Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Feminism, Eqaulity and the Olympics

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
What i am annoyed about is the idea that neo-feminists have about absolute equality.


You mean that they think women are EXACTLY the SAME as men? Are they aware of the baby-making thing? Because that's the most obvious difference. Or are they talking about physical strength? Because they're wrong about that.



If you want absolute equality then please do the jobs under the same conditions and tests. This is mainly aimed at sport and military.


If we "want" equality? See? That where you lose me.

Do you think women and men are equal or not? And what do you mean by "equal"? Exactly the same? As strong as? Why do I get the feeling that equality is something you "bless" women with? As long as they prove it to you?

IMO, it's already there. People ARE equal, male, female, black, white... It's not something you can give to someone... They have differences, so they're not "the same", but they're equal without proving a thing.




posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
If we "want" equality? See? That where you lose me.

Do you think women and men are equal or not? And what do you mean by "equal"? Exactly the same? As strong as? Why do I get the feeling that equality is something you "bless" women with? As long as they prove it to you?

IMO, it's already there. People ARE equal, male, female, black, white... It's not something you can give to someone... They have differences, so they're not "the same", but they're equal without proving a thing.


By want i mean all humans not just women however women are the campaigners and so i address them if that makes sense.

I think women and men are equal in moral terms. However there are clear differences between them. Like men are generally better at spacial reasoning and women are better at multi tasking. My point is about absolute equality and that's based solely on performance, whether it be mental or phsyical. Basically if a women out performs a man then all powers to her, and if a man out performs a women then all power to him. It's based solely on merit.

As for black and white, please don't bring that up at it's a very seperate issue, i'm talking men and women only here, please don't cloud it with race as that's unfair.

I don't like the double standards is my greatest concern. Making concessions for women in the armed services for example seems rediculous as the likfe of a solider could be in the balance.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
I don't like the double standards is my greatest concern. Making concessions for women in the armed services for example seems rediculous as the likfe of a solider could be in the balance.


Well, are we talking about the Olympics or the service? Because I agree with you about the service. The armed services are there to perform a task. If a person can perform the task, it doesn't matter what gender they are. They should train and work together because they all are going for the same goal. And that is to perform a task. Either they are physically able or not.

The Olympics is a COMPETITION against each other to see who (in your peer group) is better at something. That's the difference.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scorched Earth
Personally I think they should have separate events for women.

Instead of womens weight lifting, why not "Dishwasher Loading"?

instead of synchronized swimming, why not synchronized sandwich making?

I would really like to see a vacuum pushing event mixed in as well.




Now these would be real sporting events , what kind of uniform do you think would fit the bill ?

Leotard and stockings ?

By the way I understand that the dutch have a very real Dyke Vaulting event, perhaps this could be include for the more robust of females along with tupperware stacking.

Break out the beer !!!!!



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


I was thinking little maid outfits with g strings.

This may anger some people, but I just got my new shirt in the mail yesterday, and I thought I would share it here as it pertains to my suggested events:

17 bucks and delivered in 5 days. Oh yea.




posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Originally posted by moocowman
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


No no, please god no lol.


Thats right, all good god fearing christian women should know their place , In the home raising the kids


Even secular law (in the UK) makes it quite clear where a womans place should be.


Err you confused me as i'm an atheist. I use the word god simply as a word and nothing more, an exaderation of my feelings.


Originally posted by moocowman
The idea that women should be in someway equal to a man was agreed to by some politically influential men trying to get their wives to shut up and get naked

We are now all doomed thanks to a woman getting all flirty with a snake

Olympic games? this for men absolutely

decent christian women are quite happy competing in their own sporting events, such as the egg and spoon race at the church summer fair etc.



Again read above before you think you know the poster. Got to love assumption.


I do appologise for you not undestanding that what I meant was not what you thought I said.

I did not in anyway make an assumption about yourself, it is clear that having read my post in relation to your own it could be construde that my, childish remarks were intended for you which was not the case i can assure you .


Please accept my appologiesfor this misunderstanding no offence intended, my bad



I probably will however continue to post some nonsense and perhaps unintentionally offensive responses, but maybe they may contain a gem of wisdom or elnightenment but probably not.

Regards

Moocowman



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
Now these would be real sporting events , what kind of uniform do you think would fit the bill ?

Leotard and stockings ?

By the way I understand that the dutch have a very real Dyke Vaulting event, perhaps this could be include for the more robust of females along with tupperware stacking.

Break out the beer !!!!!


This is doing down the subject and not addressing the points. If you want to continue in this vain then so be it but you are doing nothing more then degrading yourselves. Why not try some debate, it's usually better.

As for the responses betweenyou and scortched earth, well i'm disappointed, i wanted a good, sensible and mature debate. I am glad at least BH has takent he higher road. My respect to BH.


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Well, are we talking about the Olympics or the service? Because I agree with you about the service. The armed services are there to perform a task. If a person can perform the task, it doesn't matter what gender they are. They should train and work together because they all are going for the same goal. And that is to perform a task. Either they are physically able or not.

The Olympics is a COMPETITION against each other to see who (in your peer group) is better at something. That's the difference.


Well i'm glad we can agree on the services so maybe we should leave that aside and speak only about the olympics, my apologies for bringing up the military.

The olympics for me are about human extremes, not gender extremes, and so i think that it should be based entirely upon merit, whoever can lift the most, whoever can run the furthest in the best time etc etc. For me it's about the maximal effort of the human body, and seperating the genders undermines this. To me womens events came out of the feminist movement to make them seem equal to men physically.

Now in other things women do better, for example i think female managers are better than male ones. Personal view but i think it's correct because women generally are better at multi tasking.

Edited because i have the typing skills of your average leema.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:22 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


I respectfully request you let the thread continue on the issue at hand and not crude jokes.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Why not try some debate, it's usually better. reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Okey dokey,

Her in the Uk young females are now encouraged to join football(soccer) and rugby teams with boys, the emphasis being on encouraging equality between the sexes.
All well and good, however when they grow up the female is less likely to join a male rugby team primarily because of the size thing and there are female teams she could play with.


Nevertheless in an age of alledged equality, one would expect events such as the olympics to be split into some sort of size thing as opposed to sex.

But I'm sure this would get over complicated because of the sheer variety of sports.

If we took for example gymnastics I cannot see why a same sex event could not be fair, allthough brute strength is a requirement it is not measured. So I cant see why this could not be a bisexual event.


However throwing something heavy very far requires as much strength as skill, so perhaps this event should be split into the weight of the contestants, equally so boxing martial arts etc, so they could be bisexual also .


When it comes to things like jumping very far or running very fast, I'm sure the law of averages would dictate that at some point a woman would beat the men. But because of the overall size and strength benefits, unless women as a species started to get overall bigger or men smaller, a bisexual event suerly could not be fair.

So what is the solution?



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Want debate? Ok, fine lets debate.

The idea of feminism is a joke. Men, women all equal. Not physically, thats why men hunt and women nest. Its called natural instinct.

As for women not making as much as men, waaaa waaa waaa. Women tend to go into lower paying career fields, while men tend to take the more technical jobs.

Feminism is just another way of neutering males.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Can i first thank you for talking about the issues instead of the bad jokes.


Originally posted by moocowman
Okey dokey,

Her in the Uk young females are now encouraged to join football(soccer) and rugby teams with boys, the emphasis being on encouraging equality between the sexes.
All well and good, however when they grow up the female is less likely to join a male rugby team primarily because of the size thing and there are female teams she could play with.


I'm in the UK and that covers my point, the idea of female teams is rediculous if we want to address equality. Rquality is about being equal, in terms of mental acuity and physical ability. In my mind this means absolute equality, only based on merit and no exceptions made.


Originally posted by moocowman
Nevertheless in an age of alledged equality, one would expect events such as the olympics to be split into some sort of size thing as opposed to sex.

But I'm sure this would get over complicated because of the sheer variety of sports.

If we took for example gymnastics I cannot see why a same sex event could not be fair, allthough brute strength is a requirement it is not measured. So I cant see why this could not be a bisexual event.


Well in my view it should be distributed in weight only. No sex involved.


Originally posted by moocowman
However throwing something heavy very far requires as much strength as skill, so perhaps this event should be split into the weight of the contestants, equally so boxing martial arts etc, so they could be bisexual also .


Heres what it comes down to, physically men are generally stonger than women. The olympics are about human ability in my view and so women and men should go against each other in equal heats. The same tests with the same equipment.


Originally posted by moocowman
When it comes to things like jumping very far or running very fast, I'm sure the law of averages would dictate that at some point a woman would beat the men. But because of the overall size and strength benefits, unless women as a species started to get overall bigger or men smaller, a bisexual event suerly could not be fair.

So what is the solution?


Fairness, that's a big problem because in my view equality is not fair. Equality is about putting mena nd women agains the same obstacles and getting the same results. What bothers me if feminists use this arguement unfairly. They are happy to use the equality arguement to get a job ahead of a better qualified man in attempts at diversity, but the other way around they cry sexism and turn it around on men.

So yes i want things based soley and completely on merit, nothing more and nothing less.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scorched EarthFeminism is just another way of neutering males.


True. It also has taken away alot of the pleasure that some of us women would have liked to experience in its fullness. I am feminine, but I am not feminist and just wanna say thanks *very* sarcastically to all those before me and here now that continue to push this idiotic view that women can do whatever a man can do. Even if I could (which I can't), I wouldn't want to.. I like being a woman, being the nurturer, and the support system for those I love. I don't have any desire to lead and make the tough decisions that concern my family's future... I just am not emotionally tough enough to not second guess myself (I have no choice but to do so though at the moment... but it does come with negative effects)

[edit on 16-8-2008 by justamomma]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by justamomma
 


Thanks for that but not sure i wanted that in the debate. I know some very tough women, including an actual bonified genius and i doubt they'd have trouble making decisions.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Rquality is about being equal, in terms of mental acuity and physical ability. In my mind this means absolute equality, only based on merit and no exceptions made


Does your opinion apply to all aspects of life or just sport?


For example - raising a child do you believe a man and woman are of equal ability in raising a child?



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


Yes my idea of equality applies to every single area of life, including the raising of a child.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I suppose that is the basis of my point BH. That extreme feminists deny and i thinkt he olympics are about physical human achievment, and therefore there should not be a seperate female and male category if we want the best of physical prowess. That way women would be on an equal footing of men, and as they have campaigned, quite rightly for equal rights, that shoudl be given to them.


I believe that you've been told that this is what extreme feminists believe. While there may be some who hold this view, we feminists have long known (because we are into science) that women have less muscle mass than men. So some women are stronger than some men, but if all things are equal we expect men to have more muscle and therefore more power than men.

Women have an advantate in reaction time, by a very slight bit.

What feminism is all about can be summed up in a nutshell (and I'm speaking as someone who joined the original feminist movement back in the late 60's and has been involved since then): "women (and people of non-white races) are capable of doing any job that any male is capable of doing. If they have such a job, then they need to be paid at the same payscale as a man and to have the same advancement opportunities as a man."

Period.

No "let's get rid of men" (I adore my man, thank you, and I think you'll find that the feminists here have the same feeling about their men as a rule). No "let's make men obsolete."

If a job (like firefighting) requires a person that can carry 160 pounds, then any woman who can carry that weight and can pass the written tests deserves a chance to become a firefighter -- and she shouldn't have to go to court and through a lot of legal battles just to get her dream job.

There are Olympic competitions (Equestrian, for example) where both men and women compete in the same sport and there are no "men's division" and "women's division."



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


Byrd, that's my point exactly and thank you for your view.

My point is about what i call absolute equality, that being jobs, or sports, or military positions being based soley upon merit. that being the ability to do that job.

The feminists i refer to are the neo-feminists or as i sometimes call them nazi-feminists who believe men are obsolete. However there are also plenty of mainstream feminists who think womena dn men are exactly equal in every possible aspect.

I suppse i'm being simplistic in wanting a world based on ability only.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by justamomma

Originally posted by Scorched EarthFeminism is just another way of neutering males.


True. It also has taken away alot of the pleasure that some of us women would have liked to experience in its fullness.


Uhm, it was the feminists (of the early 1900's), you know, who first focused on the idea that women were sensual and sexual creatures and who spoke out against rape and the "lie there and take it" mentality of the Victorian era. I don't know if you read up on the history of women's rights movements and what life was like for women (in the 1970's it was still hard for me as a divorced woman to get a credit card and to open a bank account without my father's co-signature. I have had car dealers refuse to sell me a car without a man's approval... and this is within the past 50 years.)

And it was much worse in the 1900's. If you haven't read up on what life was like for the non-wealthy woman (particularly a divorcee) or a non-white woman, you might like to take a read about it sometime. Read up on what happened to American Indian girls (like my grandmother) and schooling... or the women who were nurses and doctors during the Civil War.


I am feminine, but I am not feminist and just wanna say thanks *very* sarcastically to all those before me and here now that continue to push this idiotic view that women can do whatever a man can do.


You're quite welcome. The next time you see bestseller book by a woman, realize that before the 1970's, most books written by women were rejected simply because they were written by women (many romance novels were written by men using pseudonyms.) If you vote (I do, regularly) then you can thank the early feminists.

If you have a credit card, you can thank the feminists of the 1960s (I've been through the "you can't have a credit card because you're a woman" routine.

You can have your own IRA. Blame us feminists for that (because early in my work career it wasn't possible.)

If you see a woman who's a gynecologist who delivers babies and does family practice -- again, blame the feminists (the first women who tried to practice as doctors had rocks thrown at them and went through many other unpleasantries.)

Women who are dentists or dental assistants or who work as opticians -- blame feminists.

Women who are lawyers -- blame feminists.

Women who are astronauts... blame the feminists and you can blame us for still trying to force NASA and other agencies to give women equal opportunities as pilots and astronauts.

Whenver you see women of mixed races together, working as equals -- yeah, we did that. Heap the blame on me, too, because (truly) I was there and I was one of the ones working to bring it about.

That and widespread birth control for women (I worked in family planning clinics, helping get info about condoms and birth control pills and syphillis out.)


Even if I could (which I can't), I wouldn't want to.. I like being a woman, being the nurturer, and the support system for those I love. I don't have any desire to lead and make the tough decisions that concern my family's future... I just am not emotionally tough enough to not second guess myself (I have no choice but to do so though at the moment... but it does come with negative effects)


Which is fine by the feminists (in case you didn't know.) My dear daughter-in-law is a homemaker and homeschooler and I do love her to pieces. That's what she wants to do, and I'm for it 100%. No feminist would think of forcing such a dear woman into a role she hated.

On the other hand, I would never want to see her living under the same restrictions as the women did in the 1950's, when it was fairly common for men to "smack around" a woman if she didn't mind (watch some of the old comedies and old movies and you'll see that theme of "it's funny when the uppity woman gets out of hand and the man punches her to show her who's boss.") I wouldn't like to see you living that way, either.

But that's because I'm a feminist. You might be appalled at how many women of the 1950's thought it was okay for the guy to slap them around if he felt like it.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
reply to post by moocowman
 


Yes my idea of equality applies to every single area of life, including the raising of a child.



As you are in the UK you are probably aware that we have a disgustingly gender bias legal system, that is causing untold damage and trauma to thousands if not millions of children.


The application of some british laws makes it quite clear that the female is the better parent of a child.


The appliciation of financial welfare of a child is quite clear that the female is the accepted and therfore better parent of a child.

Social housing within the UK completely favours the female above the male by accepting the premise that the female has been declared the better parent.


Taxation laws within the UK openly favour the female above the male because of the acceptance that the female is the better parent.


Interestingly enough, the majority of confirmed incidents of child neglect/abuse in the UK are commited by females if I recall correctly a whopping 90%






top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join