Having your cake and eating it too?

Geno777 · 2013-02-23T04:40:02+00:00

If women are naturally less competative, more fragile and all in all more girly, it would follow that they need special protection, from society and the law.

I don't support the Pussy Pass. If they're supposed to be so empowered, they can compete with men on an EQUAL field. NO entitlements. NO affirmative action. NO sentencing women to less time for the same time. NO giving women custody more often than men. NO lowering the bar in physical standards in police, fire, and athletic work.

As I said: No Pussy Passes.

memymineown · 2013-02-23T04:45:45+00:00

If men are naturally more competitive and resilient that in no ways implies that they should be discriminated against.

DavidByron · 2013-02-23T05:06:43+00:00

how can you reconcile these two opposing believes?

Maybe you should ask the person you believe made a sexist comment what they meant. You may find that you are simply misinterpreting them.

proweruser · 2013-02-23T04:23:44+00:00

I have noticed a few inconsistencys

Yes, there are. There are many different opinions here.

truthjusticeca · 2013-02-23T05:27:14+00:00

It's sexist and discriminatory to generalize and apply average differences in sex to individuals.
Equality in law and opportunity is not the same as equal outcomes.

themountaingoat · 2013-02-23T04:09:10+00:00

I don't see how women being less competitive means that they need special legal protections from society and the law. Being competitive has risks and rewards, and there is no reason to artificially make it so that women end up with the same outcomes despite being less competitive. If women are more emotionally sensitive that is there problem to deal with; they apparently want equality so that includes being equally responsible for dealing with shit on your own.

The only way that isn't ridiculous to protect women's feeling and lack of competitiveness was traditionalism, which is impossible to go back too at this point.

Ted8367 · 2013-02-23T06:01:08+00:00

If women are naturally less competative, more fragile and all in all more girly, it would follow that they need special protection, from society and the law.

Yes, it's always been that way. Traditional roles had a balance to them.

The problem is that modern conditions have changed the balance point. For example, physical prowess is less important economically. And so is childbirth, per woman. We need to find a new balance.

The solution is not clear. People have various opinions, and that is what you are seeing.

rightsbot · 2013-02-23T04:04:17+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

proweruser · 2013-02-23T06:04:46+00:00

I should probably clarify something. I didn't want to put it in the original post, since it really doesn't matter for the discussion at hand, but most people don't seem to understand where I'm coming from here and that is kind of important.

I believe men and women are both naturally competative and resilient. Have you ever seen girls playing football (soccer)? That is just brutal! They are in it to win it and seem to play even more agressive than the boys.

When they grow older girls learn to be more sneeky and covert about their competitiveness, but it's still there.

Hell that is what radical feminism shows. Women trying to get into a better position than men. If that is not competitive I don't know what is.

But them getting sneekier is societal constructs, just like what is acceptable to wear or to play with.

That is why I made it clear that in my last paragraphs I was playing devil's advocate.

I think quite a few people here are holding on to outdated gender roles and proclaim them as natural, when there is nothing indicating that these roles are in fact natural.

That is why men and women should be equal in the eyes of the law and society. Because even though we think slightly different in certain situations, we aren't really that different.

C0CKPUNCHER · 2013-02-23T07:33:20+00:00

No you don't. It is very rare that anyone says 'men are tough, women are soft' here. But it is very common that feminists misrepresent the movement as being that. So I guess that is what you are doing.

Also:

This thread again.

SnickerSnak · 2013-02-23T21:08:37+00:00

If women are naturally less competative, more fragile and all in all more girly, it would follow that they need special protection, from society and the law.

This only makes sense if you define equality to mean equality of outcomes. If you believe equality means equal opportunity then there is no inconsistency.

From another of your replies:

I went to a school once, where you had to walk up about 7 flights of stairs to get to certain class rooms. Everybody groaned when we had classes there. There was an elevator in that building. But only disabled students had keys to it, for obvious reasons. According to your definition of discrimination all the abled bodied students at that school were discriminated against.

If you view equality as equal opportunity then yes, all the able bodied students at that school were discriminated against. No able bodied student had a key to the elevator, therefore they were never afforded the opportunity to experience the near effort free travel from floor to floor.

If you view equality as equal outcomes then no, all the able bodied students at that school were not discriminated against. Everyone (both able bodied and disabled) was able to achieve the outcome of getting to class despite one group expending more energy to achieve that goal.

In my opinion MRAs generally believe that the correct definition of equality is equality of opportunity and most discussions are going to reflect that.

Title	Having your cake and eating it too?
Author	proweruser
Upvotes	0
Comments	21
Date	February 23, 2013 4:03 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/mensrights/comments/192ar3/having-your-cake-and-eating-it-too/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/having-your-cake-and-eating-it-too.1606819 https://theredarchive.com/post/1606819

Comments