The problem lies with us men!

Originally posted by badgerprints
reply to post by Aeons

 

I'll say it once again,

If everything in the world were 50/50 between men and women, in essence 'fair' then things would still be just as screwed up in this world. Maybe they would be screwed up in a different way, but they still would be a mess.

Equality would actually be 100% - - - not 50/50. 50/50 is limiting.

100% would mean fully open opportunity to all.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by badgerprints
reply to post by Aeons

 

I'll say it once again,

If everything in the world were 50/50 between men and women, in essence 'fair' then things would still be just as screwed up in this world. Maybe they would be screwed up in a different way, but they still would be a mess.

Equality would actually be 100% - - - not 50/50. 50/50 is limiting.

100% would mean fully open opportunity to all.

Now you're just sparring with semantics.

50/50 is an improbability but implies fairness.

100% means that one side doesn't exist any more.

Originally posted by Aeons
Apparently the concept of men have been oppressed by women by women being violently disaffected from political, economic and societal power is very popular.

I'm not even sure what that sentence means, so I am sure I didn't say it, or anything like that. I did say that political forces over the last several decades have created decidedly gender biased laws in the areas of DV law (TRO's being a perfect example),family law, divorce law, sexual harrasment laws, and others which have explictly advantaged women at the expense of men.

Wake up and smell the coffee. Women didn't set up the system that you think enslaved men to their families. They didn't have the power, politically, economically, socially, religiously or militarily to do so.

Where did I say men had been "enslaved to thier families" again? Can you quote me?

Even if your points about working hard are true, it essentially assumes that women did not work (incorrect), that family tending isn't work (incorrect), that women were better off being owned (vastly incorrect), the foundational assumption that this state of affairs was perpetuated BY women ONTO men is patently a lie. An obvious one at that.

Where did I say any of this?

In order to perpetuate this obvious lie, you appeal to the "women as manipulative vixens" psychological stereotype. Women as a group, secretly plotting behind the lines to warp men with their wiles to fight wars and work in bad circumstances.

Women have in fact manipulated men into wars, on the other hand I cant think of any cases where the young men who fight in a war, caused or started that war.
From the spartan mothers who told their sons to"come home with your shield or on it", to the modern Muslim mothers who turn their children into suicide bombers, young men have often been manipulated into fighting the battles of old men and women. As to "working in bad conditions" most men have done the most dangerous work throughout history, because women weren't capable of doing so. Whether fighting in a Greek phalanx, mining coal, or hunting mammoth with spears, men have done so because women couldn't do so effectively.

Which really makes no sense whatsoever. The OBVIOUS reason these cultural governance motifs existed is that they were perpetuated by groups that DID have power and could back it up with violence and mite.

That would generally be groups of powerful men.

Cultural motifs? Is that like a family quilt?
Again I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

So if you are willing to embrace something that is such an obvious lie, it is because you have an agenda.

What is an obvious lie? That men aren't the brain dead brutes you have portrayed them as? That women enjoy legal advantages and governmental support that men do not? Really?

I appreciate that some people out are VERY adept at appealing to some men's hatred and anger and sexual issues, to turn their eyes away from the most obvious truths. Truly, astonishingly cunning.

And I am aware that some people are quite adept at appealing to women's sense of grievance and hatred of men, along with the seductive charm of being able to blame them for all your problems and using such to blind you to the obvious truths. That women in western society are the most entitled, least accountable, and over-privileged protected class.

That you have bought it hook, line, and sinker however and are that easily led is deeply disturbing.

[edit on 2009/12/2 by Aeons]

That you are so invested in a fantasy narrative that that casts men as perpetrators and women as victims is truly sad.

I can tell you don't understand.

Believe me, you do not have to say it. It is really EXCRUITIATINGLY obvious.

Originally posted by Aeons



Having worked, and being at home - and I am paid well - NOTHING I have EVER done is as hard as being at home with children 24/7 with little back up and no breaks. I have nothing but lasting repect for the legions of stay-at-home Moms and Dads .....that are not surfing bon-bon eaters.

[edit on 2009/12/2 by Aeons]

Remind me again, what percentage of stay at home parents die as a result of their duties? Lose limbs "on the job"? Commit suicide due to the stresses involved?
Yes being a full time parent is hard, but not nearly as hard or dangerous, as many professions that are predominantly male because only males will do them.

Originally posted by Aeons
I can tell you don't understand.

Believe me, you do not have to say it. It is really EXCRUITIATINGLY obvious.

Of course, as a man how could I possibly understand.

Originally posted by badgerprints


Equality would actually be 100% - - - not 50/50. 50/50 is limiting.

100% would mean fully open opportunity to all.

Now you're just sparring with semantics.

50/50 is an improbability but implies fairness.

100% means that one side doesn't exist any more.

Semantics maybe.

But in my mind 100% means there are no sides.

50/50 is a goal - but not true equality.

Originally posted by Annee

But in my mind 100% means there are no sides.

50/50 is a goal - but not true equality.

We can agree on the concept.
I'm not that attached to the numbers.

reply to post by Doglord


No one is holding a gun to anyone's head to do either. Life is about choice.People who have no concept of parenting are living in a state of arrested development.

A lot of this certainly makes sense, but...

Could part of the blame be placed on the Mothers of the world for bringing up the bad boys described in this thread?

Remember, the world wasn't always like it is today, so the nuclear family shares the blame.
Sure hope nobody calls me a sexist for making this statement, but it's true.


[edit on 2-12-2009 by Alxandro]

[edit on 2-12-2009 by Alxandro]

reply to post by Alxandro


So what you are saying is men have no responsibility for parenting. It's all up the the moms. Deny ignorance indeed.

We lost when women started to enter the work force.There is no greater task than raising children.I give all the stay home parents credit!!In todays world we have strangers raising our children.Its their ideals that our children are being subjected to.A good majority of these people have no morals.Our children suffer ,we suffer and the world suffers.

The lack of morality and decency is missing in the world.It all starts with family and it escalates worldwide.Gender has no bearing, decency and morality do.

www.startups.co.uk...

Failure fears deter women from enterprise
16/11/05 12:33
Three-quarters of females feel they do not have the right skills to start their own business, a new study reveals.

The survey by Domino's Pizza shows that 74% of women have never sought to turn their ideas into a business because they believe they lack the ability.

Half said they fear they will fail, while over a third admitted being frightened of making mistakes.

While the study shows that many of the obstacles women face in starting up are psychological, some of these worries are also real risks.

Lack of confidence is a true killer when it comes to business and if three quarters of women lack of confidence and frightened of making mistakes they don't seem to me like they should be running any businesses.

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
I'd be quite happy to take back seat and let the women go to work, i'd be happy looking after the kids and playing on the internet all day.

Have there ever been any female tyrants? I mean Maggy Thatcher came close, but maybe the world would be better if women ran the world

what about that one queen that like ate babies to make herself look prettier?

Originally posted by Alxandro
A lot of this certainly makes sense, but...

Could part of the blame be placed on the Mothers of the world for bringing up the bad boys described in this thread?

Remember, the world wasn't always like it is today, so the nuclear family shares the blame.
Sure hope nobody calls me a sexist for making this statement, but it's true.

Yes, Mothers were so much more capable in the past:

Hitler probably would have been much worse a character had his mother not stayed at home making spetzel.

reply to post by kilas

Finally someone with the balls to say the truth.

There is in every area of the world strong force and weak force. It seems in nature you CAN have too much of a good thing. We maintain harmony not by force but by a delicate balance between polarities. In this case the masculine and the feminine. I believe the masculine force must permit forward propulsion (to our evolution) and the feminine force keeps this action within parameters laterally.
I perceive woman in the cave appreciated the sheer brutality of the stronger male to protect against predators. Male brutality was useful attacking beasts for food but in modern times this display of machismo is no longer practical or useful (outside the arena of athletic events-highlighting said strength) hostility and aggression are fading traits... like the tail.

reply to post by rusethorcain


I hate it when social "scientists" try to impose Laws of physical science to give their theories some credability.

Men are not the "Polarized" opposite of Women.

In fact, apart from very slight physiological differences, there are very few differences between human genders.

reply to post by Samsan

Sorry you disagree since it has put you in a hateful and contrary frame of mind but I think for all intents and purposes we are indeed polar oposites. I hate rust. Can't think of much more but then I don't conjure things up to hate that are not really there.

reply to post by concernedcitizan

?????

Where did I say people don't have choices?
I was simply pointing out that the trope that "being a parent is the hardest job in the world" is BS. yes its difficult, but there are many much more difficult jobs.