Gender equality

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 2, 2012 0:29:22 GMT -5 navycorpsman said:

Ostensibly, men and women ARE equal, before the law and the workplace.

In reality, women are enjoying a real gender INequality that is quite similar to the fabled 'patriarchy' that has existed off and on for 5000 years. At least, in the USA and most western industrialized countries.

Thing is, we SHOULD be equal, and while there will always be a few that disagree, most would say that is morally correct. But when you start making special victims of any one group, or special accommodations at the workplace, everyone suffers, eventually. Want that 5 foot 3 inch firePERSON to lift you out of a burning house? Sorry, no can do. And I got a problem with that.

It's an issue that dates back to the beginning of civilization as we know it. Genders that is, not firemen. Things may not have always worked well, but for the most part, except a few wars, things did work. There have always been injustices, there are injustices and there will always be injustices. We have a choice to make, and that's simple enough... are the genders EVER going to be equal? Perhaps, but it will take a long time. Are the genders the same? No, and anyone that ever tries to tell you differently, is full of it. Will they ever be the same? Might happen, if someone invents an artificial womb, and figures a way to make a baby with DNA from only one person.

Hope I die before I get old.

I say people are equal only in the sense that they die, but people definitely aren't "equal" in other ways. People are just different and better in different ways than others in life. Being different is what makes us human.

Now, it would be nice if the law kept this in mind, but they know this will never exist, because women by nature depend on men almost entirely. So they can pipe all they want on the tv's and media, but this will never happen.


Artificial wombs may be bad from women as it would liberate men from the one thing they need women for, whereas women need plenty from men, expect to see much shaming and bs like you will from the male birth control pill. Yea they're worried that men will "forget" even though men build the bridges, do inventions and surgeries, but they can't take a pill but once every 3 months. They're just worried about losing their "oops" power.

[navycorpsman]

Feb 2, 2012 0:44:14 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

They're just worried about losing their "oops" power.

Yup. My wife and I are equals, but not the same. Some things she does better, and she knows it. Some things I do better, and I know it.

Sad thing is, the real, early goals of feminism were not bad... equality before the law, in the workplace and recognition as full citizens.

All that has been swept away in an attempt to take over thought, society and government.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 2, 2012 15:14:36 GMT -5 navycorpsman said:

Feb 2, 2012 0:44:14 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

They're just worried about losing their "oops" power.

Yup. My wife and I are equals, but not the same. Some things she does better, and she knows it. Some things I do better, and I know it.

Sad thing is, the real, early goals of feminism were not bad... equality before the law, in the workplace and recognition as full citizens.

All that has been swept away in an attempt to take over thought, society and government.

Well that's how it always starts. It always sounds pretty on paper, until it actually gets put into action. I don't think "equality" is just there, it has to be earned. If people want equal status or respect, they have to *earn* it, not just expect it because they exist.

[navycorpsman]

Well, part of the problem is the unstated goals of the current wave of feminists. They feel that women are unequal, staying at home and raising the kids, taking care of the house, and so on. When I was a kid, housewife was a respected job, albeit unpaid from a formal wage view. Thing is, if they want equal work, they have to agree to the conditions of employment. No business owner wants to deal with the Mommy work reduction, and that's one of the major reasons I sold my company. I got sick of giving all these concessions to women who weren't working worth a damn, because their natural emotions and hormones told them that they had to be with their kids, but they wanted to be 'super working Mom'. Men recognized that was an impossibility from the beginning, no man can be a great worker AND raise two or three kids as primary parent... life just does not work that way very well. Yet these feminists are positive that they can, and meanwhile, we get articles every month in magazines talking about how career women are leaving their jobs to raise the kids, or women that take the Mommy track, costing employers more money than the women bring into the company.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 3, 2012 13:48:18 GMT -5 navycorpsman said:

Well, part of the problem is the unstated goals of the current wave of feminists. They feel that women are unequal, staying at home and raising the kids, taking care of the house, and so on. When I was a kid, housewife was a respected job, albeit unpaid from a formal wage view. Thing is, if they want equal work, they have to agree to the conditions of employment. No business owner wants to deal with the Mommy work reduction, and that's one of the major reasons I sold my company. I got sick of giving all these concessions to women who weren't working worth a damn, because their natural emotions and hormones told them that they had to be with their kids, but they wanted to be 'super working Mom'. Men recognized that was an impossibility from the beginning, no man can be a great worker AND raise two or three kids as primary parent... life just does not work that way very well. Yet these feminists are positive that they can, and meanwhile, we get articles every month in magazines talking about how career women are leaving their jobs to raise the kids, or women that take the Mommy track, costing employers more money than the women bring into the company.

Wanting equal work means contributing equally, not leaving when you want and coming in when you want and getting benefits for the same pay as the man.

The whole nonsense with the kids is this. Women have been paid for what they *want* to do anyways. It's just like men will have sex no matter what, men are hardwired to do so like women are hardwired to have kids. Men could have let them raise their kids on their own in the wilderness like they did in the beginning of time.

Men going out and getting killed and working themselves into an early grave so you can sit at home and raise *your* kids is no slavery. I would be fine if women did that, most don't want to do anything now but leech.

That being said yea. These "super mommies" are just taking away jobs that men need and could do better to provide for a family. Not only that, but these are mostly useless, non productive pencil pushing jobs, or government jobs, but that's another discussion.

[JACK-2]

No.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

I don't think anybody is "equal" but I think people should have the same treatment under the law and no "special perks".

[JACK-2]

"Equality under the law" Yes, I agree.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 5, 2014 6:15:39 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

"Equality under the law" Yes, I agree.

Well in our country some are more equal than others.

[JACK-2]

Well, our country is garbage as always. But, men and Women aren't equal. Even certain races have things like insurance rates differences. That's life.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 5, 2014 15:17:51 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

Well, our country is garbage as always. But, men and Women aren't equal. Even certain races have things like insurance rates differences. That's life.

Nobody is equal period, but it is true that there are many distinct differences between men and women.

Of course women get everything in their favor. If insurance is cheaper for men, well that's not fair. But when women benefit more from something it's ok.

[JACK-2]

Not gonna lie. You're slowly winning me over to the non-egalitarian world view. Was thinking about it the other day: If imago dei makes man greater than animal, then why not some men over others? Is a self made man the same as some liberal bum? Is the hardworker on top the same as the loser on the bottom?

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 5, 2014 21:20:20 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

Not gonna lie. You're slowly winning me over to the non-egalitarian world view. Was thinking about it the other day: If imago dei makes man greater than animal, then why not some men over others? Is a self made man the same as some liberal bum? Is the hardworker on top the same as the loser on the bottom?

Exactly. The rest is just feel good nonsense. Men triumphed over animals for various reasons. I mean animals still live the same as they have for thousands of years without really much advancement. Humans have pushed themselves to the top. People are not "equal" and we all know that everyone is different. Even amongst animals you have the strongest, smartest, most appealing, and fastest.

Humans are no different. The difference is people are told to believe that "everyone is equal" when it isn't true because it's based off of feel good beliefs and that something must "equal out". This is how people rationalize things by saying "well poor people are happy and rich people are all bitter." When not even close to the truth.

You'll have some reach the very very best, and most will sit at the mediocre level and some will be outright losers and never do much of anything. Those are just life facts and I think if people were honest with themselves they would want to do more vs blaming others.

[JACK-2]

Ambitious and confident people make it on top. Frugal and dependent people on the bottom.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 5, 2014 23:00:10 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

Ambitious and confident people make it on top. Frugal and dependent people on the bottom.

And people are attracted to the top. Water seeks it's own level. Men seek the women with the best genes to reproduce with. Women seek the men with the best genes as well. Height, build, attractiveness, facial symmetry, wealth, etc. I'd be curious on how a "free" society would work in terms of reproductive behavior with economics. Maybe have a society where the best and brightest are attracted to and losers are not. Essentially it would be a free society.

[JACK-2]

Well, the best will always make it to the top outside societies where power is kept secure through nepotism for example. In a meritocracy, the best will rise or they'll go somewhere to be prosperous. For a long time the best was the west. But, the non-west is slowly learning and we're slowly giving up.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Feb 6, 2014 6:33:20 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

Well, the best will always make it to the top outside societies where power is kept secure through nepotism for example. In a meritocracy, the best will rise or they'll go somewhere to be prosperous. For a long time the best was the west. But, the non-west is slowly learning and we're slowly giving up.

Well it just goes to show that the very small percentage of those who make it towards the top are responsible for the hefty percentage of advancements and achievements that drive civilization. Most are along for the ride and many just outright leech. Furthermore it's better for the top to make it to the top through merit than to make it in a corrupt society where it's done by force and theft. It's worse for everyone.