Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So am I going to get lifted if I ask one of the girls in the office to make me a cup of tea" your busted, it just might take the boys (or girls!) some time to get to Cambuslang!  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong..." Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"So am I going to get lifted if I ask one of the girls in the office to make me a cup of tea" Depends on how you say it  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Ahhhh another women are hard done by thread,well you can take over the world soon when clinton,may and eagle get in,now put the kettle on theres a good woman" your so reconstructed... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oops.... Deserve the legislation to support them, not they deserve the abuse Phewwwww" a great save  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oops.... Deserve the legislation to support them, not they deserve the abuse Phewwwww a great save "Thanks, my wee fat fingers were dancing on my iPhone keypad before any outrage  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oops.... Deserve the legislation to support them, not they deserve the abuse Phewwwww a great save
Thanks, my wee fat fingers were dancing on my iPhone keypad before any outrage "you showed tremendous dexterity! when i re read some of my texts i sound like i may have had a bit too much wine! it is definately the keybard! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And if this was a misandrist would the outcome be the same....i hope so" glass is half full is the best way to be! lets celebrate progress | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oops.... Deserve the legislation to support them, not they deserve the abuse Phewwwww a great save
Thanks, my wee fat fingers were dancing on my iPhone keypad before any outrage
you showed tremendous dexterity! when i re read some of my texts i sound like i may have had a bit too much wine! it is definately the keybard! "Cheers | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?!" Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. " & breath... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" & breath... "One of my more brief posts actually :P | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. " *stand up and applauds* | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
Considering we already have a law for stuff others may find offencive, which when quuestioned couldnt actually be defined as people are offended by so much. It wouldnt surprise me if this was now a hate crime. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I still find it funny as untill around a year or two ago misogynist was defined as. A man who dislikes women, also know a a confirmed bachelor. It was changed after alot of femenists kept saying "look it up" I used to enjoy showing them it, untill it changed
Considering we already have a law for stuff others may find offencive, which when quuestioned couldnt actually be defined as people are offended by so much. It wouldnt surprise me if this was now a hate crime."i just find it astonishing that people go to the diametric opposite on something as simple as this. it is clearly wrong to be non equality in all aspects of life - but as soon as one bit seems to be being improved people moan that others - men in this case - are now disadvantaged! really don't get why this should be so  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I still find it funny as untill around a year or two ago misogynist was defined as. A man who dislikes women, also know a a confirmed bachelor. It was changed after alot of femenists kept saying "look it up" I used to enjoy showing them it, untill it changed
Considering we already have a law for stuff others may find offencive, which when quuestioned couldnt actually be defined as people are offended by so much. It wouldnt surprise me if this was now a hate crime.
i just find it astonishing that people go to the diametric opposite on something as simple as this. it is clearly wrong to be non equality in all aspects of life - but as soon as one bit seems to be being improved people moan that others - men in this case - are now disadvantaged! really don't get why this should be so "Sometimes in life we find issues which are fundamentally zero sum. You don't remove inequality by replacing it with another which appears to be how some people want to handle it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. " Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes')" Because feminists only seem interested in the parts of inequality that effect women. They are perfectly happy with mothers getting preferential custody arrangements over fathers. They care that women get paid less in some occupations but couldn't give a crap that female models earn 10x more than male models. They think women should have cheaper car insurance because they have less accidents but not that they should have higher credit card charges even though they go bankrupt more often! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm wondering what our civilisation would have been like had women been in charge and not men. We've never had a female Pope, for example. " Sweden is a good example and a blue print of why it wont work, it have a feminist movement called feminist initiative and ever since they come in power, its gone downhill, with political correctness. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes')" Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Neither is it the same thing to every woman. But in general it is an attempt to bring about a better balance. So i applaud that women can now fight in the armed forces - i would not want to do it, but I'm glad women can. So it isn't just about maternity pay or models being paid more. The facts speak for themselves, the majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less - of course there will be some inconsistencies but the scale of the problem shows that it is embedded in our society and therefore needs some positive discrimination to try to balance things. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. " Not in theory, but in practice it is | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How are Muslims going to cope? Or hip hop music "artists"?" Clearly not all Muslims or Hip Hop artists are gangsta!
Not sure the comment is either valid, fair or particularly helpful really. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is" Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in? "Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy? "So you're against sexual equality then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How are Muslims going to cope? Or hip hop music "artists"? Clearly not all Muslims or Hip Hop artists are gangsta!
Not sure the comment is either valid, fair or particularly helpful really."if hip hop artists aren't gangsta then what tf are they? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How are Muslims going to cope? Or hip hop music "artists"? Clearly not all Muslims or Hip Hop artists are gangsta!
Not sure the comment is either valid, fair or particularly helpful really. if hip hop artists aren't gangsta then what tf are they? "Not all of them are misogynists is my point, apologies if i tried to be down with the youth. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then? "It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"so it looks like this is finally being taken seriously and properly treated as a 'hate crime'. it is in the same league as racism & homophobia - well at least in Nottinghamshire, so well done to Notts Police, it is good to see this properly recognised "Cool. Why not snobism too?? All the snobs everywhere are STILL looking down their noses. Isn't this also a hate crime and hurtful? (Not directed at OP just to be clear). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it? "We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I dont think any man in their right mind would object to this. I dont think many men believe that discrimination is correct. I can't talk for all men however what gets up my nose is being told that all men are misogynists or all men discriminate. No we aren't and no we don't." That'll be misandry then | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I dont think any man in their right mind would object to this. I dont think many men believe that discrimination is correct. I can't talk for all men however what gets up my nose is being told that all men are misogynists or all men discriminate. No we aren't and no we don't." It's not the principle that concerns me. It's the potential implementation of it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Surely women shouldn't get equal pay before menopause though right? " Ha ha .....  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How are Muslims going to cope? Or hip hop music "artists"?" Don't get me started on the music of the yoof of today! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I dont think any man in their right mind would object to this. I dont think many men believe that discrimination is correct. I can't talk for all men however what gets up my nose is being told that all men are misogynists or all men discriminate. No we aren't and no we don't. It's not the principle that concerns me. It's the potential implementation of it. " So we agree equality is right and you seem to suggest it isn't here yet. So the only issue is how we deliver it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it?
We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask "Tit from tat!! It's a simple question. You won't answer it because you know full well that there are instances of men being discriminated against but feminists don't care about those. Feminists only care about female issues and that's not what equality is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How are Muslims going to cope? Or hip hop music "artists"? Clearly not all Muslims or Hip Hop artists are gangsta!
Not sure the comment is either valid, fair or particularly helpful really. if hip hop artists aren't gangsta then what tf are they?
Not all of them are misogynists is my point, apologies if i tried to be down with the youth. "nah, just the good ones  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it?
We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask
Tit from tat!! It's a simple question. You won't answer it because you know full well that there are instances of men being discriminated against but feminists don't care about those. Feminists only care about female issues and that's not what equality is. "My earlier post already answering this bit! "Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Neither is it the same thing to every woman. But in general it is an attempt to bring about a better balance. So i applaud that women can now fight in the armed forces - i would not want to do it, but I'm glad women can. So it isn't just about maternity pay or models being paid more. The facts speak for themselves, the majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less - of course there will be some inconsistencies but the scale of the problem shows that it is embedded in our society and therefore needs some positive discrimination to try to balance things" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I dont think any man in their right mind would object to this. I dont think many men believe that discrimination is correct. I can't talk for all men however what gets up my nose is being told that all men are misogynists or all men discriminate. No we aren't and no we don't. It's not the principle that concerns me. It's the potential implementation of it. So we agree equality is right and you seem to suggest it isn't here yet. So the only issue is how we deliver it?" I've never understood the feminist suspicion of men. I have a theory on it but that's all. You know, all men have mothers, most have wives and quite a lot have daughters. The idea that we somehow want to live in a society where our mother, wife or daughter gets harassed is quite bizzare. Obviously I want my mother, wife and daughter to have the same opportunities and freedoms I enjoy, why wouldn't I? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How are Muslims going to cope? Or hip hop music "artists"?" These are definitely the burning issues that need addressing!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." " & i bet you never used it... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I often verge on a general sense of misanthropy since I am an egalitarian (that's what feminism means to me and I consider myself a feminist) and people generally can be awful. I encounter misogyny more often than misandry in my daily life from personal experience and would have no qualms about seeing it as a hate crime either way. It's seeing people as 'other' that causes it and that's the main issue right there." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it?
We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask
Tit from tat!! It's a simple question. You won't answer it because you know full well that there are instances of men being discriminated against but feminists don't care about those. Feminists only care about female issues and that's not what equality is.
My earlier post already answering this bit!
"Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Neither is it the same thing to every woman. But in general it is an attempt to bring about a better balance. So i applaud that women can now fight in the armed forces - i would not want to do it, but I'm glad women can. So it isn't just about maternity pay or models being paid more. The facts speak for themselves, the majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less - of course there will be some inconsistencies but the scale of the problem shows that it is embedded in our society and therefore needs some positive discrimination to try to balance things""So what you mean is that it's ok to focus on women's issues because on balance, there are more of them. How convenient. I guess we'll get onto the men's issues when everything is right with the world... I won't hold my breath though. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it..." Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it?
We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask
Tit from tat!! It's a simple question. You won't answer it because you know full well that there are instances of men being discriminated against but feminists don't care about those. Feminists only care about female issues and that's not what equality is.
My earlier post already answering this bit!
"Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Neither is it the same thing to every woman. But in general it is an attempt to bring about a better balance. So i applaud that women can now fight in the armed forces - i would not want to do it, but I'm glad women can. So it isn't just about maternity pay or models being paid more. The facts speak for themselves, the majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less - of course there will be some inconsistencies but the scale of the problem shows that it is embedded in our society and therefore needs some positive discrimination to try to balance things"
So what you mean is that it's ok to focus on women's issues because on balance, there are more of them. How convenient. I guess we'll get onto the men's issues when everything is right with the world... I won't hold my breath though. "You have had many thousands of years to sort it out, if you haven't done it by now then why not let us have a go - you never know we might do a good job | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it?
We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask
Tit from tat!! It's a simple question. You won't answer it because you know full well that there are instances of men being discriminated against but feminists don't care about those. Feminists only care about female issues and that's not what equality is.
My earlier post already answering this bit!
"Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Neither is it the same thing to every woman. But in general it is an attempt to bring about a better balance. So i applaud that women can now fight in the armed forces - i would not want to do it, but I'm glad women can. So it isn't just about maternity pay or models being paid more. The facts speak for themselves, the majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less - of course there will be some inconsistencies but the scale of the problem shows that it is embedded in our society and therefore needs some positive discrimination to try to balance things"
So what you mean is that it's ok to focus on women's issues because on balance, there are more of them. How convenient. I guess we'll get onto the men's issues when everything is right with the world... I won't hold my breath though.
You have had many thousands of years to sort it out, if you haven't done it by now then why not let us have a go - you never know we might do a good job "Sure, it's great that Theresa May is prime minister, we'll save money in taxes since she'll obviously get paid 20% less than Cameron. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it... Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. " I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How come women live longer, but retire earlier? " We get paid state pension the exact same age as men do. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it?
We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask
Tit from tat!! It's a simple question. You won't answer it because you know full well that there are instances of men being discriminated against but feminists don't care about those. Feminists only care about female issues and that's not what equality is.
My earlier post already answering this bit!
"Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Neither is it the same thing to every woman. But in general it is an attempt to bring about a better balance. So i applaud that women can now fight in the armed forces - i would not want to do it, but I'm glad women can. So it isn't just about maternity pay or models being paid more. The facts speak for themselves, the majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less - of course there will be some inconsistencies but the scale of the problem shows that it is embedded in our society and therefore needs some positive discrimination to try to balance things"
So what you mean is that it's ok to focus on women's issues because on balance, there are more of them. How convenient. I guess we'll get onto the men's issues when everything is right with the world... I won't hold my breath though.
You have had many thousands of years to sort it out, if you haven't done it by now then why not let us have a go - you never know we might do a good job
Sure, it's great that Theresa May is prime minister, we'll save money in taxes since she'll obviously get paid 20% less than Cameron. "I'm not following your argument... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it?
We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask
Tit from tat!! It's a simple question. You won't answer it because you know full well that there are instances of men being discriminated against but feminists don't care about those. Feminists only care about female issues and that's not what equality is.
My earlier post already answering this bit!
"Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Neither is it the same thing to every woman. But in general it is an attempt to bring about a better balance. So i applaud that women can now fight in the armed forces - i would not want to do it, but I'm glad women can. So it isn't just about maternity pay or models being paid more. The facts speak for themselves, the majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less - of course there will be some inconsistencies but the scale of the problem shows that it is embedded in our society and therefore needs some positive discrimination to try to balance things"
So what you mean is that it's ok to focus on women's issues because on balance, there are more of them. How convenient. I guess we'll get onto the men's issues when everything is right with the world... I won't hold my breath though.
You have had many thousands of years to sort it out, if you haven't done it by now then why not let us have a go - you never know we might do a good job
Sure, it's great that Theresa May is prime minister, we'll save money in taxes since she'll obviously get paid 20% less than Cameron. "No way! She's post menopause, she can actually perform all month. She deserves equal pay. Bless her. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How come women live longer, but retire earlier? " They don't retire earlier any more. Historically few women worked full time or paid enough to earn a pension, only qualifying through their husband. Often women were younger than said husband too. Since more women work the pension system has been equalised. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes')" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And if this was a misandrist would the outcome be the same....i hope so" LMAO..misandry!!!!you do realise you live in a mans world? If you were born a white man in the UK then you are one of the most privileged human beings to have ever existed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it... Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake. "Women don't get paid less, on average they do lower paying jobs. Once you normalise for job type and experience then the gender pay gap evaporates. The only thing the pay gap confirms is that women do indeed give birth to children and on average, spend more time raising them (shock horror). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it... Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake.
Women don't get paid less, on average they do lower paying jobs. Once you normalise for job type and experience then the gender pay gap evaporates. The only thing the pay gap confirms is that women do indeed give birth to children and on average, spend more time raising them (shock horror). "I agree that the pay gap is mainly caused by the fact women take time off to have children. However there are still plenty of jobs, low paid and high, where women do NOT get pay parity. Also, why do women do lower paying jobs? Through choice? I doubt it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it... Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake.
Women don't get paid less, on average they do lower paying jobs. Once you normalise for job type and experience then the gender pay gap evaporates. The only thing the pay gap confirms is that women do indeed give birth to children and on average, spend more time raising them (shock horror). "I've decided to put man pant's on now and forego commando in the interests of getting a better paid job... No facts back up what you have just said. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it... Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake.
Women don't get paid less, on average they do lower paying jobs. Once you normalise for job type and experience then the gender pay gap evaporates. The only thing the pay gap confirms is that women do indeed give birth to children and on average, spend more time raising them (shock horror). "The fact that only women are able to give birth seems to mean to many men that although they helped equally to create that life, they are not expected to put half their time into raising them. There is still the expectation that women should stay at home and care for the child. When I had my daughter many were shocked that I returned to work after less than 6 months full time and my husband worked part time. Why is this the case? This is the 21st century! Nita | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it... Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake.
Women don't get paid less, on average they do lower paying jobs. Once you normalise for job type and experience then the gender pay gap evaporates. The only thing the pay gap confirms is that women do indeed give birth to children and on average, spend more time raising them (shock horror).
I've decided to put man pant's on now and forego commando in the interests of getting a better paid job... No facts back up what you have just said."All the facts back up what I'm saying. Lookup what women who don't have children earn, here's a clue - it's more than the average man | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"so it looks like this is finally being taken seriously and properly treated as a 'hate crime'. it is in the same league as racism & homophobia - well at least in Nottinghamshire, so well done to Notts Police, it is good to see this properly recognised "my ex husband was (and probably still is) a misogynist....in his case that meant that he had a deep seated hatred and mistrust of women because of how he was treated by his own mother... it had naff all to do with him telling me to get in the kitchen and putting the kettle on but it did have a lot to do with why we are no longer married, so I personally feel that this is a big step forward for all women who have had to deal with such unreasonable behaviour that they have to flee their marital home.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it... Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake.
Women don't get paid less, on average they do lower paying jobs. Once you normalise for job type and experience then the gender pay gap evaporates. The only thing the pay gap confirms is that women do indeed give birth to children and on average, spend more time raising them (shock horror).
I agree that the pay gap is mainly caused by the fact women take time off to have children. However there are still plenty of jobs, low paid and high, where women do NOT get pay parity.
Also, why do women do lower paying jobs? Through choice? I doubt it."My guess would be that lower paying jobs are generally easier to fit around childcare. I believe that childcare is prohibitively expensive in this country, driven by arbitrary government regulations on the ratio of child to carers that are set far lower than other countries. There's an easy fix that would improve equal opportunities... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How come women live longer, but retire earlier? " So we can look after our grandchildren to enable our children to work double shifts. Although I have seen a granddad picking up a grandchild. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. " You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Mind you, there was a saying at the last company I worked for which often proved correct. "You don't have to be a cunt to work here, but it helps if you've got one...." & i bet you never used it... Only when it was true. So yeah,I used it quite often. I hate the assumption that women are out for what they can get. Across the globe women are treated appallingly, and its only recently that women in the UK have got parity. And even then we still get paid less. But as soon as any method to redress the balance is brought up, the whole fucking country goes nuts. Fuck sake.
Women don't get paid less, on average they do lower paying jobs. Once you normalise for job type and experience then the gender pay gap evaporates. The only thing the pay gap confirms is that women do indeed give birth to children and on average, spend more time raising them (shock horror).
The fact that only women are able to give birth seems to mean to many men that although they helped equally to create that life, they are not expected to put half their time into raising them.
"Agree! But certainly not the case in this household and I struggle with why people aren't discussing such fundamentals before they have children... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...?" Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? " Because all the students had fucked off on summer holidays? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? Because all the students had fucked off on summer holidays? "Because feminists not only don't care about mens issues, they see it as an insult to have them discussed at the same level as women's issues. Equality my ass. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? " Was that to remind everyone that we still own everything,and have it easy on this planet? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? Because all the students had fucked off on summer holidays?
Because feminists not only don't care about mens issues, they see it as an insult to have them discussed at the same level as women's issues. Equality my ass. "So remind me what rights are men losing as a result of equality? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? " I actually do recall reading about this point but i cant recall what the reasons were. Generally, since this isnt exactly an isolated incident, feminist groups have been shutting down mens group and attempting to silence their issues through fear and intimidation and smear for many years, its usually becase someone pulls the "It might intimidate women on campus to hear these dangerous opinions" line. But feel free to remind me what the actual reason was in this case. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? Because all the students had fucked off on summer holidays?
Because feminists not only don't care about mens issues, they see it as an insult to have them discussed at the same level as women's issues. Equality my ass.
So remind me what rights are men losing as a result of equality?"I'm being discriminated against for car insurance renewal because I'm greater risk of an accident. However, the same logic can't be applied to credit cards because that's the bad type of discrimination. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"In what way are men losing out to a more equal society? Discuss" I cant beleive they made rape in marriage illegal!and that wives can make statements against their husbands,and women are allowed to own property!its a disgrace | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? I actually do recall reading about this point but i cant recall what the reasons were. Generally, since this isnt exactly an isolated incident, feminist groups have been shutting down mens group and attempting to silence their issues through fear and intimidation and smear for many years, its usually becase someone pulls the "It might intimidate women on campus to hear these dangerous opinions" line. But feel free to remind me what the actual reason was in this case. " You guessed correctly | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? Because all the students had fucked off on summer holidays?
Because feminists not only don't care about mens issues, they see it as an insult to have them discussed at the same level as women's issues. Equality my ass.
So remind me what rights are men losing as a result of equality?
I'm being discriminated against for car insurance renewal because I'm greater risk of an accident. However, the same logic can't be applied to credit cards because that's the bad type of discrimination. "You ought to watch the film 'Suffragette', it just might let you empathise with what women have had to, and still do suffer from. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? Because all the students had fucked off on summer holidays?
Because feminists not only don't care about mens issues, they see it as an insult to have them discussed at the same level as women's issues. Equality my ass.
So remind me what rights are men losing as a result of equality?
I'm being discriminated against for car insurance renewal because I'm greater risk of an accident. However, the same logic can't be applied to credit cards because that's the bad type of discrimination.
You ought to watch the film 'Suffragette', it just might let you empathise with what women have had to, and still do suffer from."Thanks for proving my point that you are indifferent to mens issues. I live and love with enough women to understand the real issues they face. I rather address real issues than imagined ones like gender pay gaps. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? Because all the students had fucked off on summer holidays?
Because feminists not only don't care about mens issues, they see it as an insult to have them discussed at the same level as women's issues. Equality my ass.
So remind me what rights are men losing as a result of equality?
I'm being discriminated against for car insurance renewal because I'm greater risk of an accident. However, the same logic can't be applied to credit cards because that's the bad type of discrimination.
You ought to watch the film 'Suffragette', it just might let you empathise with what women have had to, and still do suffer from.
Thanks for proving my point that you are indifferent to mens issues.
I live and love with enough women to understand the real issues they face.
I rather address real issues than imagined ones like gender pay gaps. "When you come up with an issue that actually affects men in societies equality that women are actually impacting then lets carry this on. You know insurance companies are run by men, so if you are being negatively impacted in claims then don't blame women, blame the gender profiling that they use to penalise you! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
Woman on woman bashing, so unpleasant | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hmm... it actually is about denying mens rights. Actively so. Though to make that point rather supposes that men have those rights to begin with. In many cases they dont and never did. An attempt to bring a better balance? In a western nation, with an equal pay act that has been enshrined in law since the mid 1970s. With the equality act that forbids pretty much all forms of discrimination based upon gender (So long as the discrimination is against women, discrimination against men such as all female short lists in parliamentary parties is just fine) I absolutely approve in principle that women should be able to fight in front line positions. Just as soon as they can meet the same physical requirements that the men have to. Which doesnt necessarily mean no woman will fight since the equal thing to do would be to reduce the male requirements down to match the female ones. Since if they are going to hire females based on that standard then THAT must be the standard required for the role. Not the higher male standard. The majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less? This is so woefully inaccurate i dont know where to start. Just because 77p in the £ makes a good soundbyte doesnt make it any more accurate than it ever was. Its hockum, horseshit, it has been for decades. Yes, women earn less than men, for DIFFERENT jobs, averaged over the population, based upon industry choices, work-life balance choices, overtime choices etc. Two people, of either gender in the same job in the same firm are not being paid differently and if they are then why the hell are they not raising it. Because the court case would be over in a heartbeat. As for positive discrimination, sorry but no, bullshit. Just because in your _iew women 1000 years ago were discriminated against doesnt mean that for the next 100 (which conveniently being all of your lifetime and beyond) women should get special treatment and advantages to "Balance it out". That is not equality, or egalitarianism, that is a 4 year olds logic. You seem to be miss quoting me. I said for thousands of years, not a thousand years ago. We do not live in an equal society, the laws introduced have brought a better balance but it is by no means equal. In no way is my brand of feminism, and all the women i know, about denying mens rights - which particular right is being taken away from you...? Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? Because all the students had fucked off on summer holidays?
Because feminists not only don't care about mens issues, they see it as an insult to have them discussed at the same level as women's issues. Equality my ass.
So remind me what rights are men losing as a result of equality?
I'm being discriminated against for car insurance renewal because I'm greater risk of an accident. However, the same logic can't be applied to credit cards because that's the bad type of discrimination.
You ought to watch the film 'Suffragette', it just might let you empathise with what women have had to, and still do suffer from.
Thanks for proving my point that you are indifferent to mens issues.
I live and love with enough women to understand the real issues they face.
I rather address real issues than imagined ones like gender pay gaps.
When you come up with an issue that actually affects men in societies equality that women are actually impacting then lets carry this on.
You know insurance companies are run by men, so if you are being negatively impacted in claims then don't blame women, blame the gender profiling that they use to penalise you!"I don't agree that men are actually impacting the womens issues you care about. Ironically, when a woman tried campaigning for a female face on a bank note, the majority of social media hate mail came from women, as does the majority of 'slut shaming'. However as a feminist you are probably used to ignoring the facts that get in the way of your ideology. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"In a world where a female Prime Minister will be reduced to 'would you fuck her'" I also thought that was sad. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? " Men can get breast cancer to. Never fails to amaze me how many people dont actually know that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? " My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak "There's no need to be insultingly patronising to that poster - his points are perfectly valid. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak "Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality. I'm done. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People seem to be getting feminism and misandry mixed up in a way that makes you look like you have the intellect of a fucking potato,and fuck me its shaming reading the thoughts of confused,and privilleged white men.You need to grow some nuttage" Bumped as we are in danger of missing some of the original points. I am pro equality and anti misogyny just for clarity | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done. "Did I write that last paragraph or did you? Bit confused with your message now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak "Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case."Men have owned it for millenia... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak "Is hard being a white man.we control all the wealth,and all the power.
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Is hard being a white man.we control all the wealth,and all the power.
"Do you? Give us some | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Is hard being a white man.we control all the wealth,and all the power.
Do you? Give us some "Have you not got your patriarchy cheque yet? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done. "Having raised no actual points beyond fear mongering, falsehoods and hearsay, you are indeed, done. By the way, you might want to take a look at the statistics for demographics most affected by violent crime, the US DoL statistics on equal pay, and the various studies showing conclusively that as a group men hold an outgroup bias in favour of women. Just a thought... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case.
Men have owned it for millenia... "Owned what exactly? Or are you just throwing out another bizarre non sequitur like your esteemed colleague? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done.
Having raised no actual points beyond fear mongering, falsehoods and hearsay, you are indeed, done.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the statistics for demographics most affected by violent crime, the US DoL statistics on equal pay, and the various studies showing conclusively that as a group men hold an outgroup bias in favour of women. Just a thought..."What is an 'outgroup bias in favour of women'? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case.
Men have owned it for millenia...
Owned what exactly? Or are you just throwing out another bizarre non sequitur like your esteemed colleague?"I have colleagues on here! Feck! & Double feck!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done.
Having raised no actual points beyond fear mongering, falsehoods and hearsay, you are indeed, done.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the statistics for demographics most affected by violent crime, the US DoL statistics on equal pay, and the various studies showing conclusively that as a group men hold an outgroup bias in favour of women. Just a thought...
What is an 'outgroup bias in favour of women'?"There are in-group and out-group biases. They are studied in social sciences. Studies have conclusively and repeatedly shown that women generally have an in-group bias. That is to say that in most situations, all things being equal, in a conflict they will side with another female. They have also conversely proven that men typically display an out-group bias. And predictably that is to say that in most situations, all things being equal in a conflict they will side with a female over another male. The reasons proposed for this vary. But the effects are repeatedly shown in multiple studies. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done.
Having raised no actual points beyond fear mongering, falsehoods and hearsay, you are indeed, done.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the statistics for demographics most affected by violent crime, the US DoL statistics on equal pay, and the various studies showing conclusively that as a group men hold an outgroup bias in favour of women. Just a thought..."Well we were on the same side of the arguement until now so if my points were crap... My last comment wasn't quoting you! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done.
Having raised no actual points beyond fear mongering, falsehoods and hearsay, you are indeed, done.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the statistics for demographics most affected by violent crime, the US DoL statistics on equal pay, and the various studies showing conclusively that as a group men hold an outgroup bias in favour of women. Just a thought...
What is an 'outgroup bias in favour of women'?
There are in-group and out-group biases. They are studied in social sciences.
Studies have conclusively and repeatedly shown that women generally have an in-group bias. That is to say that in most situations, all things being equal, in a conflict they will side with another female.
They have also conversely proven that men typically display an out-group bias. And predictably that is to say that in most situations, all things being equal in a conflict they will side with a female over another male.
The reasons proposed for this vary. But the effects are repeatedly shown in multiple studies. "So a genuine question here - why is society dominated by men in most high powered roles? & why has this been so for so long? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done.
Having raised no actual points beyond fear mongering, falsehoods and hearsay, you are indeed, done.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the statistics for demographics most affected by violent crime, the US DoL statistics on equal pay, and the various studies showing conclusively that as a group men hold an outgroup bias in favour of women. Just a thought...
Well we were on the same side of the arguement until now so if my points were crap...
My last comment wasn't quoting you! "Yup, my bad. I misunderstood your message. I see now you were suggesting that the other poster not start her dialogue based on those presumptions, not that you were raising those presumptions to be true yourself. I'll hold my hands up there. Jumped the gun entirely. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done.
Having raised no actual points beyond fear mongering, falsehoods and hearsay, you are indeed, done.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the statistics for demographics most affected by violent crime, the US DoL statistics on equal pay, and the various studies showing conclusively that as a group men hold an outgroup bias in favour of women. Just a thought...
Well we were on the same side of the arguement until now so if my points were crap...
My last comment wasn't quoting you!
Yup, my bad. I misunderstood your message. I see now you were suggesting that the other poster not start her dialogue based on those presumptions, not that you were raising those presumptions to be true yourself.
I'll hold my hands up there. Jumped the gun entirely."It's all good | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Stop the bromance and answer my question "Annoying when people won't answer questions isn't it | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Try starting your analysis in a place where men don't hate you, don't want to rape you and are happy to work along side you for the same pay. You might actually get closer to reality.
I'm done.
Having raised no actual points beyond fear mongering, falsehoods and hearsay, you are indeed, done.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the statistics for demographics most affected by violent crime, the US DoL statistics on equal pay, and the various studies showing conclusively that as a group men hold an outgroup bias in favour of women. Just a thought...
What is an 'outgroup bias in favour of women'?
There are in-group and out-group biases. They are studied in social sciences.
Studies have conclusively and repeatedly shown that women generally have an in-group bias. That is to say that in most situations, all things being equal, in a conflict they will side with another female.
They have also conversely proven that men typically display an out-group bias. And predictably that is to say that in most situations, all things being equal in a conflict they will side with a female over another male.
The reasons proposed for this vary. But the effects are repeatedly shown in multiple studies.
So a genuine question here - why is society dominated by men in most high powered roles? & why has this been so for so long?"The answer to that could fill a library, it's very difficult to bring together quite so many reasons given the complexity of society and history. But a simple back of a fag packet explanation would be a combination of the apex fallacy and the changing nature of human civilisation. Back in the day, life was hard. Men were more ideally built to deal with those hardships giving them effectively massive power. But that power was often wielded for the benefit of women since species propagation is key. So for a time, when physical labour was more necessary men legitimately did have more direct power than women. But now, although men do tend to hold most positions of power they also hold the vast majority of positions of outright powerlessness. 93% of homeless persons are male. It's an apex fallacy to suggest that because most of those with power are men, that men as a group hold all the power. I could go on for hours with this, and explain far better, but I'm off to a meet :D | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can we just get back to slap, shag or avoid?" they're illegal now | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Stop the bromance and answer my question
Annoying when people won't answer questions isn't it "Sorry, was i interrupting your cuddle | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can we just get back to slap, shag or avoid?" It depends if it's the female or male half of the couple posting. If it's the male then I should apparently try and subjugate you because as a feminist I can't possibly see you as an equal. It's a gender minefield! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because obviously its a term thats never nebulously defined or abused to silence. Definitely a great idea to make it a criminal matter to get on the wrong side of an opinionated snowflake, cant see anything that could go wrong... Absolutely. You can't discriminate on the basis of race or sexuality so of course you should be free to make sure women know their place. Who do these snowflakes think they are?! Yeah, because its ALWAYS discrimination isnt it. If something happens that a woman isnt happy about, dassss misogyny. Let me make something perfectly clear, i support equality for all. Problem is, that does mean equality, and it does mean all. It doesnt mean that you get to pick the bits of equality you like and keep the bits of the olden days you prefer. It means absolutely equal treatment. Sure. But men and women aren't treated equally by society. Feminism is trying to equalise things, but too many men see this as an affront to them somehow and throw their toys out the pram (and start calling women 'special snowflakes') Thank you :D Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Not in theory, but in practice it is Of course it isn't! Unless you mean because there isn't any more room at the top we'd better not let women in?
Should credit card companies charge higher rates to women to compensate for the fact that women have a higher risk of bankruptcy?
So you're against sexual equality then?
It's a question not a statement of my opinion. Perhaps you could answer it?
We could play tit for tat all evening, but the fundamental question is - do you believe that we have sexual equality today? I don't by the way before younask
Tit from tat!! It's a simple question. You won't answer it because you know full well that there are instances of men being discriminated against but feminists don't care about those. Feminists only care about female issues and that's not what equality is.
My earlier post already answering this bit!
"Feminism is not about denying men's rights. Neither is it the same thing to every woman. But in general it is an attempt to bring about a better balance. So i applaud that women can now fight in the armed forces - i would not want to do it, but I'm glad women can. So it isn't just about maternity pay or models being paid more. The facts speak for themselves, the majority of women doing equal jobs to men are paid less - of course there will be some inconsistencies but the scale of the problem shows that it is embedded in our society and therefore needs some positive discrimination to try to balance things"
So what you mean is that it's ok to focus on women's issues because on balance, there are more of them. How convenient. I guess we'll get onto the men's issues when everything is right with the world... I won't hold my breath though. "I'm betting that the men who complain about. 'men's issues' do fuck all to champion those causes, which are what again? The tyranny of agreeing that the mother will do the majority of childcare? Male models get less money do they? Boohoo. What about female footballers? How do they compare? Not complaining about that, are you? Yeah, how convenient that we focus on the lives that are fucked by sexist laws, shame on bitches! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can we just get back to slap, shag or avoid? It depends if it's the female or male half of the couple posting. If it's the male then I should apparently try and subjugate you because as a feminist I can't possibly see you as an equal. It's a gender minefield!" I'm guessing mentioning religions role in all this now would be a bad idea? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case.
Men have owned it for millenia...
Owned what exactly? Or are you just throwing out another bizarre non sequitur like your esteemed colleague?"I love me a good non sequitur.. I love waking up as a white man as a glance my tired eyes over the world i've created and own..its not for me to worry about getting battered,sexually assaulted,raped,and murdered by women. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can we just get back to slap, shag or avoid? It depends if it's the female or male half of the couple posting. If it's the male then I should apparently try and subjugate you because as a feminist I can't possibly see you as an equal. It's a gender minefield! I'm guessing mentioning religions role in all this now would be a bad idea? "Possibly. Although those who practice what they preach ought to forgive you... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case.
Men have owned it for millenia...
Owned what exactly? Or are you just throwing out another bizarre non sequitur like your esteemed colleague?
I love me a good non sequitur..
I love waking up as a white man as a glance my tired eyes over the world i've created and own..its not for me to worry about getting battered,sexually assaulted,raped,and murdered by women."That's why I kicked the homeless guy on the way home from work. Should've checked his privilege, fucking white male! smh | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can we just get back to slap, shag or avoid? It depends if it's the female or male half of the couple posting. If it's the male then I should apparently try and subjugate you because as a feminist I can't possibly see you as an equal. It's a gender minefield! I'm guessing mentioning religions role in all this now would be a bad idea?
Possibly. Although those who practice what they preach ought to forgive you..."I'm not very good at being forgiven  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm wondering what our civilisation would have been like had women been in charge and not men. We've never had a female Pope, for example. Sweden is a good example and a blue print of why it wont work, it have a feminist movement called feminist initiative and ever since they come in power, its gone downhill, with political correctness. " It should be called social correctness. I have experienced anti-men myself when I wasn't allowed in the 'mother and baby' room so I told the shop (Debenhams) that I would change my babies nappy on a table in their cafe if I wasn't provided with proper 'father and baby' facilities and so they did.....years later. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case.
Men have owned it for millenia...
Owned what exactly? Or are you just throwing out another bizarre non sequitur like your esteemed colleague?
I love me a good non sequitur..
I love waking up as a white man as a glance my tired eyes over the world i've created and own..its not for me to worry about getting battered,sexually assaulted,raped,and murdered by women.
That's why I kicked the homeless guy on the way home from work. Should've checked his privilege, fucking white male! smh"Was that on your way home from whole foods? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can we just get back to slap, shag or avoid? It depends if it's the female or male half of the couple posting. If it's the male then I should apparently try and subjugate you because as a feminist I can't possibly see you as an equal. It's a gender minefield!" Male half, no way im showing wiggles a thread on feminism. She gets ranty as fuck. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case.
Men have owned it for millenia...
Owned what exactly? Or are you just throwing out another bizarre non sequitur like your esteemed colleague?
I love me a good non sequitur..
I love waking up as a white man as a glance my tired eyes over the world i've created and own..its not for me to worry about getting battered,sexually assaulted,raped,and murdered by women.
That's why I kicked the homeless guy on the way home from work. Should've checked his privilege, fucking white male! smh
Was that on your way home from whole foods?"Yeah, just after I was charity-shamed. Now that should be illegal | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? I actually do recall reading about this point but i cant recall what the reasons were. Generally, since this isnt exactly an isolated incident, feminist groups have been shutting down mens group and attempting to silence their issues through fear and intimidation and smear for many years, its usually becase someone pulls the "It might intimidate women on campus to hear these dangerous opinions" line. But feel free to remind me what the actual reason was in this case. " Ooh ooh me! Pick me! I know this one! It's for the same reason there is no straight pride day, no white history month - because they are so over represented every. Single. Fucking. Day. , that no-one needs men to be represented any more than they already are - or do we need to hear about the plight of men in Saudi Arabia because their wives need a lift because they aren't allowed to drive? Shutting down men's groups through fear and intimidation - yeah, that line passes, because historically men have always been afraid of being beaten to a pulp by women and raped in alleyways. That's why men have so few rights - because of the constant fear and intimidation | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So a genuine question here - why is society dominated by men in most high powered roles? & why has this been so for so long?" Because women aren't stupid! Many years ago, I was a "housewife", and then later and since, I've been in a high-powered role. Which did I prefer? Are you kidding?? Housewife, no question - no stress, no long commute, no everyday life or death decisions, no putting up with workplace morons - the list is endless. I really don't believe the majority of women can't do high-powered roles - many of us just don't want to | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
"Now i am confused? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
"Slack Jawed Women?!!  I haven't got my cock pick up, so I don't think so! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
Now i am confused?"don't worry lol | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
Now i am confused? don't worry lol"Still confused, but assume it isn't being complimentary. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
Now i am confused? don't worry lol
Still confused, but assume it isn't being complimentary. "Mine was supposed to be funny | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
"But someone being an sjw on here would refute both sets of arguments, surely? Since society is made up of both men and women. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? My heart is bleeding for all you poor men out there. It must be so incredibly hard being a guy. I just don't know how you have managed to achieve such dominance being so weak
Sarcasm is often the retort of those with no case.
Men have owned it for millenia...
Owned what exactly? Or are you just throwing out another bizarre non sequitur like your esteemed colleague?
I love me a good non sequitur..
I love waking up as a white man as a glance my tired eyes over the world i've created and own..its not for me to worry about getting battered,sexually assaulted,raped,and murdered by women.
That's why I kicked the homeless guy on the way home from work. Should've checked his privilege, fucking white male! smh"Exactly.a white guy kicks another white guy for fucking up big time "you were a contender bro,the world was handed to you on a plate,and you fucked up big time"..unless you're a very unconvincing woman that is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
Now i am confused? don't worry lol
Still confused, but assume it isn't being complimentary.
Mine was supposed to be funny "You get let off as M has had a cup of tea with you & can vouch you are just mad! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? I actually do recall reading about this point but i cant recall what the reasons were. Generally, since this isnt exactly an isolated incident, feminist groups have been shutting down mens group and attempting to silence their issues through fear and intimidation and smear for many years, its usually becase someone pulls the "It might intimidate women on campus to hear these dangerous opinions" line. But feel free to remind me what the actual reason was in this case. Ooh ooh me! Pick me! I know this one! It's for the same reason there is no straight pride day, no white history month - because they are so over represented every. Single. Fucking. Day. , that no-one needs men to be represented any more than they already are - or do we need to hear about the plight of men in Saudi Arabia because their wives need a lift because they aren't allowed to drive? Shutting down men's groups through fear and intimidation - yeah, that line passes, because historically men have always been afraid of being beaten to a pulp by women and raped in alleyways. That's why men have so few rights - because of the constant fear and intimidation "You seem really angry perhaps you should get hubby to make you a nice cup of tea Ritax | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? " Christ no! Any more fantasy and I'll totally lose any sense of reality. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Ooh ooh me! Pick me! I know this one! It's for the same reason there is no straight pride day, no white history month - because they are so over represented every. Single. Fucking. Day. , that no-one needs men to be represented any more than they already are - or do we need to hear about the plight of men in Saudi Arabia because their wives need a lift because they aren't allowed to drive? Shutting down men's groups through fear and intimidation - yeah, that line passes, because historically men have always been afraid of being beaten to a pulp by women and raped in alleyways. That's why men have so few rights - because of the constant fear and intimidation " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"What are men losing as a result of "equality"? Well your question supposes that the developments made as a result of feminism are actually "equality" which they aren't. Not even close. What they are is privileges for women in the main. Equality was met and passed quite some time ago. What we have now is female advantage in many places. Well for example L is currently doing a PhD in a STEM field, which is great. She's looking likely to get a scholarship based upon her gender not available to males. Ergo males have a lower opportunity to pursue those fields. Firefighters now have lower entry requirements for female applicants than males. So leaving aside the fact that when your 300lb nan needs pulling out of a burning building she ain't gonna be able to do it, it also means that men who are perfectly capable of meeting the standard she met, cannot be employed. Female advantage There's the fact that we drafted legislation to cover infant genital mutilation but decided that males weren't deserving of that protection despite the practice being far more common on males. Presumably nothing at all to do with the fact females tend to prefer the look, or the fact that the resulting amputated organic matter has applications in the cosmetics industry primarily servicing women. Then we have the NOW actively fighting the presumption of shared parenting as a default. Because it might mean women get less in child support. And that's ignoring their hilariously bigoted award of the 2016 "woman of courage" to a known false rape accuser and harasser of men. try kronenbourg the righter of wrongs Then we could get into the disparity in funding for various gendered cancers, such as prostate vs breast, wherein a similarly lethal condition is given a massively disproportionate share of a finite resource because a woman's life is more valuable presumably. Would you like me to go on? Christ no! Any more fantasy and I'll totally lose any sense of reality." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Ooh ooh me! Pick me! I know this one! It's for the same reason there is no straight pride day, no white history month - because they are so over represented every. Single. Fucking. Day. , that no-one needs men to be represented any more than they already are - or do we need to hear about the plight of men in Saudi Arabia because their wives need a lift because they aren't allowed to drive? Shutting down men's groups through fear and intimidation - yeah, that line passes, because historically men have always been afraid of being beaten to a pulp by women and raped in alleyways. That's why men have so few rights - because of the constant fear and intimidation
"Men can be raped in alleyways aswel...or didnt you know that | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Ooh ooh me! Pick me! I know this one! It's for the same reason there is no straight pride day, no white history month - because they are so over represented every. Single. Fucking. Day. , that no-one needs men to be represented any more than they already are - or do we need to hear about the plight of men in Saudi Arabia because their wives need a lift because they aren't allowed to drive? Shutting down men's groups through fear and intimidation - yeah, that line passes, because historically men have always been afraid of being beaten to a pulp by women and raped in alleyways. That's why men have so few rights - because of the constant fear and intimidation
Men can be raped in alleyways aswel...or didnt you know that"Dangerous gangs of women round your way are there? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
Now i am confused? don't worry lol
Still confused, but assume it isn't being complimentary.
Mine was supposed to be funny
You get let off as M has had a cup of tea with you & can vouch you are just mad! "in a nice way I hope | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Can we just get back to slap, shag or avoid?" Okay. Theresa May - would you ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Do you know why the University of York had to cancel an International Mens day? I actually do recall reading about this point but i cant recall what the reasons were. Generally, since this isnt exactly an isolated incident, feminist groups have been shutting down mens group and attempting to silence their issues through fear and intimidation and smear for many years, its usually becase someone pulls the "It might intimidate women on campus to hear these dangerous opinions" line. But feel free to remind me what the actual reason was in this case. Ooh ooh me! Pick me! I know this one! It's for the same reason there is no straight pride day, no white history month - because they are so over represented every. Single. Fucking. Day. , that no-one needs men to be represented any more than they already are - or do we need to hear about the plight of men in Saudi Arabia because their wives need a lift because they aren't allowed to drive? Shutting down men's groups through fear and intimidation - yeah, that line passes, because historically men have always been afraid of being beaten to a pulp by women and raped in alleyways. That's why men have so few rights - because of the constant fear and intimidation
You seem really angry perhaps you should get hubby to make you a nice cup of tea Ritax"Why wouldn't sexism make me angry? Why is it even a joke? I might make him a cuppa, seeing as he's commenting with the same agenda. Reward him for not seeing me as inferior for having an innie rather than an outie. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
Now i am confused? don't worry lol
Still confused, but assume it isn't being complimentary.
Mine was supposed to be funny
You get let off as M has had a cup of tea with you & can vouch you are just mad! in a nice way I hope "I'll tell you when i see you | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Ooh ooh me! Pick me! I know this one! It's for the same reason there is no straight pride day, no white history month - because they are so over represented every. Single. Fucking. Day. , that no-one needs men to be represented any more than they already are - or do we need to hear about the plight of men in Saudi Arabia because their wives need a lift because they aren't allowed to drive? Shutting down men's groups through fear and intimidation - yeah, that line passes, because historically men have always been afraid of being beaten to a pulp by women and raped in alleyways. That's why men have so few rights - because of the constant fear and intimidation
Men can be raped in alleyways aswel...or didnt you know that"Yeah..by other men | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Ooh ooh me! Pick me! I know this one! It's for the same reason there is no straight pride day, no white history month - because they are so over represented every. Single. Fucking. Day. , that no-one needs men to be represented any more than they already are - or do we need to hear about the plight of men in Saudi Arabia because their wives need a lift because they aren't allowed to drive? Shutting down men's groups through fear and intimidation - yeah, that line passes, because historically men have always been afraid of being beaten to a pulp by women and raped in alleyways. That's why men have so few rights - because of the constant fear and intimidation
Men can be raped in alleyways aswel...or didnt you know that"And who is doing it to them? Of course, male rape isn't a joke. But it sure comes in handy if you want to trivialise the rape of women because it's contradicting the narrative that women are the greater physical threat and terrorise university lectures about men into being shut down. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So a genuine question here - why is society dominated by men in most high powered roles? & why has this been so for so long? Because women aren't stupid! Many years ago, I was a "housewife", and then later and since, I've been in a high-powered role. Which did I prefer? Are you kidding?? Housewife, no question - no stress, no long commute, no everyday life or death decisions, no putting up with workplace morons - the list is endless. I really don't believe the majority of women can't do high-powered roles - many of us just don't want to "No SJW's want to comment on this then? Maybe it doesn't fit the narrative... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So a genuine question here - why is society dominated by men in most high powered roles? & why has this been so for so long? Because women aren't stupid! Many years ago, I was a "housewife", and then later and since, I've been in a high-powered role. Which did I prefer? Are you kidding?? Housewife, no question - no stress, no long commute, no everyday life or death decisions, no putting up with workplace morons - the list is endless. I really don't believe the majority of women can't do high-powered roles - many of us just don't want to
No SJW's want to comment on this then? Maybe it doesn't fit the narrative..."Still don't know the term. A lot of silly things have been said, but the most important message is that abuse and hatred of women is now going to be prosecuted in Nottinghamshire. Yay for Notts police, just need all the other counties to pick up on it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So a genuine question here - why is society dominated by men in most high powered roles? & why has this been so for so long? Because women aren't stupid! Many years ago, I was a "housewife", and then later and since, I've been in a high-powered role. Which did I prefer? Are you kidding?? Housewife, no question - no stress, no long commute, no everyday life or death decisions, no putting up with workplace morons - the list is endless. I really don't believe the majority of women can't do high-powered roles - many of us just don't want to
No SJW's want to comment on this then? Maybe it doesn't fit the narrative...
Still don't know the term. A lot of silly things have been said, but the most important message is that abuse and hatred of women is now going to be prosecuted in Nottinghamshire. Yay for Notts police, just need all the other counties to pick up on it. "Social Justice Warrior or as marxist philosopher Slavoj Zizek would say; proponents of 'inter passivity'. As ever, Google is your friend. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I'm playing a game of spot the sjw ...
But someone being an sjw on here would refute both sets of arguments, surely? Since society is made up of both men and women."Would they? I doubt it | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Fuck sake. Is there nothing left I'm allowed to do "In case you're unclear, you never were allowed to do whatever you did...! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
