exclusionary term for equality between men and women. I don't belong to any sort of feminist group or anything like that, just read the definition and agreed with what it said.

Yes. I, too, utilize dictionary.com as my primary tool in determining if I support a group or not. Not by the actions of that group, but by a simple definition which the particular group has traditionally 'hid behind' as an excuse for conducting its hatred. Hell, thats how EVERYBODY should choose whether they're a part of any political party. Just ignore everything the party DOES but concentrate on a definition from an online dictionary.

I want equal opportunity for women and men to do what they want. I don't want anyone assuming a woman is illogical on the basis that she is a woman and I don't want anyone to assume a man is a rapist or violent just because he is a man.

Alright, for sakes of running in circles of the same discussions, maybe you'll better understand these points if I give you a list:

I believe women TEND to be MORE illogical THAN men, not that they are illogical. Learn the difference.
Civilization wasn't always easy enough to allow everyone to 'do what they want'. This is due to biological differences between men/women AND the fact that (mostly men) hadn't yet developed the technology to allow women to work alongside men.

I for one had a much better time in my high school than I would have in the the regular schools and I felt more comfortable there because my value wasn't as much being pinned to how attractive I am to men.(In the student body not by teachers of course)

Oh no, all those evil boys would've clearly pinned you to 'how attractive' you are to them! Clearly none of them would've treated you with respect and none of the girls would've treated the boys as such as well. You dodged quite the bullet there! Maybe its your own insecurity of how attractive you are and not that of evil boys juding you? You ever think of that? It seems to me that you can only LET boys opinions get to you, just as I can only LET girls opinions get to me. If only your above-average all-female school actually promoted READING about and OBSERVING a particular ideology rather than blindly believing it from an online dictionary, maybe it would've won some merit. Maybe.

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well I just believe men Tend to base how they treat a woman on the basis of if they want to bang them.

Girls do the same thing. We all have sexual desires, ya know?

You seem to be going at me quite aggressively right now.

Hardly. Maybe you don't have very thick skin?

I don't think boys are evil just they tend to think with ya know their dicks it's not bad that they do its just what they tend to do.

And women don't think with their clitoris? You honestly think teenage girls aren't biologically engineered (just like boys) to consider sexual reproduction? You ever wonder why girls choose the 'bad boys'? Girls are just as guilty, if not more so, than boys for doing this. The difference is that boys/men are blamed for this while girls/women are looked upon as victims for doing the same exact thing.

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Just saying guys tend to either treat uglier girls badly or ignore them.

Girls are DEFINITELY no different in this regard.

Girls make fun of those same girls to get attention from those same guys.

And how is this a problem? Boys treat each other like shit and even get into physical altercations to look good in front of girls. Boys are ALWAYS competing with each other, why do girls think that all of these traits are exclusive to them?

I do have thick skin but I feel that since I'm refraining from being rude or condescending to you, maybe you might afford me the same courtesy.

I've been more sarcastic than anything and pretty darn courteous. What irks me is that its COMPLETELY acceptable for you to say something like "guys think with their dicks", but if I say men tend to be more logical due to biological factors, I'M the sexist. Whenever men say anything feminists don't like, we're sexists. But it's completely acceptable to tell men they're too stupid to not think with their genitalia, when women DO the EXACT SAME THING. And then, when I point this out, suddenly I'm a sexist again.

Woman choose their mates based on how they believe that mate will provide for their offspring and how they can protect them.

They used to before birth control was around. Since women have 100% reproductive control now, the only trait girls/young women generally choose their mates on is how much that person stimulates their clitoris. And then, when they start nearing 30, they suddenly cash in on the richest man who can 'provide for their offspring and protect them'. What a great system, eh? Now, seems pretty frivilous to blame boys for 'thinking with their dicks', doesn't it?

I don't understand why you are so against an option for girls and boys to go to separate schools if they choose so.

I'm not. It's just that you made it seem like your personal minor issues with the opposite gender was some sort of reasoning for mandating separation of school. You also made it seem like boys were hindering girls from progressing, when the same argument could be made for boys.

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NightAria1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Aikidi 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]BinaryShadow 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aikidi 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]g2petter 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BinaryShadow 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aikidi 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aikidi 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aikidi 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Aikidi1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Jyrsa1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Aikidi1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SpaceDog777 -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]FreddyDeus 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SpaceDog777 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]docsquidly 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]XDingoX83 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BinaryShadow 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]XDingoX83 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pizzlybear 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 60 points61 points62 points 14 years ago (204 children) | Copy Link

[–]tnw1 64 points65 points66 points 14 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[–]nikocujo 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]cercer 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]TracyMorganFreeman1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I forgot a comma, I meant when practicable both socially and legally.

As for socially, there are some things that aren't really workable, or at least currently most people aren't mature enough for. Segregated bathrooms/locker rooms, etc. It may seem ridiculous to point out, but treating each sex equally socially would imply dating or trying to to date as well as flirt with/check out both men and women, even if one isn't bisexual. There aren't many instances where it isn't practicable socially or legally, but they do exist.

As for legally, an example would abortion. Women bear 100% of the burden, and due to this they have 100% control over the fate of the fetus. This is to ensure that women aren't forced into motherhood, aren't forced to bear the physical burden. Men don't have this option, but allowing men to have a say in whether the fetus is carried to term could impinge on the mother's body autonomy. The current system allows fathers to be forced into fatherhood. An alternative would be what has become known as "financial abortion" or "legal paternal surrender". That would allow the man to abdicate both rights and responsibilities before the child is born, and personally I think it should be kept within the same time window that abortion is allowed, so the mother can make an informed decision-whether to go forward with the knowledge the father will or will not be involved. This would be example where equal treatment isn't practicable, but equal outcome can occur without unfairly treating either group.

[–]expletive-deleted1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]expletive-deleted1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]YesImSardonic -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]YesImSardonic 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hillarysmanbag 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic 18 points19 points20 points 14 years ago* (138 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 16 points17 points18 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 43 points44 points45 points 14 years ago (91 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic 52 points53 points54 points 14 years ago (73 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 22 points23 points24 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]royboh 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NiceGuysSTFU -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KingNick -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]GavnLogic -7 points-6 points-5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 15 points16 points17 points 14 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]KingNick 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]semperverus -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I've heard multitudes more MRA's discuss the draft issue than feminists. And despite what you may think, talking about something is "doing something" - it's called raising awareness. When I go to feminist blogs, I read such silly drivel about female body image, how men objectify women, bla bla bla. MRA blogs routinely discuss things such as draft

When feminists do talk about the draft, it's usually some COP OUT comment like the one you just made, trying to come up with some reason to moot the issue and weasel out discussing sexist draft laws. Rather than equalize draft laws, feminists would rather just abolish the draft to begin with. But they don't want to abolish the draft to benefit men - they want to abolish the draft so women won't be drafted. Instead of presenting-center and having an iota of accountability over the issue, it's always "well, we shouldn't have draft laws in the first place..." or "war is bad" or "war is TEH PATRIARKIE!" or other such nonsensical cop out drivel.

[–]blow_hard 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I've heard multitudes more MRA's discuss the draft issue than feminists.

Confirmation bias. Do you really hunt through feminist blogs and spend as much time reading them as MRA blogs? Based on the fact that you seem to think women don't care about the draft, I'm going to have to say obviously not. MRA blogs routinely discuss the draft because it's one of the few issues they've got they people will actually sympathize with them on. Very few people will admit to liking or supporting the draft, after all.

You don't seem to understand that abolishing the draft WOULD equalize the draft laws, because then both genders would have the same chance of being drafted: zero. The fact that you think that women want to abolish the draft so that they won't be drafted is utterly absurd, the height of ignorance, and shows that you lack even basic understanding of the feminist platform. Women already face zero chance of being drafted, because that's how the law is right now and virtually no one is campaigning to subject women to the draft. Women aren't worried about being drafted.

There is already very strong opposition to the draft, there has been since the Vietnam war, when it was incredibly unpopular. The way things are going, there is a lot more public support for ending the draft than there is for extending it, or widening it. That's the way things are. Knowing that, obviously if you truly want to have a chance at equalizing things, you should aim to end the draft for everyone. It's not a cop out, it's the most realistic solution to the problem, and the one that is most likely to come about.

Yes, the draft laws are sexist, and the draft is also horrible which is why we should end it. "Rather than equalize draft laws, feminists would rather just abolish the draft to begin with." Abolishing the draft would equalize draft laws. If neither men nor women can be drafted, that seems pretty equal to me.

[–]GavnLogic 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Confirmation bias. Do you really hunt through feminist blogs and spend as much time reading them as MRA blogs?

Assumption. I spend more time reading feminist blogs than I do MRA material. Why? Because how can I refute feminist drivel unless I first read it?

Based on the fact that you seem to think women don't care about the draft, I'm going to have to say obviously not.

Your statement here is based on an unproven premise, ie that women/feminists care about the draft.

Very few people will admit to liking or supporting the draft, after all.

I'm going to keep this here because I'll need to bring it back in a second:

You don't seem to understand that abolishing the draft WOULD equalize the draft laws, because then both genders would have the same chance of being drafted: zero.

Yes, however, the draft isn't going anywhere soon, and isn't likely to be abolished in the near future. It's here to stay. The fact that Congress would have almost unanimous support from the population if they abolished the draft, yet still haven't, indicates that it's in place due to a necessity. Just like taxes.

The fact that you think that women want to abolish the draft so that they won't be drafted is utterly absurd, the height of ignorance, and shows that you lack even basic understanding of the feminist platform. [Emphasize mine]

So what you're saying with all them fancy words there is: Women want to be drafted?

Women already face zero chance of being drafted, because that's how the law is right now and virtually no one is campaigning to subject women to the draft. Women aren't worried about being drafted.

Exaaaaaactly my pooooinnntttt. -knocks on your head- Anyone hooommmeee? Women face zero chance of being drafted. Is it any wonder they're not really campaigning all that hard to instate 50/50 practices or even to abolish the draft altogether? I mean granted, you can find a few token statements by feminists, but what sort of attention are they really giving the issue?

There is already very strong opposition to the draft, there has been since the Vietnam war, when it was incredibly unpopular. The way things are going, there is a lot more public support for ending the draft than there is for extending it, or widening it. That's the way things are. Knowing that, obviously if you truly want to have a chance at equalizing things, you should aim to end the draft for everyone. It's not a cop out, it's the most realistic solution to the problem, and the one that is most likely to come about.

Yes, the draft laws are sexist, and the draft is also horrible which is why we should end it. "Rather than equalize draft laws, feminists would rather just abolish the draft to begin with." Abolishing the draft would equalize draft laws. If neither men nor women can be drafted, that seems pretty equal to me.

As I already pointed out: Despite such an unpopular opinion amongst the populace, the draft isn't going anywhere soon. Thus, the position of "equality through establishment" is a moral cop out because, either way, women stand no risk of being drafted. It is a gynoprotectorate position, much like all of feminism.

[–]blow_hard1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You've done a great job of missing all my points, I'm not going to bother talking to you if you're going to purposefully misrepresent what I say.

That said, I'm going to make just one clarification, because there's one point I could have worded better. When you got confused here:

The fact that you think that women want to abolish the draft so that they won't be drafted is utterly absurd, the height of ignorance, and shows that you lack even basic understanding of the feminist platform. [Emphasize mine] So what you're saying with all them fancy words there is: Women want to be drafted?

No, what I was saying was that the reason women want to abolish the draft isn't because they're worried they might someday be drafted; the reason (most) women are against the draft and want to abolish it is because they think it's wrong and unfair. It's not, 'oh no, we might get drafted someday, we should do something about that!' it's hey, war sucks, no one should be forced into it, regardless of their gender.

Other than that you're being purposefully obtuse and combative and don't seem willing to have a constructive discussion.

For example, how can you say this

Your statement here is based on an unproven premise, ie that women/feminists care about the draft.

Which has been proven by many others (including me, for example) in this very thread- I know someone else already posted this, which is the National Organization for Women's condemnation of the draft.

If we're going to talk about unproven assumptions, your entire argument seems to rest on the assumption that the draft isn't going anywhere, which you haven't bothered to prove in any way.

[–]GavnLogic1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You've done a great job of missing all my points, I'm not going to bother talking to you if you're going to purposefully misrepresent what I say.

This is ironic because you won't even address any of my points.

Other than that you're being purposefully obtuse and combative and don't seem willing to have a constructive discussion.

Translation: "You don't agree with me, so you're just a bad person! And you're dumb! Neener neener!"

Which has been proven by many others (including me, for example) in this very thread- I know someone else already posted this[link removed], which is the National Organization for Women's condemnation of the draft.

Yeah, in 1971 during the whole "anti-war trend", NOW made some token statements about the draft. You've sure presented a strong case there. <-- That was sarcasm, BTW.

If we're going to talk about unproven assumptions, your entire argument seems to rest on the assumption that the draft isn't going anywhere

Excuse me - but I thought you had a problem with people misrepresenting what other people say? I said the draft "isn't going anywhere, soon." I never said "the draft isn't going anywhere, period".

You can have the last word and posture if it makes you feel better. I won't debate with someone who doesn't have the intellectual spine to hold themselves to their own standards.

[–]blow_hard0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]superiority 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]superiority 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ballsey 15 points16 points17 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Falsum2 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KingNick 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]N8theGr8 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]N8theGr8 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]blakkadder -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]blakkadder 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]blakkadder 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]youseeah 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]youseeah 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]bikemaul 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KingNick 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchrodingersRapist 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago* (27 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago* (26 children) | Copy Link

The basic idea here is that you're not sexist unless you think one gender should be drafted and the other should not. I can't speak for every feminist, but I'm of the opinion that as things currently stand in America it is pretty ridiculous that we have a list of people the government can legally force to go to war on a whim. There should be a significant barrier, possibly even the passing of a constitutional amendment, that would require people to acknowledge that it was truly necessary to force people to go to war.

In places like South Korea where compulsory service might actually be a good idea then yeah, it should be extended to women.

And for the record, NOW has long acknowledged the unfairness of the draft towards men. You may object to some of their other reasons, but the fourth point there is clearly sympathizing with men.

Edit due to post timer:
@notcaptainkirk: it would be hard to justify going through the process of drafting women just to make it easier to stop drafting anyone. Just skip the first step and get rid of it all at once.

@bikemaul: no burden is necessary right now. We have a lot of voluntary soldiers and a lot of death robots to do our police work right now. If we ever got invaded by aliens we could change the laws then.

[–]AryoBarzan 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 14 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted]-2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan6 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]-2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]miss_bonbonbonbon2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]miss_bonbonbonbon2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]miss_bonbonbonbon2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]miss_bonbonbonbon2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

OK I actually don't want to argue with you but I just need to point out to you that on the thread about the genital mutilation of males and females I was actually agreeing with the OP. I have said several times in that thread that I agreed that male genital mutilation is equally as morally vile as female and should be treated as such.

I have infact argued against male genital mutilation in other threads too. I have also discouraged people from choosing this option in my job as a paediatric nurse. Believe me, I know how fucked up male genital mutilation is.

You had no reason at all to say that ''The only people undermining genital mutilation are the ones justifying it by saying 'it's not as bad as x', like yourself.'' No right whatsoever. Just because I had pointed out that your comment about male and female genitals was infact incorrect you seemed to have decided that I was sexist towards men and for male genital mutilation. You should have actually read what I'd written and thought about it before stereotyping. I was here to argue FOR men's rights but you were too ignorant to realise that.

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The reason I hadn't called you names and stayed VERY civil with you is because I can tell that you are actually here, to some degree, for men's issues and not some troll like the SRS poster above. I refuse to call MRA or MRA supporters (even to a small degree) names or insult them in any manner due to the fact that I ALWAYS have some hightened level of respect towards them, even if I don't 100% agree with them.

I will also give you a big thank you for your good deeds as a paediatric nurse. I feel homocidal everytime I see some woman telling parents lies about MGM and then going on to cut up the poor boy with a nice happy smile on her face. Just the thought of it now makes me sick to my stomach.

I did not say (nor imply) that you are for MGM or sexist against men. You probably wouldn't be here if you were one of those two, let alone both. Which is why, as addressed earlier, I remained civil with you. I don't believe I am anywhere near incorrect on my MGM/FGM stats, but I do think that we don't share the same definitions of 'common' and other such words that got in the way of our argument.

Either way, agree to disagree? Extends Hand

[–]miss_bonbonbonbon2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]6 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]-1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SchrodingersRapist -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]SchrodingersRapist 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Which is only short your amendment qualifier by subtracting the president and adding a senate vote, and then a state vote. Which all take time to even setup, and may not even be possible in the event of an invasion or first strike scenario(especially if EMPs were used which is likely any advanced armies first action to knock out communication lines and cause disarray).

I prefer having everyone sign up, it's the fair way of keeping a list of able bodied Americans. It would save time if shit ever hit the fan so to speak, if we ever have another Pearl Harbor. Instead of your suggestion by passing a new amendment, having everyone sign up for a new draft, and still having people dead set on not fighting fleeing the country or dodging it anyway. Furthermore, this isn't the 60's anymore. The backlash from anything less than being invaded would be enormous. Likely instituting a draft that a majority of the populous didn't agree with the cause for would just end with people not serving, protests, and probably violent riots in many major cities.

Why don't we just talk fairness and women can push to have it required they sign up instead of pointing to outdated(assuming a couple of those ever were true) aspects posted in the 70s from NOW and ignoring that those things that happen to both sides. I would totally be behind women serving an equal role in the military (including front line work, pay, rank, etc.) in response to the #4 on that list as well.

[–][deleted]-1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Which is only short your amendment qualifier by subtracting the president and adding a senate vote.

And, you know, 3/4 of the states.

The backlash from anything less than being invaded would be enormous. Likely instituting a draft that a majority of the populous didn't agree with the cause for would just end with people not serving, protests, and probably violent riots in many major cities.

True, but would that be any better? Looting, soldiers against rioters, and if you think the right vs. left division in this country is bad now...

Why don't we just talk fairness and women can push to have it required they sign up

Between antiwar liberals, antifeminist conservatives, and people who just plain don't want to sign up for the draft, I can't see it happening. Not to mention that it's the wrong way to solve the problem.

Edit:

Which all take time to even setup, and may not even be possible in the event of an invasion or first strike scenario

I am less worried that we will need a draft at a moment's notice than I am about an unjustified draft. Some may disagree. Some of those people will not understand how utterly dominant the US military is right now.

[–]SchrodingersRapist3 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

2/3rds Houses at the start and 3/4ths the states, I am well aware. I'm going to stick to my assumptions about the time all of that would take at a minimum in the event of an emergency, when time and lives matter.

True, but would that be any better? Looting, soldiers against rioters, and if you think the right vs. left division in this country is bad now...

In fact that would be worse. Which is the threat under which to ensure that it would never happen on a whim, and only for something seriously warranting it.

Between antiwar liberals, antifeminist conservatives, and people who just plain don't want to sign up for the draft, I can't see it happening. Not to mention that it's the wrong way to solve the problem.

You're right, thankfully there are two ways I see around this problem.

One is that we are a republic and a majority should still rule so long as it comes down to a vote.
The second, and I particularly like this one better, make the draft optional for EVERYONE able(not counting the obvious disabled, unable, or such). Those that aren't willing to be drafted and defend the country in the event of invasion, fight in the event of a world war scale outbreak of violence for their fellow person, or be drafted to render aid to their fellows in the event of a severe natural emergency are not allowed to own property(Read: Land) or gain aid from government programs/assistance of any kind. People wouldn't have to fight for any cause they didn't agree with, and wouldn't be barred from renting a place to live, employment, or medical services, but would not gain all the benefits of being a citizen in a place they are unwilling to defend or assist in a crisis. It could be setup something akin to some failure to render aid laws.

[–][deleted]-1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]notcaptainkirk 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SarahC 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]themountaingoat 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]themountaingoat 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]srshk213 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BinaryShadow 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]YesImSardonic 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lecks 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lecks 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lecks1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

My guess would be the notion that men are both priviledged and expected to deal with hardships, rather than strive to alleviate them. It's not uncommon for men who discuss men's rights issues to be mocked or even berated simply for acknowledging that we face discrimination or that certain issues affect men and women equally or are even disprotionately worse for men.

There seems to be a general sentiment that we bring these things on ourselves, typically because of the belief there is some overarching structure that favours men but that we fail it's expectations on an individual level and are therefore punished for it.

When the majority of the populace is taught that men have always been the ones in power then it becomes very difficult to convince anyone that men have genuine struggles. After all, if we hold all the power then whatever problems we have must be comparitively trivial to what women face.

The first hurdle an MRA has to overcome is his percieved position of power and priviledge.

[–]throwaway6237 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 12 points13 points14 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Stuartc084 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KilliamWallace 14 points15 points16 points 14 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]marswithrings 23 points24 points25 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Actually, woman aren't allowed in direct combat because a country (I believe Israel) once tried allowing it, and found that male soldiers frequently endeavored in over-heroics in the presence of female soldiers.

By this I mean, they were jumping in front of the women to take bullets, or jumping on top of grenades, etc - which is not independently bad, but it was done to the extent that many of them were prioritizing protecting the women over of the primary mission objective.

Additionally, men who did not partake in what I've called the over-heroics, but instead witnessed women being blown to bloody bits, suffered severe psychological trauma.

Gender roles built into us by society may indeed be the problem, but they have been ingrained in us so deeply that they can legitimately interfere with direct combat, and not for those physical reasons everyone assumes.

[–]smischmal 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]marswithrings 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]marswithrings 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I actually learned this from school, not the web (for once in my life), so I don't have a link handy. A few minutes of searching yielded this - it's not as detailed as my previous comment, but does support what I said. I would imagine it wouldn't be too hard to find more if you're interested in the subject, but I don't have time to do an extensive search myself. xD

According to Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, author of On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, Israeli soldiers reacted with uncontrollable protectiveness and aggression after seeing a woman wounded. Grossman also notes that Islamic militants rarely, if ever, surrender to female soldiers, lessening the IDF's ability to interrogate prisoners. On the other hand, Iraqi and Afghan civilians are often not intimidated by female soldiers. However, in such environments, having female soldiers serving within a combat unit does have the advantage of allowing for searches on female civilians. Children and women are more likely to talk to female soldiers than to male soldiers.

sauce

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheRadBaron 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]KilliamWallace 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheRadBaron 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]KilliamWallace 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]KilliamWallace 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]eberkimer2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]KilliamWallace3 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Demonspawn3 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How bad of an actual problem is this?

It's a problem, and one of those that are almost never talked about (because it's too politically incorrect [PDF]).

Some deploying units reported that non-deployable rates for pregnancy among women were as much as 30% of those assigned.

Consider the ''pregnant-Navy syndrome.''

In this phenomenon a woman benefits from the Navy's technical training and then, just prior to her ship's being deployed, becomes pregnant so as to qualify for shore leave and not be deployed.

Or she becomes pregnant immediately after her ship is deployed, thus allowing her to shirk responsibilities, forcing her shipmates to pick up the slack.

In ''Women in Ships: Can We Survive?'' published in Proceedings of the U.S. Naval Institute, in July 1987, Lt. Roberta Spillaine wrote of an experience aboard the USS Acadia: ''One West Coast based tender reported that more than 40 percent of her female non-rated seamen became pregnant during work-up for deployment - and no replacements were authorized.''

[–]KilliamWallace2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]eberkimer3 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]KilliamWallace3 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SarahC 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BrendanFraser 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]radamanthine 13 points14 points15 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hypersapien 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SarahC 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NiceGuysSTFU 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Metaphoricalsimile -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]boss1000 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]xebo -10 points-9 points-8 points 14 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[+]xebo -7 points-6 points-5 points 14 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]wienerleg -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]wienerleg -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]wienerleg -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wienerleg1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wienerleg1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wienerleg1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You must not be looking very hard, a lot of effort in expended in the name of charity. People begging on streets easily make enough to not die, at least in large cities.

Everyone has a right to work. No one has a right to make someone pay them money. You can dig holes in your backyard and nobody can stop you. But requiring some people to give money in exchange for goods they don't want is basically theft. If I make someone hire a midget for his basketball team, I'm not doing that midget any good. I might as well steal the money from the owner and give it to him, so in that case he can still get the work of an efficient worker.

Actual liberties don't involve infringing on the rights of others, and I think requiring employers to reduce their standards because they hurt someone's feelings is going to end up being bad for even people who get hired, because competition in the marketplace should shove out businesses that have bad hiring practices (mandated by the government or not).

Either there is a surplus of labor, in which case we can't grant everyone jobs and it's nonsense to grant a right to work when no work exists, or there is a deficit of labor, in which case even deficient workers (read: women, cripples, midgets) will be employed. There's no need to legally require people to lower their standards, and it can only hurt in the long run.

[–][deleted]1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wienerleg1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well I personally think that some people will die no matter what we do, but I don't see a "right to work" being the optimal way to run charity. I just see it as a weird condescending way to pretend that people who can't do a job are just fine that just hurts employers, and if we do think it's necessary/moral to impair people to help others, we might as well just levy a tax and give charity.

I just think it's a weird moral solution to say "well no one helps these people so we're going to legally require you to put them somewhere they don't belong and give them money." Also this keeps oscillating between women and cripples but I guess my argument is way safer as far as women go, since they're not all going to starve in the street or whatever.

Why do you think a right to work is a better solution than just giving them money, especially when we have a surplus of workers anyway?

[–][deleted]1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]xebo -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]xebo -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]blow_hard 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]xebo -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Unenjoyed 27 points28 points29 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]youcanttakemeserious 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Santos_L_Halper 12 points13 points14 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]marswithrings 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]youcanttakemeserious -6 points-5 points-4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]markinthedark 136 points137 points138 points 14 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]brucemo 29 points30 points31 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]fauxjargon 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]airodynamic1000 -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fauxjargon2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]geodebug 17 points18 points19 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wasdninja 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KingNick 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]brucemo 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KRATOSBRAH 54 points55 points56 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]xebo 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]darkgatherer 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kardlonoc 22 points23 points24 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]couldbeglorious 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Psy-Kosh 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Malithion 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nanomagnetic 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]nepidae 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]nanomagnetic 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]nepidae -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]nanomagnetic 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]nepidae -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]nanomagnetic 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Tetha 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]KingNick 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Tetha 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]spongemonster -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jvardrake 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]levelate 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lecks 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]stemgang 24 points25 points26 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hypersapien 18 points19 points20 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]significantshrinkage 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BrendanFraser 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]purrit 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bnb2011 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mynameisflorian 36 points37 points38 points 14 years ago* (61 children) | Copy Link

[–]context_free 21 points22 points23 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KOAN13 19 points20 points21 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TIA-RESISTANCE 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BrendanFraser 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]typhonblue 25 points26 points27 points 14 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]downloadacar 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]mynameisflorian 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -13 points-12 points-11 points 14 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]downloadacar 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]downloadacar 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The idea is that neither the hypothetical abused atheist nor the hypothetical abused christian should have to be forced to put up with blind discrimination. It shouldn't be the responsibility for the christian/atheist to learn to put up with people being stupid bigoted asshats, it should be the responsibility of society to stop normalizing the act of being a stupid bigoted asshat.

In my opinion he has no right to make other people stop "offending" him with their speech.

This isn't something I've been trying to disagree with, and not the point I'm making.

When I said:

Please refrain from replying, as you have no right to not get your feelings hurt.

and

And if an atheist gets verbally abused in the bible belt for not going to church, it's the atheist's fault for not moving away. It's not like anyone is forcing him to stay there, and it's not like he has a right to be offended.

It wasn't to argue that it is a right. It was to assert the notion that, because an act is not within active violation of a right, does not mean that the behavior should necessarily be acceptable nor tolerable.

[+]Kerdek -10 points-9 points-8 points 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]NotKennyG 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[+]Kerdek -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]NotKennyG 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]NotKennyG -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]NotKennyG 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]NotKennyG1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]JtheHomicidalManiac 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KingNick -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points25 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]FlightsFancy 11 points12 points13 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Smight 18 points19 points20 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]themountaingoat 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]failbus -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BZenMojo -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]C0CKPUNCHER 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Celda -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Celda 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mynameisflorian 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nlakes 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]HITLARIOUS -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lorrdernie 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mynameisflorian 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Kerdek -6 points-5 points-4 points 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]IllThinkOfOneLater 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]IllThinkOfOneLater 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]IllThinkOfOneLater 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]IllThinkOfOneLater 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrSparkle666 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PierceHarlan 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kombat_Wombat 15 points16 points17 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PierceHarlan 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kombat_Wombat 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]trias_e 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jms3r 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Malithion 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 24 points25 points26 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]mynist[S] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]SpelingTroll 22 points23 points24 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ajleece 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Cr4igg3rs 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tango646 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nautilis 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Malithion 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]jargonista 14 points15 points16 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]IllThinkOfOneLater 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mynist[S] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]roharareddit 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcmur 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ayn_Rand_Was_Right 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cislum 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevinV 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]cislum 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevinV 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]cislum -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevinV 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]cislum 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You are saying what your opinion is, and as an American I respect that, but you have understand that your perspective is as confusing as the link you posted; are you calling me a coward or congratulating me on being peaceful, or extraordinarily brave?

Anyway, lets start basic. I don't know if you're American, but since you write in English I assume you know a little about American history. If you do. then you probably know all about the place of Afro-Americans in American society during the last few hundreds years. Of course they technically have the same rights as white people do now, but wouldn't you say that there are still echoes of the way they were treated in American culture? We made a big deal out of electing an African-American president for a reason. Do you deny white privilege?

You probably see where this is going. I don't know if you're a music fan, but I like to quote John Lennon when making this comparison http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woman_Is_the_Nigger_of_the_World (of course I might omit a certain word if I'm actually saying it) For most of history women have not had basic freedoms free men have had by default because they were women, not because they were poor or slaves. Women belonged in the household,and were often not allowed to own property or contribute to their society when there was democracy. These ideals are still very much alive in today's society, sadly often championed by women (http://onemillionmoms.com/). Men might fall further when things go bad, but we sure as hell have an easier time rising in society then women.

Would you rather have a semblance of security at the cost of the ability to be a part of the group that dominates society both culturally, and economically? OF course if you're one of the many unlucky men that end up pumping gas and going to war you might, but there are a lot of rich men out there capitalizing on the way society is structured. Give me an example of a female Newt Gingrich and I'll shut up.

[–]ZombieKitty 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZombieKitty 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZombieKitty 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

He never said much, as is tradition. Can't blame them though. The few things he always talked about was not only preserving the life of the guys in his platoon as best he and they could do, but the freedoms of others from the Axis powers. He was in france when he learned of his friend's homosexuality and at first he was taken back, not out of disgust but it was an uncommon thing to know publicly. (The story goes he came out of a house with some dude and his face went sheet white like he had been caught doing the dirtiest thing - which, for the time period, that's the social outlook in many if not most places).

My grandfather just laughed and commented that he did always seem funny but couldn't care less what or who he did. They were literally fighting for freedom as they knew it.

He was one of those guys that didn't give a rats rear-end what anyone did as long as you didn't get in the way of their freedoms. Society be damned. I wish he were alive now to tell it himself - was one of the best men I ever knew.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZombieKitty 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]redkey42 -12 points-11 points-10 points 14 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]PierceHarlan 16 points17 points18 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]redkey42 -10 points-9 points-8 points 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]PoundnColons 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]redkey42 -5 points-4 points-3 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]PoundnColons 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]redkey42 -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PoundnColons 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]redkey42 -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]levelate 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]redkey42 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]levelate 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]redkey42 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Abe_Vigoda -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PierceHarlan 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]youcanttakemeserious -6 points-5 points-4 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]zachbredberg 26 points27 points28 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]youcanttakemeserious -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]zachbredberg 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]youcanttakemeserious -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jadolf -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]anachronic -12 points-11 points-10 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Kombat_Wombat -7 points-6 points-5 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jargonista 14 points15 points16 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Every time a female makes some claim about how, historically, women have been oppressed by the patriarchal structure of society for millenia, they forget one tiny fact. That it wasn't just the women. There were rich bastards at the top who always exploited everyone below them for benefit. And anyone who thinks that the men had it easier ignore the fact that no one ever convinced droves of women to gather in fields or on beaches to push deadly pieces of metal into each other. Nope, that was all men. So, yeah, being a woman probably sucked a lot, and has sucked for a long time, and probably continues to suck. But that's not the average man's fault, they get fucked over too. And it's the bastards at the top who are fucking us all over.

Let's be clear, WWII was a justified war (from the allied side of things). But how many wars have been fought in the world? And how many were justified? And how many were fought by men. I think you get my point.

[+]Nexlon -10 points-9 points-8 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]themountaingoat 13 points14 points15 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nexlon -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kragmoor -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]killyoureparents -28 points-27 points-26 points 14 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]aloneinlove 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]douglasmacarthur 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]purrit 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KRATOSBRAH 11 points12 points13 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]youcanttakemeserious -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[+]anachronic -12 points-11 points-10 points 14 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]youcanttakemeserious 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]anachronic -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]youcanttakemeserious 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]anachronic -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]youcanttakemeserious -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]anachronic -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]youcanttakemeserious -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]anachronic1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]drinkthebleach1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]anachronic1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ajleece 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]anachronic -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ajleece 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]anachronic 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ajleece 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GavnLogic -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]BarackObamazing -20 points-19 points-18 points 14 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 14 points15 points16 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NotKennyG 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]themountaingoat 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]memymineown 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+]BarackObamazing -9 points-8 points-7 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I made no comment about relative deaths by gender. I was talking about the fact that wars result in suffering for all people regardless of gender.

What was the relative number of male vs. female civilian deaths at Leningrad, Tokyo, Dresden, Hiroshima or any of the other cities that were utterly destroyed in WWII? I, for one, don't care. Millions of people were killed, injured or otherwise traumatized. The victims' genders don't matter to me. Seriously, why are MRAs complaining about men having to fight a war in which we did this to people of all genders?

Before MRAs start complaining about men having to fight in WWII, they should remember that men were almost exclusively empowered to start a war at the time. There's where I see privilege. Seriously, look for a woman on this list. Next, try this one.

[–]themountaingoat 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]memymineown 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BarackObamazing -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]memymineown 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]elitez 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]purrit 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dangerpantz -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Kerdek -12 points-11 points-10 points 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

The trouble I have with this is that the photo is from a bygone era, and OP is trying to use it to say something about male privilege today. It's temporally irrelevant. Furthermore, it seems to insinuate that male privilege is no better than this.

Unfortunately, privilege-checking is a must in a conversation about race, gender, sexuality, and the likes, and the value of men's privileges in the states is greater than the value of women's privileges, still. The MRA's thesis is that there are instances of female privilege superiority, and his/her purpose is to narrow the gap in those instances, but that still permits for -- and it is the case that -- white, heterosexual, cismales are the most privileged group in the world; let's not forget that. Posts like this seem to be an attempt at drowning men in their own pity by projecting men's difficulties in some areas into every area.

Edit: Shifted punctuation in final sentence.

[–]themountaingoat 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]themountaingoat 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]themountaingoat 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PierceHarlan 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kerdek -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Celda 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]superproxyman 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ValiantPie 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]FreddyDeus -12 points-11 points-10 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

It seems compulsory for someone to post this image on here once every few months.

Why?

It isn't as clever and as persuasive as some people obviously think it is.

You certainly won't win any arguments against feminists, because feminism addressed the issue of war and conscription decades ago.

Feminists don't deny that men die in wars. They also argue that it is men who start wars in the first place. That if men have a problem being asked to fight and die in a war, don't complain to a woman, complain to the male who started it.

They also argue that the often young and poor men who die in wars do so at the behest of the senior ranks of the patriarchy.

This is, in fact, one of the central pillars of the feminist argument that men too are victims of the patriarchy.

So posting this picture over and over and over again isn't particularly clever. I'm not sure who the OP is trying to convince or what he is trying to convince them of.

If anything, this plays straight into the hands of feminists.

[–]GavnLogic 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PierceHarlan 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]FreddyDeus -5 points-4 points-3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No, you are the fucking idiot. You and my 'pal' PierceHarian. You are so fucking retarded that you don't know the difference between someone who is presenting an argument of their own, and someone who is relating someone else's argument. Perhaps if you bothered reading posts properly, you half-witted fucking moron, you wouldn't look like such an empty head fucking twat.

You see, that wasn't my argument. That was the feminist argument. I did do my best to make it clear that it was the feminist argument by saying on at least half a dozen occasions that this was the feminist argument. If you had a few more brain-cells to rub together, or were not one of the increasingly hysterical idiots that seem to populate r/mensrights these days, you might have noticed that.

My point, the one you and my imbecilic 'pal' failed to pick up on is this. When people keep repeatedly posting this image, what is it that they want to achieve? What is it that they're trying to say?

They certainly aren't making an argument-winning case to feminists, because as my original post made clear, they've already come up with their answer to that kind of point, whether you agree with it or not.

And it certainly is not saying anything new to us.

So to repeat my question. Why the fuck does this image get posted and upvoted with such fucking tiresome regularity?

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]FreddyDeus -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Griff_Steeltower -14 points-13 points-12 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

In a way it is. Warriors command a lot of cultural capital. Especially in America. Especially in 1940s America. Culturally it's still only okay to have men dying in war. As individuals, that's bad. As a gender, it's enabling. Actually, things that command a lot of capital aren't always pleasant (high society manners, anyone? And since when is being in charge always 'pleasant'?). Yes, it sucks to storm Normandy. But still, as a gender, the fact that it was our duty and honor to do it shows our cultural primacy. When the citizens of the US decided to kick the Brits to the curb, it was the men who made the decision because it was the men who had the guns because men were seen as the moral authorities. When the ship goes down the women get the boats first, the men get the buckets, and with them, the authority. Not saying it's right or good, it's certainly uneven and different but I think a lot of people with both Xs and Ys would opt for the greater responsibility. I would.

[–]johnmarkley 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]JeremiahMRA 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Griff_Steeltower -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thetrollking 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]rross -6 points-5 points-4 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]ICumWhenIKillMen -7 points-6 points-5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hey, I remember [World War 2]. That was when those men voted for that man who appointed those men who killed those men (because our men did bad things to their men because their men killed our men and other men because someone shot a man) and the men seized the land owned by other men (wash and repeat) and the men who were buds with our men were like "help" and the men were like "no" and these other eastern men killed our men so our men killed their men and also those original men were dicks so our men killed their men and like a fucking shitload of Russian men died too killing those men and the men in charge were voted for by the men who could vote and the men supported the men killing because those other men had to die and so lots of men died for those other men until the bad men were dead and the men in charge split up the land of the bad men for the personal and political gain of the winning men and men in suits were locked in a secret war with the other men who won who were once allies and, well, I guess what I'm getting at is that it's all women's fault.

[+]killyoureparents -20 points-19 points-18 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]PissyAndGrumpy -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KingNick -5 points-4 points-3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]ArchangelleSarielle -17 points-16 points-15 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ValiantPie 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]ArchangelleSarielle -13 points-12 points-11 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]s34hunt -12 points-11 points-10 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Male Privilege.
Author	mynist
Upvotes	842
Comments	538
Date	February 8, 2012 1:35 AM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/pfk5a/male_privilege/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/male-privilege.1028060 https://theredarchive.com/post/1028060

Comments