reply to post by DavidLV
I agree that men and women generally have a certain selection of traits that can be defined along gender lines ( in fact, I think I've got into hot
water from some of ATS' resident feminazis for pointing out this fact ! ).
However, the idea that women should behave in a feminine way and that men should behave in a masculine way, is still, for the most part, a
While I believe in this idea, I don't think that society should force men and women to behave in a certain way.
If a man likes to dress up in women's clothes or work as a beautician, or if a woman wants to fight on the frontline in the army, then society
shouldn't negatively judge these people or their choices, because of outdated gender stereotypes and societal roles.
We should have full social equality across the board.
Equality doesn't have stipulations or conditions; and that's where the problem lies nowadays...
Women, cheered on by the feminist harpies ( or should that be ''shrieked on'' LOL ), are now legally receiving preferential and biased treatment
in many aspects of society. This is a complete contradiction of the ''equality'' that the feminazis claim to support.
For example, some fire services alter their physical tests according to the gender of the applicant, so a female firefighter has to carry a weight
that is less than a male firefighter has to.
This is clear discrimination, and it flies in the face of equality and meritocracy ( not to mention public safety ).
You'll never hear any complaints from the obnoxious feminists about physical tests such as these, which are weighted ( no pun intended ) in favour of
There are also incessant cries for equal pay for sportswomen. Women's sport is a fourth-rate version of men's sport, and they don't deserve to earn
as much as the men, because they aren't nearly as good.
The women's 100m Gold Medalist at the 2008 Olympics won in 10.78 seconds; she wouldn't have got anywhere near qualifying from the heats of the
men's event, yet alone got near the medals.
In fact, I have ran the 100 metres not too much slower than that, and I'm not nearly good enough to progress beyond the realms of amateur track and
field athletics !
Imagine organising a version of the NBA, but only for men who are 5' 10'', and then demanding that the players in this league should earn as much
as the top NBA stars ! Or holding a high-jump competition for Congolese pygmies, and awarding them the same prize money as the winner of the top
The above scenarios may sound absurd, but they are equally as justifiable as paying women equal prize money in sport.
After all, a good sub 5 foot 10 basketball player, a good pygmy high-jumper, and a good female tennis player ( they do actually exist ! ) are all
equally disadvantaged by their genetics to reach the top of their sport...
So, why should women get preferential treatment in this regard, in terms of prize money ?