hawk·ish·ly
Posted 29 May 2014 - 07:59 PM
*vomits*
Go ahead, vomit. You're adding a lot to the discussion. Men do not dictate that women are not allowed into STEM, finance, or business fields. Because women opt to not pursue those careers, do not point to a pay difference and say "See, inequality!"
There's a whole lot that goes into determining a salary; Ever take a look at a supply-demand curve? It's not men's fault women opt for higher quantity positions. It's simple economics.
Coffee God
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:03 PM
*vomits*
I think what you meant was
I have no friends.
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:04 PM
*vomits*
woomy woomy manmenmi!!
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:04 PM
Go ahead, vomit. You're adding a lot to the discussion. Men do not dictate that women are not allowed into STEM, finance, or business fields. Because women opt to not pursue those careers, do not point to a pay difference and say "See, inequality!"
There's a whole lot that goes into determining a salary; Ever take a look at a supply-demand curve? It's not men's fault women opt for higher quantity positions. It's simple economics.
I've already added to this thread and it was made very apparent that my opinion isn't welcome here. You guys are just going to dismiss anything I say anyways, so unfortunately there's fucking no point in trying.
But look at your comment. Read it. I'm going to point out the problematic thing here. "It is not men's fault that women can't think independently and instead opt to follow traditional career and life paths.".
And wow Adam, really? Did you seriously just fucking post that?
The Teacher.
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:06 PM
I've already added to this thread and it was made very apparent that my opinion isn't welcome here. You guys are just going to dismiss anything I say anyways, so unfortunately there's fucking no point in trying.
But look at your comment. Read it. I'm going to point out the problematic thing here. "It is not men's fault that women can't think independently and instead opt to follow traditional career and life paths.".
And wow Adam, really? Did you seriously just fucking post that?
My emotions to this post...
I have no friends.
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:06 PM
And wow Adam, really? Did you seriously just fucking post that?
KatDog 5ever
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:06 PM
I think you might have bulimia. You might have to get on the crazy train with Kat, Trich, and Nymh.
Not me, though. I don't have any mental disorders.
I'm not crazy!!!! *twitch*
hawk·ish·ly
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:14 PM
I've already added to this thread and it was made very apparent that my opinion isn't welcome here. You guys are just going to dismiss anything I say anyways, so unfortunately there's fucking no point in trying.
But look at your comment. Read it. I'm going to point out the problematic thing here. "It is not men's fault that women can't think independently and instead opt to follow traditional career and life paths.".
And wow Adam, really? Did you seriously just fucking post that?
You expressed your opinion at one point, while all your other posts were vomit sounds, or taking one line from a response to you and saying "Way to prove my point" or other equally confrontational with no reasoning behind the post. No fucking wonder people dismiss you.
Valid point, it was worded poorly on my end. I'm trying to keep everything as civil as possible and minimizing my usage of sarcasm (Which usually flows damn near boundless). Apparently some slipped through.
He did. Your obvious disgust with this thread has been noted and then properly discarded.
Pretty much.
The Teacher.
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:17 PM
I'm 12 and what is this?
ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ﾉ ᴅᴏɴɢᴇʀsヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ﾉ
Posted 29 May 2014 - 08:20 PM
Bitch Of The Boards
Posted 30 May 2014 - 04:47 AM
Did you seriously link me to an article about a proposed bill that I directly linked?
So the quoted portion of that bill, which is exactly as written, is wrong? What point were you trying to even make? Read the proposed bill as-written, if it gets too confusing for you ask questions, and try and really comprehend what is going on within the bill. I can guarantee you that no trial is required, only a sworn affidavit. I know this because I read the proposed bill on the government website.
This bill would establish a procedure to obtain a gun violence restraining order and, when applicable, a firearm seizure warrant, when a person poses a significant risk of personal injury to himself or herself or others by possessing a firearm. The bill would establish the requirements for obtaining a gun violence restraining order and a firearm seizure warrant and would require, not later than 14 days after the execution of a gun violence restraining order, and, when applicable, a firearm seizure warrant, a hearing to determine whether a person who is subject to the order may, among other things, own or possess a firearm, or whether the seized firearm should be returned.
This bill would authorize a law enforcement agency to request a renewal of a gun violence restraining order if the agency has probable cause to believe that a person subject to that restraining order continues to pose a significant risk of personal injury to himself or herself or others by possessing a firearm. This bill would additionally authorize a judge, upon his or her own motion, or upon request of another person, to issue a renewal of a gun violence restraining order, as specified.
Existing law requires specified law enforcement officers to take temporary custody of any firearm or deadly weapon in plain sight or discovered pursuant to a lawful search when present at the scene of a domestic violence incident involving a threat to human life or physical assault.
This bill would apply the requirements described above to law enforcement officers serving a gun violence restraining order.
18101.
(a) Any person may submit an application to the court, on a form designed by the Judicial Council, setting forth the facts and circumstances necessitating that a gun violence restraining order be issued. A gun violence restraining order shall be issued to prohibit a named person from possessing a firearm if an affidavit, signed by the applicant under oath, and any additional information provided to the court demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the court, the named person poses a significant risk of personal injury to himself or herself or others by possessing firearms.
(b) A firearms seizure warrant may not be issued but upon probable cause, supported by an affidavit, naming or describing with reasonable specificity the facts and circumstances justifying the order and listing any firearm or firearms to be seized pursuant to the order.
Again, like I said, they have to provide proof of their claims and it has to be to the satisfaction of the court. You can't just go make an accusation and get an affadavit you have to provide valid proof of the claims being made and be backed up by law enforcement and get it signed through a magistrate. No one's rights are being violated, if a person is mentally ill they do not have rights to own a firearm.
As for Dan, I don’t take a Women’s Studies class, but it’s lovely that you jump to that conclusion about me when you’ve been going on against jumping to conclusions about men for pages, that’s lovely. Last time I checked your country ranked at 15 in gender equality.
http://www.bbc.com/n...siness-11517459
And just because you think we’re “mostly equal” doesn’t mean that there still isn’t room for improvement, if only people would just sit down and listen to issue that directly affect women without trying to turn it back to men or feign skepticism maybe we’d be progressing faster on that equality. We’re in here telling you that we have to deal with gendered harassment and sexual objectification and you’re brushing us off by saying we’re overreacting or it’s not as common as we think, based on what exactly? Your experience with street harassment? Probably not.
This is a societal issue that needs to be addressed, yes sexual assaults happen to men too but you know what? The grand majority of the time it happens at the hands of other men, obviously this is an issue that mostly deals with men and we have to attack the problem at the source, men and concepts of masculinity which I have provided studies on that no one seems to want to address ever ITT. We have tried to voice our concerns and we have been brushed off and scrutinized to the point where women don’t even feel comfortable voicing their opinion because they’re tired of immediately being shut down and being told that they’re overreacting or aren’t making their claims nicely enough for you to take seriously~*~*~*~
You appear that you’re not trying to help when you resort to making ridiculous statements such as calling me a man hater or a misandrist for not agreeing with you. Have I called you a woman hater or a misogynist? No, and yet you say that I have to make my arguments in a nicer tone and then wonder why I lose my patience with you and don’t want to engage with you any further?
Edited by Mishelle, 30 May 2014 - 04:47 AM.
M'lord
Posted 30 May 2014 - 07:01 AM
"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security." - Ben Franklin
no
Posted 30 May 2014 - 07:52 AM
- It is more than just motherhood. It is also the choice of a major to pursue. What you end up doing before getting into politics.
- To the tune of women being paid 96% of what men get paid with all benefits considered for identical positions. Also note that the article brings up men being more likely to negotiate a higher salary, which can easily be a few % points.
- I was not constructing the sentence like that. I was saying that men do not force women to choose a specific major. If women wanted to get into petroleum engineering, I'm sure they would be just as successful as men (Both financially and on-the-job performance). You can't fix an issue of pay differential when you're comparing apples and oranges; if certain fields had more women, the pay differential would be a hell of a lot less than the oft-cited but incorrect number in the 75% range.
- If it is a working mother, then where is the equal leisure time coming from? Are they only working part-time, are you sure they're not "stay-at-home" mothers? Because the 24-hour day is pretty damn limiting. If both parents work an equal amount of time, commuting identical (or nearly identical) distances, and the woman does double the time on house work, then the leisure time WILL NOT be roughly equal.
- No, they're not. They choose to go that route. Women can do whatever their heart desires, whether you want to admit that or not.
It is not men's fault that women can't think independently and instead opt to follow traditional career and life paths.
Affirmative action is a form of discrimination. Funny enough, the Supreme Court recently upheld Michigan's ban on affirmative action. Gotta love legal precedence, huh? By definition, that's not equality. Trumpet that 99% of rapes are committed by men statistic all you want, but rape by females on males is significantly under reported. Finally, we're not talking about standards to hold men and women accountable. You've been discussing punative actions against all men (Teach them) because of the actions of a subset of the group. Regarding standards - Those must be the same across the board: Do not commit sexually assault against anyone. No mention of gender. To do otherwise creates a structural inequality.
What I'm getting at is you're completely incorrect. To get rational, intelligent individuals on board with your ideas, don't be a fucking idiot. Aim for what you truly believe in, which is equality. Don't fucking overshoot for the sake of working down. This isn't a negotiation. Don't fucking cherry-pick stats. Do have well reasoned arguments. Just try and treat men as equals. That's feminism's god damned goal, you said it yourself, is to eliminate inequalities between men and women. Don't establish new inequalities.
You say that all of these inequalities are results of women's choices. But no one exists in a vacuum. Women face social pressure and stigmatization that coerces them into often making certain choices. Men are affected by this gender-informed pressure as well, but men almost always come out in positions of power, privilege, and wealth when compared to women.
I'm going to assume, for the sake of civility, that you misspoke with the "women can't think independently" thing.
Regardless of the legal precedence, I support affirmative action. If it's discrimination, it's positive and have provided women and minorities opportunities they never would have had without it. The fact that the Supreme Court upheld Michigan's ban means nothing to me, like most other things the Supreme Court does. They are more than capable of being wrong. Rape by females on males is significantly underreported, which is yet another reason to support feminism. Men would report rape at levels equal to women if victims weren't so stigmatized, or the status of a being a victm wasn't equated with femininity.
Again, no one is saying that men and women should be held to different standards. Both men and women should be equally expected to not rape. But, whatever the exact figure, not mentioning gender would be ignoring reality. Men commit the majority of rapes. What "structural inequality" does focusing education efforts on a group that is statistically more likely to rape create? If you're not a rapist, don't take it personally...
As it stands, men by default are already given the benefit of the doubt in rape accusations: what was she wearing? What was she drinking? How many times did she say no?
That last paragraph was completely unnecessary, so I won't respond to it...
Resident Know-It-All
Posted 11 June 2014 - 01:24 PM
I found this and thought it would be a helpful addition to the debate. Thoughts?
no
Posted 11 June 2014 - 01:37 PM
I found this and thought it would be a helpful addition to the debate. Thoughts?
I don't think anything produced by the American Enterprise Institute is a helpful addition...
Posted 11 June 2014 - 05:34 PM
Go ahead, vomit. You're adding a lot to the discussion. Men do not dictate that women are not allowed into STEM, finance, or business fields. Because women opt to not pursue those careers, do not point to a pay difference and say "See, inequality!"
There's a whole lot that goes into determining a salary; Ever take a look at a supply-demand curve? It's not men's fault women opt for higher quantity positions. It's simple economics.
Even in similar fields, females on average earn less.
Just try and treat men as equals. That's feminism's god damned goal, you said it yourself, is to eliminate inequalities between men and women.
Except females have been discriminated against for a while now in many countries, some worse than others. The process to equality includes empowering women, whether it's through affirmative action or redefining the social structures set in place currently, e.g. placing the same value on unpaid work, such as child raising, as one does on traditional paid work in the office.
It sounds almost as if several people in this thread are trying to defend males from feminism. The way you refuted each of Bone's statements with the sweeping generalization that women brought it down upon themselves makes you seem rather ill-informed of these issues.
Feminism is not about attacking males. It'll only seem that way if you take everything too personally (which is quite self-centered, actually; I find a majority of the #notallmales response really selfish and egotistical). You absolutely cannot deny that women aren't facing sexual harassment and discrimination by males. After all, it's not the females who are raping other females, to put it plainly. 
The issue at point is we condemn these acts and those who participate in such acts against females, which, sorry to say, happens to include many males.
You should be directing your anger at your male counterparts who engage in these terrible acts, not fighting against the larger feminist movement by saying, "Well, you know, not all males do that so this feminism movement is invalid."
M'lord
Posted 12 June 2014 - 04:52 AM
Bitch Of The Boards
Posted 13 June 2014 - 05:30 AM
To be fair, no-ones provided any academic studies for proof.
Academic studies to prove what exactly?
M'lord
Posted 13 June 2014 - 06:41 AM
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
Community Forum Software by IP.Board 3.4.8
Licensed to: Neocodex
