Gonzalez
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
I think the question here is: How in hell this turned into a serious debate? It was a joke, guys, remember?
I think the question here is: How in hell this turned into a serious debate? It was a joke, guys, remember?
I think the question here is: How in hell this turned into a serious debate? It was a joke, guys, remember?
There are no jokes in feminism. It's the most humourless crowd, period.
Self-deprecating humour at its finest.Daleks have little, if any, individual personality,[11] ostensibly no emotions other than hatred and anger,[9] and a strict command structure in which they are conditioned to obey superiors' orders without question.[91] Dalek speech is characterised by repeated phrases, and by orders given to themselves and to others.[92] Unlike the stereotypical emotionless robots often found in science fiction, Daleks are often angry; author Kim Newman has described the Daleks as behaving "like toddlers in perpetual hissy fits", gloating when in power and flying into rage when thwarted.[93] They tend to be excitable and will repeat the same word or phrase over and over again in heightened emotional states, most famously "Exterminate! Exterminate!"
Ignorance is never good, which is why I don't believe that closing your eyes to innate differences between the sexes, and how they interact with one another, is a good course of action. Trying to fit individuals into the mold of equality when they are not equal only creates problems, namely denial of reality and creation of hostility and conflict.
That's what I think is wrong with feminism - like Marxism, it portrays an "oppression" that doesn't actually exist for the reasons that are posited, and advocates destruction of the traditional, time-tested way of doing things for the sake of the vague ideal of equality, often causing more damage than could be foreseen. In fact, some circles think that feminism was a tool by Communist subverters to undermine the Western family unit and thereby undercut social health, making a weaker target. It's an interesting notion to consider.
Ignorance is never good, which is why I don't believe that closing your eyes to innate differences between the sexes, and how they interact with one another, is a good course of action. Trying to fit individuals into the mold of equality when they are not equal only creates problems, namely denial of reality and creation of hostility and conflict.
Oh, so you're a biotruther. How quaint. Sander already deconstructed your claims extensively.
That's what I think is wrong with feminism - like Marxism, it portrays an "oppression" that doesn't actually exist for the reasons that are posited, and advocates destruction of the traditional, time-tested way of doing things for the sake of the vague ideal of equality, often causing more damage than could be foreseen. In fact, some circles think that feminism was a tool by Communist subverters to undermine the Western family unit and thereby undercut social health, making a weaker target. It's an interesting notion to consider.
"Traditional, time-tested way of doing things" like shoving women in the kitchen, denying them basic political rights, beating children? Or are you referring to time-tested way of doing things from the Bible, including selling your daughters into slavery, forcing women to marry rapists, the whole nine yards?
Ignorance is never good, which is why I don't believe that closing your eyes to innate differences between the sexes, and how they interact with one another, is a good course of action. Trying to fit individuals into the mold of equality when they are not equal only creates problems, namely denial of reality and creation of hostility and conflict.
Oh, so you're a biotruther. How quaint. Sander already deconstructed your claims extensively.
That's what I think is wrong with feminism - like Marxism, it portrays an "oppression" that doesn't actually exist for the reasons that are posited, and advocates destruction of the traditional, time-tested way of doing things for the sake of the vague ideal of equality, often causing more damage than could be foreseen. In fact, some circles think that feminism was a tool by Communist subverters to undermine the Western family unit and thereby undercut social health, making a weaker target. It's an interesting notion to consider.
"Traditional, time-tested way of doing things" like shoving women in the kitchen, denying them basic political rights, beating children? Or are you referring to time-tested way of doing things from the Bible, including selling your daughters into slavery, forcing women to marry rapists, the whole nine yards?
I think the question here is: How in hell this turned into a serious debate? It was a joke, guys, remember?
There are no jokes in feminism. It's the most humourless crowd, period.
Since I am a secular atheist, there is nothing in any holy book that gives me any direction for my worldview, besides the diffusion of the basic morality tales among society. The Torah, which describes the horrible ideas that you mention, was written by a primitive tribe that had a literal god-complex, that hated and feared both sex and women. It is hardly shocking to see such barbarism from people of that region, and less shocking still that their rules regarding sex relations were strict and harsh. I think we are both in agreement that those rules are wrong and should not be an example for anyone in the modern day.
At least we got Sander to reappear, at the cost of turning this into an actual "debate".
Is that thinly-veiled antisemitism I smell? Not that I'm surprised after the Alain Soral crap. It's a miracle he doesn't blame the Jews for feminism.
I'd say you and Sander are the ones being short sighted here, as well as feminists in general - you have the preconceived notion that all "traditional sexual relations" are neccesarily slavery and barbarism, and therefore you cannot even conceive that some women might elect and enjoy those traditional systems over what we have today. That's the problem with feminism, it chases strawmen and causes very real damage as a result.
I like how Tagz skips over all the posts and quotes Vault17 instead because of course his unconscious is like: "I can beat him and look rightious while doing it!"
I'm sure there were. Of course, no one is advocating for forbidding anyone from being a housewife if they want to. The point is that in the past and to a lesser extent in the present, many women don't actually have a real choice in the matter. That's the point.Vault17 said:Now it's my turn to say your choice of words is telling. "Shoving" them in the kitchen? Are you implying that all women at all periods hated being a housewife, did not want to be there, did not want to do their part in making the home? How do you know there were not women out there who loved it, saw it as their calling and purpose, what they were meant for?
See, "SJW's" (apostrophes don't pluralize words in English) have a sense of humor. They just think your humor is shit.Akratus said:There's plenty of feminists with a (relatively) good sense of humour, what you're talking about is SJW's.