Sexism and other isms

Life Dating & Relationships
1

Men and women will never be equal because 90% of men are brought up to be weak, selfish, intellectual and emotional children. Only 75% of women are.

‘Equality’ in terms of how women are treated by men: equal pay, sexual and reproductive freedom, economic freedom, freedom from domestic violence, freedom from religious violence / misogyny, freedom from forced prostitution, freedom from sexual violence and harassment, equal access to education, equal access to medical care. Google it, if you really don’t understand.

And seriously, ‘bitcho’? I understand that English is your 14th language, but seriously, STFU. You’re in public.

2

That is a highly sexist, offensive, and inaccurate statement. :thumbsdown:

3

That is a highly sexist, offensive, and inaccurate statement. :thumbsdown:[/quote]

You should fight sexism wherever you see it. Men seem to have a problem with sexism against men. I just don’t understand it. :cactus:

If you wish to be considered our equals, police your less enlightened brothers better. Not all men but yes all women: getting rid of misogyny is not our problem, it’s yours. Sort it out if you want respect from women.

NB: not the opening of a debate or discussion.

4

One is reminded of when the great Paul Mooney was asked what needed to be done to totally eradicate racism.
His answer:
“Kill all the white people”

QED :thumbsup:

5

That is a highly sexist, offensive, and inaccurate statement. :thumbsdown:[/quote]

Ermintrude consistently uses the language of feminism to create a safe haven to show off her chauvinism. It’s why I have her on ignore. She is a basically bad human being.

6

[quote=“Rocket”]One is reminded of when the great Paul Mooney was asked what needed to be done to totally eradicate racism.
His answer:
“Kill all the white people”

QED :thumbsup:[/quote]

Yup, never met any non-white racists…

Or were you noting a comparison in that both Mooney’s and Ermintrude’s statements were massively simplistic, biased and erroneous? Perhaps I missed the sarcasm smiley?

7

Snort. skoster, you talk a lot about me. I’m a pretty bad person, yep, no argument from me. Don’t care. Absolutely no interest in most men.

It is – literally! – mind-blowing to 90% of men that female equality is men’s job, not women’s. :roflmao:

8

[quote=“Micahel”][quote=“NonTocareLeTete”][quote=“Micahel”][quote=“Ermintrude”]

Men and women will never be equal[/quote]

Best to leave it there. Neither side really wants it. Women say they want equality but only when there is a benefit, do not equality if they loose benefits.[/quote]
Oh yup, totally, ALL women are like this. Uh huh. Crazy thing is, when you went around polling every woman in the world about this topic, you forgot to talk to me, and a bunch of my (also female) friends, so… time to get out that clipboard and try again bucko![/quote]

Yeah, I think when you list out all the items of true equality, like women in combat and others, most will pass on those, bitcho![/quote]
I don’t believe men or women should be forced to serve in the military, sunshine. But since it’s an imperfect world, I believe there’s absolutely no reason men should be forced to do it, and not women.
I also believe that female firefighters shouldn’t have lighter physical strength requirements than men. They should be held to the same standards as the men are, and if that means they can’t serve, so be it.
I also believe both partners should pay for stuff equally in a dating relationship (as I do with my boyfriend).
I also believe that household/family duties shouldn’t be prescribed due to sex/gender, but rather by talent, ability and desire.

That’s how I was raised, and I’m sticking to it. I think it’s the best way to be.

And I say this as a moderator, please debate ideas rather than calling people names. I know that I have often fallen short of this ideal, myself, and feel pretty stupid about it later.
The overall quality of the forum is reduced when it becomes a slugfest. I’ve had a couple of people call attention to these sort of posts---- and SIIIIIIGH- I just fucking hate the idea of editing someone else’s words. I’m probably going to have to, someday. I just…bleeeeeeh. I like free speech.

And let’s face it, if you’re calling people names in your post, your overall credibility as a poster is reduced.

9

That is a highly sexist, offensive, and inaccurate statement. :thumbsdown:[/quote]

You should fight sexism wherever you see it. Men seem to have a problem with sexism against men. I just don’t understand it. :cactus:

If you wish to be considered our equals, police your less enlightened brothers better. Not all men but yes all women: getting rid of misogyny is not our problem, it’s yours. Sort it out if you want respect from women.

NB: not the opening of a debate or discussion.[/quote]

That is also highly offensive, on a number of levels. First, I personally fight gender stereotypes wherever I see them. In this thread, I have been careful to use “person” when discussing the original topic of prostitution, whereas many posters seem to believe that only women can be prostitutes and/or victims of human trafficking. I am against sexism, period, whether from a man or woman, whether about men or women.

You are a very bright and witty person, which is why I find it so astonishing that you repeatedly demonstrate close-minded hatred and bigotry towards men. Sexism is just as offensive to civilized society as racism, anti-Semitism, anti-gay bigotry, and every other instance of small-minded spite. Imagine if a Christian were to come on here, make outrageously offensive comments about Jewish people, and when confronted, give your response: “Well, Jew, if you wish to be considered our equals, police your less enlightened brothers better”. Utterly absurd and offensive. It is your obligation to treat other people with the same courtesy and respect as you would like to be treated.

10

Men and women have sovereignty over their own bodies. That is a fundamental human right. If a person chooses to have sex with another person in exchange for money, their choice should be respected. Beyond that, it is literally impossible to stop prostitution. Criminalizing the matter does not stop it from happening. It merely drives the practice into the unsafe and unregulated black market, dramatically increasing the likelihood of abuse and the rate of human trafficking. There are relatively few nations with an enlightened view of prostitution, but among them is the Netherlands. Prostitution is legal, but highly regulated. Prostitutes can only practice their trade from designated brothels, and each room contains a panic button that directly contacts the police, who can literally be in the room in a few minutes. Prostitutes are given regular health inspections, and the use of prophylactics is widespread. It’s simply not a question of whether or not prostitution is going to exist. It’s only a question of whether we want to make prostitutes’ lives relatively safe or extremely dangerous. I vote for safe, which is why I believe prostitution should be 100% legal, but regulated.

Discussions on whether prostitution is empowering or disempowering are interesting from an academic viewpoint, but they shouldn’t be used to suppress human rights. Our bodies belong to us, to do with as we please, so long as we do not impinge on the rights of others. Criminalizing prostitution is immoral.

11

I used to think that way too, but I have since learned that there’s nothing inherently unfair about gender-norming. The physical standards of fire fighters, soldiers, etc., are not necessarily about specific job requirements as much as making sure that candidates are healthy and fit. Of course it’s important that candidates can do the job, but beyond that, gender-norming is fair because of inherent physical differences between men and women. It’s important to know that a female fire fighter can lift a fire hose and ax down a door. It doesn’t matter if she does 75 push-ups instead of 100. Without gender-norming, there would be less women in physically demanding jobs like fire fighter, police officer, soldier, etc., and that would be a blow to equality.

12

I used to think that way too, but I have since learned that there’s nothing inherently unfair about gender-norming. The physical standards of fire fighters, soldiers, etc., are not necessarily about specific job requirements as much as making sure that candidates are healthy and fit. Of course it’s important that candidates can do the job, but beyond that, gender-norming is fair because of inherent physical differences between men and women. It’s important to know that a female fire fighter can lift a fire hose and ax down a door. It doesn’t matter if she does 75 push-ups instead of 100. Without gender-norming, there would be less women in physically demanding jobs like fire fighter, police officer, soldier, etc., and that would be a blow to equality.[/quote]

Yet at some point someone will be passed out from smoke inhalation and need a firefighter to carry them out of a burning building. Those physical requirements are there in an effort to ensure a job can be done. It’s not just physical fitness, it’s physical fitness for a set of specific tasks. These fitness tests are generally (or should be) based on establishing minimum necessary abilities to perform a job. If they aren’t the answer isn’t to gender norm, it is to set appropriate measures in order for the job to be performed.

If the gender norming means reducing the requirements to the point where the job can’t be done then it’s a blow to equality since it is essentially a statement that one gender is incapable of performing the job. Pandering is just as discriminatory as any other form of sexism, and it reduces overall equality since it gives free reign to the (erroneous) belief that this artificially produced equality is just a superficial cosmetic hiding the truth that inequality of rights is a true reflection of inequality of abilities.

Given the opportunity, I guarantee that a woman will come along and rise to meet any equal physical test which is based on a reasonable skillset for firefighting. When we gender norm we take away that opportunity.

13

[quote=“Ermintrude”]Men and women will never be equal because 90% of men are brought up to be weak, selfish, intellectual and emotional children. Only 75% of women are.

‘Equality’ in terms of how women are treated by men: equal pay, sexual and reproductive freedom, economic freedom, freedom from domestic violence, freedom from religious violence / misogyny, freedom from forced prostitution, freedom from sexual violence and harassment, equal access to education, equal access to medical care. Google it, if you really don’t understand.

And seriously, ‘bitcho’? I understand that English is your 14th language, but seriously, STFU. You’re in public.[/quote]

This narrative is the mainstream narrative now in Britain and Ireland and Scandinavia. Men are portrayed as inferior beings in the media and entertainment industry and also treated worse legally, especially with regards abuse cases and following divorce. Women’s day is celebrated with gusto, men are completely ignored.

14

[quote=“headhonchoII”][quote=“Ermintrude”]Men and women will never be equal because 90% of men are brought up to be weak, selfish, intellectual and emotional children. Only 75% of women are.

‘Equality’ in terms of how women are treated by men: equal pay, sexual and reproductive freedom, economic freedom, freedom from domestic violence, freedom from religious violence / misogyny, freedom from forced prostitution, freedom from sexual violence and harassment, equal access to education, equal access to medical care. Google it, if you really don’t understand.

And seriously, ‘bitcho’? I understand that English is your 14th language, but seriously, STFU. You’re in public.[/quote]

This narrative is the mainstream narrative now in Britain and Ireland and Scandinavia. Men are portrayed as inferior beings in the media and entertainment industry and also treated worse legally, especially with regards abuse cases and following divorce. Women’s day is celebrated with gusto, men are completely ignored.[/quote]

Yes, and now Obama has waged war on men in the work place. Equal pay for equal work. While I believe in equal pay for equal work, men and women don’t necessarily do the same jobs. According to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, men on average work more hours than women. Not to mention that most people who die on the job in the United States are men. 93% of on the job deaths involve men.

Furthermore, more men have lost their jobs during the recession than women.

The other amusing thing is all the money spend in the United States to promote women in STEM. The real kicker is that female students are out scoring male students on the SAT. It would appear that efforts should be made to help male students do better in school.

15

So what other group doesn’t have the right to expect equal treatment?

I mean as long as we’re separating people up into groups who can be discriminated against and not, I’d like a guide book of the ‘right’ people to feel fine about minimizing.

We cool with anti-Christian stuff? Anti-Semitism? White people from certain areas but not others? Same for brown people? Can you hook me up with a Google map of the areas? Who gets to vote on which group?

ALL discrimination, including sexism, damages ALL people. Anyone who advocates for any group to be discriminated against, in word or deed, isn’t just part of the problem, you ARE the problem.

16

No. Discrimination does not generally damage straight white men. I have no idea whether you’re any of those things, mind.

17

Just a simple concept, so bafflingly beyond most people.

Fatuous, facile, flobaresque analogy alert: does racism in Taiwan damage Indonesians or white Canadians or Han-origin Taiwanese more? Which group can most effectively and speedily put a stop to it?

Moar speculative attax on my emotional well-being needed before this point can be conceded!

18

No. Discrimination does not generally damage straight white men. I have no idea whether you’re any of those things, mind.[/quote]

First, you’re wrong on a macro scale. Discrimination damages society as a whole, all people sink with the tide as ideas and talents are lost.

Second, tell that to men denied access to their children based on preferential treatment of one gender.

Or how about white males in parts of Japan where there are signs in stores and bars saying no gaijin? I guess it doesn’t hurt them since they’re white males, maybe only the gay ones are right to feel discriminated against.

Gosh, it’s getting all complicated now that we’re deciding who deserves equal treatment and who doesn’t!!

Though I see we’re narrowing down the groups of people it’s ok to discriminate against. Who else? How about the wealthier Asian males in the US? Is that cool?

I’d just like a list of exactly who it’s ok to discriminate against and marginalize. Who are the less worthy people who don’t deserve equal treatment?

[quote=“Ermintrude”]
Just a simple concept, so bafflingly beyond most people.

Fatuous, facile, flobaresque analogy alert: does racism in Taiwan damage Indonesians or white Canadians or Han-origin Taiwanese more? Which group can most effectively and speedily put a stop to it?

Moar speculative attax on my emotional well-being needed before this point can be conceded![/quote]

Oh I see, it’s ok for you to make sexist remarks and be a chauvinist because other people have done it.

Nobody (with any sense) is saying it’s ok to be sexist. What people are saying is is ALSO not ok for YOU to be a chauvinist.

19

:roflmao:

20

:roflmao:[/quote]

Waves from Japan…

That’s all you got? No argument but a cutesy emoji to back up your statement that it’s entirely ok to discriminate against people?

I’ll be here when you make up that list of groups it’s ok to discriminate against. Or grow up, whichever comes first…