Is feminism genetic racism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scroller

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesHunt

There's alot of talk from feminists that women get a raw deal in life and should be given special privileges to compete with men. What do you lot think?

---

Hello, 1970 called and it wants its wacky right-wing complaint back.

---

:claps :claps :claps :claps

Yeah, this is a pretty common straw-man argument...

Frequently hear it from the conservatives whenever some oppressed group decides to speak up and demand the equal rights they are due.

You hear it about various minorities, gays, blacks, women, whatever. For the most part, they all want to be treated equally; have equal access to privileges, be treated equally under the law, receive equal pay for equal work, etc.

And as for the front lines bit - do you have any idea how long and how hard some of these feminists have been pushing for the right to serve combat duty in the military? And the women who currently are in the military aren't treated so hot either, there is rampant sexism and outright misogynism in the armed forces, particularly in your more traditional units like the Marine Corps.

For what its worth, I am against the draft. If we can't get enough people to volunteer (misnomer if there ever was one...) for the armed services, then we need to reconsider what wars we are fighting, and how we are compensating our troops. What ever happened to capitalism? If you can't get enough workers, offer higher wages and better benefits (or better yet, stop screwing people out of the benefits already promised to them...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

Quote:

---

There's alot of talk from feminists that women get a raw deal in life and should be given special privileges to compete with men. What do you lot think?

---

I don't know even one feminist who thinks women should be given special previleges. Not one. I do know women who would like to be financially compensated in a manner commensurate to men for the same job. I know women who would insist the recent Supreme Court ruling on the Ledbetter vs Goodyear case was a travesty of justice. I know catholic woman who lament that the church limits their participation and devalues their spirituality. This complaint would be heard throughout the Muslim world, if woman weren't so completely subjugated by Islam. Woman have to fight continually for their right to their own body, even in this country, as every conservative asshole politician, in his persistent pursuit of the fundamentalist vote, is forever producing legislation to limit reproductive rights. A man can walk into a pharmacy and get viagra, but in some states druggists want the right to deny woman birth control. Yeah, the Earth is a pretty shitty place for women. If you don't want to hear them complain, do something about it.

---

Wow, you said alot. Sorry, but I know a many men who are at work getting paid the same amount of money that a woman is, but doing a greater share of the work. He's toting 100lb. boxes and she 25lbs. but yet she's making the same or better. As far as the Muslim faith goes, alot of their laws are to protect women; you just have extremist who destroy the true meaning of the koran and the West that only wants to focus on the negative. I have a friend who works undercover for the Gov. He said that many of the women "choose" to wear the Burca in Afghanistan and elsewhere. As far as women being limited to pastoral/ leading role in the church is all tangible with scripture, Jesus/ God called on men to lead the church body not women. Also, when a woman is pregnant, it's not just "her" body anymore, and this society seems to forget the fact that it takes two and those rights of the father are all "TERMINATED" until it's time to pay CHILD SUPPORT to some bimbo who got drunk and got pregnant and ended up on Maury or one who tried to "trap" her man, or some lush who can't make it in life so she got pregnant to get on welfare!


Have a great day :wink:

I rest my case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lochaber

Yeah, this is a pretty common straw-man argument...

Frequently hear it from the conservatives whenever some oppressed group decides to speak up and demand the equal rights they are due.

You hear it about various minorities, gays, blacks, women, whatever. For the most part, they all want to be treated equally; have equal access to privileges, be treated equally under the law, receive equal pay for equal work, etc.

And as for the front lines bit - do you have any idea how long and how hard some of these feminists have been pushing for the right to serve combat duty in the military? And the women who currently are in the military aren't treated so hot either, there is rampant sexism and outright misogynism in the armed forces, particularly in your more traditional units like the Marine Corps.

For what its worth, I am against the draft. If we can't get enough people to volunteer (misnomer if there ever was one...) for the armed services, then we need to reconsider what wars we are fighting, and how we are compensating our troops. What ever happened to capitalism? If you can't get enough workers, offer higher wages and better benefits (or better yet, stop screwing people out of the benefits already promised to them...)

---

Before that woman made a big case of joining the all male Citadel, that was a place of honor and guidance. She made a big stink, got the rules changed and then "quit" that citadel has went to hell since, they started having rapes, pregnancies etc. You don't throw the sheep into a lions den. Funny how we don't see women taking to the streets and protesting and burning bras again to fight on the front lines. Yeah, they really want to be on the front lines.......or do they? And I'm sorry, but if I were wounded and had a choice of who to put me over their shoulder and run me to a chopper, someone like Chris Tillman or Sarah Palin, I'm choosing Tillman, now that doesn't make me a misogynist or sexist, it makes me "smart" :wink:

Quite frankly, I say bring our men home and let these so-called tough women fight this war, they've earned it. More for your noodle...


http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...s-combat_x.htm


Have a great day

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

I rest my case.

---

The proof is in the pudding Trish. "Women and children first?" isn't that sexism and misandry against men? Trust me, I can go all night. I rest "my" case as well.


Take care :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gotchagood

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

I rest my case.

---

The proof is in the pudding Trish. "Women and children first?" isn't that sexism and misandry against men? Trust me, I can go all night. I rest "my" case as well.


Take care :wink:

---

In a dire scenario, like a post-apocalyptic world, having more women then men is necessary from a logistical view for species sustainability.

It only takes one fertile (hetero) male to keep a mammal species populated, while it takes more females because they have a more limited window of reproductive ability (the whole biological clock thing), and can only reproduce so quickly within that time (and then there is an assumption that not all of the offspring will survive, so more of them are needed to compensate for that).

But in a world where we have, if anything, global overpopulation- you're right, there is no tangible benefit to saving more of one specific sex when we're dealing with a small scale tragedy like a ship sinking. The whole ship can go down with everyone onboard and it's not really going to make a difference in the global population.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gotchagood

She made a big stink, got the rules changed and then "quit" that citadel has went to hell since, they started having rapes, pregnancies etc. You don't throw the sheep into a lions den.

---

Please tell me that I misunderstood this and you didn't just go and blame women for "getting" raped...

i dont go near them i keep the hell away from them thats why god bless trannys.women are a walking talking problem

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SarahG

In a dire scenario, like a post-apocalyptic world, having more women then men is necessary from a logistical view for species sustainability.

It only takes one fertile (hetero) male to keep a mammal species populated, while it takes more females because they have a more limited window of reproductive ability (the whole biological clock thing), and can only reproduce so quickly within that time (and then there is an assumption that not all of the offspring will survive, so more of them are needed to compensate for that).

---

excuse me for breaking up an otherwise serious discussion (not that i want to insinuate that his posts in any way deserve to be taken seriously) but i found that your post is much more fun to read by imagining you repeatedly losing control over your right arm while typing