Gender Equality

[pakicetus 312]

 

 

Are those factors solely responsible for the behavior?

 

Considering how the behavior persists when the factors are removed, nope. 

 

 

 

I am not sure why but women are not inferior to men in any way.

 

They're, on average, inferior in terms of upper-body strength. Inferior as people? Nah.

 

 

 

Well, I thought Russians were considered a unique group. Not Europeans.

 

They're just Eastern Europeans. Nothing particularly odd (unlike, say, the Lapps or the Basque). 

 

 

That's when people should understand that there is no universal standard and that individuals can be anything they want to be.

 

Nobody here is saying there are universal standards. 

[Commissar Alexer 763]

What kind of man do women find very attractive?

[HaroldGenhi 82]

They are genetic. The Y chromosome doesn't carry as much information as the X. With less information there are less ways to correct for errors in the code. That's why men are more susceptible to genetic disorders.

Umm, no, that is not the reason for why men are more susceptible to genetic disorders. First off, it would only be X-linked genetic disorders which females can get as well. Secondly, the reason has nothing to do with Y carrying less information than X chromosomes. The reason that males are more susceptible to X-linked genetic disorders is because if your X-chromosome screws up there is no copy of what it should be, a normal code we shall say. Women have two X-chromosomes, so if one screws up, the other which hasn't screwed up will maintain the normal code averting the disorder (or lessening it). Women still get these disorders, but it is never as severe or lethal.

 

Say if I give a person a picture of a dog and a copy of that picture. Then I give another person the same picture of the dog, but instead of a copy, I give him a picture of a cat. Now, I remove the original picture of the dog from both people and give them a slightly altered version of the picture of the dog and I tell them to find the difference. Who will have an easier time finding the difference? The person with basically a reference copy of the picture of the dog or the person with the picture of the cat?

[Aidan OGain 112]

What kind of man do women find very attractive?

Every one's different. So if you're genuine, there's one who'll find what you're about attractive. Likely more than one. Genuine people are a rarity.

Umm, no, that is not the reason for why men are more susceptible to genetic disorders. First off, it would only be X-linked genetic disorders which females can get as well. Secondly, the reason has nothing to do with Y carrying less information than X chromosomes. The reason that males are more susceptible to X-linked genetic disorders is because if your X-chromosome screws up there is no copy of what it should be, a normal code we shall say. Women have two X-chromosomes, so if one screws up, the other which hasn't screwed up will maintain the normal code averting the disorder (or lessening it). Women still get these disorders, but it is never as severe or lethal.

 

Say if I give a person a picture of a dog and a copy of that picture. Then I give another person the same picture of the dog, but instead of a copy, I give him a picture of a cat. Now, I remove the original picture of the dog from both people and give them a slightly altered version of the picture of the dog and I tell them to find the difference. Who will have an easier time finding the difference? The person with basically a reference copy of the picture of the dog or the person with the picture of the cat?

Fair enough. I stand corrected. Thanks for the clarification.

 

They're overwhelmingly European, and as such can be (and are) lumped into them. It's not like most Europeans are pure anyhow.

 

 

 

Taxonomic, anthropological, genetic, etc. 

 

Races don't have to be pure for them to exist. The existence of alloys does not mean metals do not exist.

But those "pure metals" can't be refined out of the human alloy. Racial purity has no meaning, so why even bother with an irrelevant and inaccurate labeling system? Dividing up the human race in this way serves no purpose.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Aidan OGain

[pakicetus 312]

 

 

Racial purity has no meaning,

 

Never contested that. 

 

 

 

so why even bother with an irrelevant and inaccurate labeling system?

 

Race isn't necessarily inaccurate. It's just a taxonomic classification of human strains (something which is of interest to many people, myself included).

 

Wether it's irrelevant depends on the situation, really.

[Aidan OGain 112]

Never contested that. 

 

 

 

Race isn't necessarily inaccurate. It's just a taxonomic classification of human strains (something which is of interest to many people, myself included).

 

Wether it's irrelevant depends on the situation, really.

I worry because of what this classification system has been used for in the past. It hasn't been... savory. Is there any purpose to it besides its own existence? Culture is different. That is something that should be valued. But anyone can learn and participate in any culture. Race seems too tribal to me.

[pakicetus 312]

I worry because of what this classification system has been used for in the past

 

Historical racial classifications are outdated and inaccurate. Almost nobody takes them seriously anymore.

 

You shouldn't be concerned with wether racial classification is taxonomically/genetically useful or not. Racial strife happens regardless of it.

 

Is there any purpose to it besides its own existence?

 

I dunno. Does the classification of birds have any relevance beyond its own existence?

Edited April 16, 2015 by pakicetus

[Aidan OGain 112]

Do we subdivide species into races? We certainly don't call them that. Plants are called "varietals", for example. Animals, if they're domesticated and engineered through artificial selection are called "breeds". I feel uneasy placing people into "Breeds".

 

Varietals sounds nice, also hybridization among varietals causes more robust plants. That I guess I approve of. Inbreeding should be avoided.

 

If race is a scientifically valid concept, why are not all living things divided by race? With other living things, scientifically speeking, we stop at the species level. Humanity is one species. Birds are a whole class of species.

[Commissar Alexer 763]

 

 

Every one's different. So if you're genuine, there's one who'll find what you're about attractive. Likely more than one. Genuine people are a rarity.

 

That is nearly always the standard answer: Everyone's different.

 

When you go out, what kind of guys do you see young women with?

 

A tip: It's not the nice ones.

[HaroldGenhi 82]

Do we subdivide species into races? We certainly don't call them that. Plants are called "varietals", for example. Animals, if they're domesticated and engineered through artificial selection are called "breeds". I feel uneasy placing people into "Breeds".

 

Varietals sounds nice, also hybridization among varietals causes more robust plants. That I guess I approve of. Inbreeding should be avoided.

 

If race is a scientifically valid concept, why are not all living things divided by race? With other living things, scientifically speeking, we stop at the species level. Humanity is one species. Birds are a whole class of species.

I would expect this to be because breeds/varieties/whatever you want to call it can be viewed very much as a subsection of species for when there is a large divergence of characteristics in a given species. All dogs, along with wolves are of the same genus and species, but they are all different breeds. Cats are treated the same way. But an important distinction between breed and species has to established. Species is the scientific term used by biologists in the classification of animals. Breed, on the other hand, is from taxonomy and is not actually scientific in terms of the field of biology. In fact, biologists try to distance themselves from the term Breed as it is unscientific. This is why we only see breeds in domesticated animals since it is more from animal husbandry than biology.

 

So strictly speaking, race, being comparable to a breed, is an unscientific identifier in terms of biology generally speaking, but it is still useful when used to help identify diseases or ailments that are more prevalent among those specific races (EX: Sickle Cell and African American).

 

Race can also be used as a qualifier of your culture, broadly speaking. People have found pride in being Asian, African American, or Latino or a mix thereof. Has race been used negatively? Yes. Is racism still a problem? Yes. But there are still people out there who have gained a strong sense of self because of their race. It can be used by others to tear you down or make stereotypes about you, or it can be used by the individual to bolster their cultural and racial identities.

 

Relating this back to gender, should we just eliminate the qualifiers male and female to stop sexism? We are all one species with our own love interests, why should gender exist? It is mostly for the same reasons why race will exist. You find pride in your race, you find pride in your gender, just as you can feel ashamed of it or it used by others to demean you. We are creatures that need to find patterns and to classify our surroundings so we can make sense of them. I feel that race and gender are necessary to maintain a general social order to us in this stage humanity's existence. 

[Aidan OGain 112]

That is nearly always the standard answer: Everyone's different.

 

When you go out, what kind of guys do you see young women with?

 

A tip: It's not the nice ones.

Eh, maybe. I used to think that. It's kind of natural to assume a guy who is with a girl I like is an a-hole. But I get your point. You're talking about "alpha male" behavior. I agree that it can be attractive, but it's not attractive to every woman. And if you're not genuinely "alpha", women don't like you to pretend. Women have brains adapted to spot pretenders. Certain traits make for good investment in the hazard of reproduction. Some of that is being "alpha", some of that is being able to contribute to her children in time and resources. A large part of that is being reliably helpful. Pretending is basically the opposite of that. Being yourself is a journey of discovery. You have to work hard to discover who you are and to refine that. That part of "being yourself" is left unexplained. But it's essential.

 

As dweeby as I am, I'm off the market. And I didn't need to act alpha to do it. But I will say without getting into the story of it that I'm married because I was true to myself.

I would expect this to be because breeds/varieties/whatever you want to call it can be viewed very much as a subsection of species for when there is a large divergence of characteristics in a given species. All dogs, along with wolves are of the same genus and species, but they are all different breeds. Cats are treated the same way. But an important distinction between breed and species has to established. Species is the scientific term used by biologists in the classification of animals. Breed, on the other hand, is from taxonomy and is not actually scientific in terms of the field of biology. In fact, biologists try to distance themselves from the term Breed as it is unscientific. This is why we only see breeds in domesticated animals since it is more from animal husbandry than biology.

 

So strictly speaking, race, being comparable to a breed, is an unscientific identifier in terms of biology generally speaking, but it is still useful when used to help identify diseases or ailments that are more prevalent among those specific races (EX: Sickle Cell and African American).

 

Race can also be used as a qualifier of your culture, broadly speaking. People have found pride in being Asian, African American, or Latino or a mix thereof. Has race been used negatively? Yes. Is racism still a problem? Yes. But there are still people out there who have gained a strong sense of self because of their race. It can be used by others to tear you down or make stereotypes about you, or it can be used by the individual to bolster their cultural and racial identities.

 

Relating this back to gender, should we just eliminate the qualifiers male and female to stop sexism? We are all one species with our own love interests, why should gender exist? It is mostly for the same reasons why race will exist. You find pride in your race, you find pride in your gender, just as you can feel ashamed of it or it used by others to demean you. We are creatures that need to find patterns and to classify our surroundings so we can make sense of them. I feel that race and gender are necessary to maintain a general social order to us in this stage humanity's existence.

 

Good point. I might argue that the best parts of race and gender are the non-inheritable cultural aspects. With gender there is more definite biological hard-wiring going on, true. And with race, it seems to be a part of honoring your parents and ancestors. If we can all mind our own ancestors and let each other express our genders free of harassment, then sure. But large collective bodies ought to be careful how they treat such group identifiers. In the 20th c, it was used by the state to terrible effect. And there's a long history before then of unjust treatment.

[Commissar Alexer 763]

Eh, maybe. I used to think that. It's kind of natural to assume a guy who is with a girl I like is an a-hole. But I get your point. You're talking about "alpha male" behavior. I agree that it can be attractive, but it's not attractive to every woman. And if you're not genuinely "alpha", women don't like you to pretend. Women have brains adapted to spot pretenders. Certain traits make for good investment in the hazard of reproduction. Some of that is being "alpha", some of that is being able to contribute to her children in time and resources. A large part of that is being reliably helpful. Pretending is basically the opposite of that. Being yourself is a journey of discovery. You have to work hard to discover who you are and to refine that. That part of "being yourself" is left unexplained. But it's essential.

 

As dweeby as I am, I'm off the market. And I didn't need to act alpha to do it. But I will say without getting into the story of it that I'm married because I was true to myself.

 

Good point. I might argue that the best parts of race and gender are the non-inheritable cultural aspects. With gender there is more definite biological hard-wiring going on, true. And with race, it seems to be a part of honoring your parents and ancestors. If we can all mind our own ancestors and let each other express our genders free of harassment, then sure. But large collective bodies ought to be careful how they treat such group identifiers. In the 20th c, it was used by the state to terrible effect. And there's a long history before then of unjust treatment.

 

Dominant and aggressive men have usually better genes which results in a healthier offspring.

But they are shitty fathers and tend to leave the woman after sex. Which makes sense, why should someone with good genes not 'spread his seed' out?

 

But what about the woman and her fatherless child? Simple: That's where the nice guys come in. Men with less testorsterone make usually better fathers. That's why women choose them for long-term relationships. They literally exist to provide for the offspring of the alpha male.

 

 

Now you may say that you wife would never do that but here's the funny thing: When men were confronted that their children were not their own they reacted mostly with disbelieve. Women rely on that their husbands and boyfriends don't believe they would cheat on them.

 

 

And yet despite our culture (which currently encourages adultery) it's still a thing.

[pakicetus 312]

Do we subdivide species into races?

 

Yeah, although alternatively they're sometimes called "strains". Basically, one step under subspecies.

 

If race is a scientifically valid concept, why are not all living things divided by race?

 

Many organisms tend to either not have strains/races in the first place, due to lack of population distinction, or have them treated as "subspecies".

 

Here's an article that goes a it more in-depth.

 

That said, we're going a bit off topic, so perhaps we should continue this via PM.

Edited April 16, 2015 by pakicetus

[Aidan OGain 112]

Dominant and aggressive men have usually better genes which results in a healthier offspring.

But they are shitty fathers and tend to leave the woman after sex. Which makes sense, why should someone with good genes not 'spread his seed' out?

 

But what about the woman and her fatherless child? Simple: That's where the nice guys come in. Men with less testorsterone make usually better fathers. That's why women choose them for long-term relationships. They literally exist to provide for the offspring of the alpha male.

 

 

Now you may say that you wife would never do that but here's the funny thing: When men were confronted that their children were not their own they reacted mostly with disbelieve. Women rely on that their husbands and boyfriends don't believe they would cheat on them.

 

 

And yet despite our culture (which currently encourages adultery) it's still a thing.

I've heard that before. there are lots of models for relationship patterns. And that may be one strategy, but there are others.

 

My grandfather cheated on my grandmother and had a child. People tell my mother that there is a woman in town who is just like her. Apparently my grandfather one day decided to contact his other child. She told him he wasn't her father. The father who raised her, who taught her everything she knows, who loves her and supports her is her father. She told him he was just a donor of genetic material.

 

Granted, that was very much in character for how my mother would have reacted.

 

But I don't buy into that worldview simply because I am not that guy. It requires me to distrust women and live in competition with everyone around me. I don't like to compete like that. That worldview costs too much of my soul to adopt. But everyone's got their thing. Luckily, humanity is diverse. There's something for everyone.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Aidan OGain

[darkwingmare 1,296]

I wouldn't call myself a feminist, 'cause I'm not that much into the "thing" they do, protesting and stuff. However, I'll ALWAYS support equality the way feminists do, 'cause that's what the world needs. Fair fighters for equality in the world.

 

Now, people seem to have misunderstood feminism to a quite large extent.. See, feminists don't work to make it better for only women, they fight for equality. Hear me now, equality and equality only.

 

People who understand what the feminism started up for and respect their ways of sending the message equality out to society, are the real feminists. They love and tolerate men, they know men have a lot of problems in society to take care of as well, they're aware of the grim stereotypes for men and therefore they also fight for these things to get better as well. It's called feminism, NOT because they hate men and only want to help the female gender all around but because women are in need of more help in society as of now.

 

Women are discriminated everywhere, anytime, by basically everyone both at home and especially on the streets and men have it better because of what they are.. Stronger and more dominantly built. Now we're speaking of jobs, rape, abuse, murder and not to speak of that they're also very often objectified as sex objects, naked girls everywhere in media, we can't show our tits in public for some reason('cause they're bigger or what? I call that bullsh*t).

 

I believe this will change with time, hopefully, we're all fighting for it to happen. We know that men also get abused, raped and murdered and it's definitely never more okay, as well as they have the stereotypes of "don't cry or you'll get beat up", "don't wear pink or you're gay", "don't back off from a fight or you're a wuss" and many more, but let's face the facts here... Men have had control and taken charge through the history and that's why we need to fight to make the females to catch up to men in many points. We're fighting for that matter to get better to begin with, because it's one huge step towards EQUALITY, which is what they're aiming for in the end.

 

At the same time, they of course love and tolerate all the men and understand what they're going through as well, because they also have issues and problems that need to be taken cared of and that's fast. We just need to start somewhere, and that somewhere is the less fortunate in most countries, meaning women.

 

I hope I didn't sound too rude, I was just trying to explain what the feminists actually do, despite all the bad sides showing of it on the internet and in protests outdoors. There are many "feminists" who hate men that doesn't deserve the title they're claiming to have at all. Men haters are men haters, not feminists.

 

Love Equality. Understand the real point of Feminism. Let's all fight to get to live in a better society.

Edited April 16, 2015 by darkwingmare

[Side Bird 565]

You know, America is always talking about this and doing stuff, but they are actually quite.. Low in gender equality, and racial equality.

Everypony should be equal in my opinion, with wages and stuff.

[HaroldGenhi 82]

You know, America is always talking about this and doing stuff, but they are actually quite.. Low in gender equality, and racial equality.

Everypony should be equal in my opinion, with wages and stuff.

The wages are pretty close to equal right now with only a few businesses today having a gender pay gap, that gap being only about $0.05, but it is there. Next to all other businesses pay men and women equally. If we compare ourselves to the world we have about a pretty average to above average rate of gender equality and racial equality with Sweden being probably the most radicalized in one direction for equality for all while we have certain countries in the Middle East radicalized for the low gender and racial equality. I will also repeat myself from before, men and women of the same age and education level that are single and childless working the same job will have a gender pay gap, in benefit to the woman. Women will be paid 8% more than men during this time for doing the same work.

 

So why does this change? It tends to change because the woman will decrease her work hours so she can take care of the kid. As mentioned previously, women are more inclined to take on such a role because their brain chemistry fosters that role more so than the man's brain. Fewer hours means less pay. Equally, women get maternity leave in some businesses and I wonder if these female exclusive benefits are factored in to the wage gap calculation. Another factor is that the majority of women will go into social service jobs like teachers, psychologists, and nurses. These professions are not paid the greatest and most of those positions do not have overtime benefits which also slants the scale as I have previously stated. The study that said there is this almost quarter to a dollar wage gap is a travesty of compiling statistics, yet it floors me how much people buy it. It is comparing apples to oranges, a base average of male and female wages and normalizing it to a dollar. That is bad statistics and an exceptionally clunky conclusion.

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't call myself a feminist, 'cause I'm not that much into the "thing" they do, protesting and stuff. However, I'll ALWAYS support equality the way feminists do, 'cause that's what the world needs. Fair fighters for equality in the world.

 

Now, people seem to have misunderstood feminism to a quite large extent.. See, feminists don't work to make it better for only women, they fight for equality. Hear me now, equality and equality only.

 

People who understand what the feminism started up for and respect their ways of sending the message equality out to society, are the real feminists. They love and tolerate men, they know men have a lot of problems in society to take care of as well, they're aware of the grim stereotypes for men and therefore they also fight for these things to get better as well. It's called feminism, NOT because they hate men and only want to help the female gender all around but because women are in need of more help in society as of now.

 

Women are discriminated everywhere, anytime, by basically everyone both at home and especially on the streets and men have it better because of what they are.. Stronger and more dominantly built. Now we're speaking of jobs, rape, abuse, murder and not to speak of that they're also very often objectified as sex objects, naked girls everywhere in media, we can't show our tits in public for some reason('cause they're bigger or what? I call that bullsh*t).

 

I believe this will change with time, hopefully, we're all fighting for it to happen. We know that men also get abused, raped and murdered and it's definitely never more okay, as well as they have the stereotypes of "don't cry or you'll get beat up", "don't wear pink or you're gay", "don't back off from a fight or you're a wuss" and many more, but let's face the facts here... Men have had control and taken charge through the history and that's why we need to fight to make the females to catch up to men in many points. We're fighting for that matter to get better to begin with, because it's one huge step towards EQUALITY, which is what they're aiming for in the end.

 

At the same time, they of course love and tolerate all the men and understand what they're going through as well, because they also have issues and problems that need to be taken cared of and that's fast. We just need to start somewhere, and that somewhere is the less fortunate in most countries, meaning women.

 

I hope I didn't sound too rude, I was just trying to explain what the feminists actually do, despite all the bad sides showing of it on the internet and in protests outdoors. There are many "feminists" who hate men that doesn't deserve the title they're claiming to have at all. Men haters are men haters, not feminists.

 

Love Equality. Understand the real point of Feminism. Let's all fight to get to live in a better society.

I'm an egalitarian. It is a title that encompasses general equality for all people. The term feminism was created when there was a big discrepancy between men and women. It was made at the time for women, hence the name being more descriptive and relatable to women rather than being all encompassing. It was a position that modified itself to then begin fighting for equality for all, but it very much started as just fighting for women's equality to men.

 

Equally, feminism has been divided into waves with men hating feminists making up the third wave and the second wave being the ones that want gender fairness. We can pull a no true scotsman fallacy to clean the ranks of feminists to make it seem more pure and noble, but that is only sweeping the dust under the rug. We just have to admit that groups of people with ideologies have a spectrum of belief that tend to be in a bell curve. They are still feminists, but they are radical in some regard. Instead of ignoring their existence by just stating that they are not 'real feminists' it would just be better to call them radical feminists or even bad feminists.

 

As of right now there is more women employment then male employment. Right now there is more women in college than men in college. There are more women succeeding through high school than men. There are more rape help centers for women. There are more scholarships tailored to women than men. More men die at their workplace than women. Men commit more suicide than women. Women will make 8% more than men early in life, but will only in only some companies make 5% less (without factoring in the benefits). If we include prison statistics, men are raped more than women, normally by other men, but nothing is done about it. Woman cries rape and she is instantly believes and the man has to prove his innocence. Man cries rape and he is laughed at. When a man and woman get a divorce, who gets the kids? Who has to make child payments, who loses half of their property? It would be even fair to say that men are just as sexualized as women through toys and the media.

 

So I have to ask, how much more help do women need before they can stand on their own?

[Antidaeophobia 299]

Feminism itself already IS the fight for gender equality - and the vast majority of feminists follow that idea. Hiwever there are feminists who believe that women are better than men and refuse to see how that's being sexist because "only men can be sexist". I believe they're referred to as Social Justice Warriors on the net, or "feminazis" in a more light-heated sense. As for women not being drafted - I say go ahead and change it so that gender doesn't matter. However, the last time that was fully in effect was WW2, when men were dominant. I imagine it hasn't been revised as no war has been large enough to merit it. But anyway let's not just but the blame on "feminists" but rather extremists - just like not all muslims are terrorists and not all white people are racist.

Most people that sight the whole 'I believe in equality, thats why I don't say I'm a feminist' and etc, usually don't know much about feminism.

Feminist can be of any age, any gender identity, any sexuality, and any woman that believes she is superior to a man, or that men are the woes of the world, are NOT feminist, they are matriarchist. I do however have an issue with social justice warriors, which I'm sure is what many of you are actually referring but mix it up with feminism. 

Women want to be equal in all things, including in war. Many women that are in the military now are fighting also to be treated as equals so that they to can be stationed on the front lines, and also to eliminate sexual violence in the ranks as well. 

I'm a proud feminist, and the daughter and granddaughter of feminists. Also, my best male friends are all proud feminists.

Also, female feminist want men to be treated equal, that's the point of destroying the patriarchy, is so that men also aren't shamed for going out of a 'gender norm'. The idea that men are aggressive, rape machines that are incompetent in the home and with child care, is a result of the patriarchy- not feminism. 

 

Edited April 17, 2015 by Antidaeophobia

[Commissar Alexer 763]

I've heard that before. there are lots of models for relationship patterns. And that may be one strategy, but there are others.

 

My grandfather cheated on my grandmother and had a child. People tell my mother that there is a woman in town who is just like her. Apparently my grandfather one day decided to contact his other child. She told him he wasn't her father. The father who raised her, who taught her everything she knows, who loves her and supports her is her father. She told him he was just a donor of genetic material.

 

Granted, that was very much in character for how my mother would have reacted.

 

But I don't buy into that worldview simply because I am not that guy. It requires me to distrust women and live in competition with everyone around me. I don't like to compete like that. That worldview costs too much of my soul to adopt. But everyone's got their thing. Luckily, humanity is diverse. There's something for everyone.

 

And the circle continues....

 

 

 

I wouldn't call myself a feminist, 'cause I'm not that much into the "thing" they do, protesting and stuff. However, I'll ALWAYS support equality the way feminists do, 'cause that's what the world needs. Fair fighters for equality in the world.

 

Now, people seem to have misunderstood feminism to a quite large extent.. See, feminists don't work to make it better for only women, they fight for equality. Hear me now, equality and equality only.

 

People who understand what the feminism started up for and respect their ways of sending the message equality out to society, are the real feminists. They love and tolerate men, they know men have a lot of problems in society to take care of as well, they're aware of the grim stereotypes for men and therefore they also fight for these things to get better as well. It's called feminism, NOT because they hate men and only want to help the female gender all around but because women are in need of more help in society as of now.

 

Women are discriminated everywhere, anytime, by basically everyone both at home and especially on the streets and men have it better because of what they are.. Stronger and more dominantly built. Now we're speaking of jobs, rape, abuse, murder and not to speak of that they're also very often objectified as sex objects, naked girls everywhere in media, we can't show our tits in public for some reason('cause they're bigger or what? I call that bullsh*t).

 

I believe this will change with time, hopefully, we're all fighting for it to happen. We know that men also get abused, raped and murdered and it's definitely never more okay, as well as they have the stereotypes of "don't cry or you'll get beat up", "don't wear pink or you're gay", "don't back off from a fight or you're a wuss" and many more, but let's face the facts here... Men have had control and taken charge through the history and that's why we need to fight to make the females to catch up to men in many points. We're fighting for that matter to get better to begin with, because it's one huge step towards EQUALITY, which is what they're aiming for in the end.

 

At the same time, they of course love and tolerate all the men and understand what they're going through as well, because they also have issues and problems that need to be taken cared of and that's fast. We just need to start somewhere, and that somewhere is the less fortunate in most countries, meaning women.

 

I hope I didn't sound too rude, I was just trying to explain what the feminists actually do, despite all the bad sides showing of it on the internet and in protests outdoors. There are many "feminists" who hate men that doesn't deserve the title they're claiming to have at all. Men haters are men haters, not feminists.

 

Love Equality. Understand the real point of Feminism. Let's all fight to get to live in a better society.

 

You can repeat as often as you much but it doesn't change the fact that your movement is hypocritical to the extreme.

I asked your bunch several times what femenism has done for men and each time either the question was avoided or ignored or the post was deleted.

[Side Bird 565]

The wages are pretty close to equal right now with only a few businesses today having a gender pay gap, that gap being only about $0.05, but it is there. Next to all other businesses pay men and women equally. If we compare ourselves to the world we have about a pretty average to above average rate of gender equality and racial equality with Sweden being probably the most radicalized in one direction for equality for all while we have certain countries in the Middle East radicalized for the low gender and racial equality. I will also repeat myself from before, men and women of the same age and education level that are single and childless working the same job will have a gender pay gap, in benefit to the woman. Women will be paid 8% more than men during this time for doing the same work.

 

So why does this change? It tends to change because the woman will decrease her work hours so she can take care of the kid. As mentioned previously, women are more inclined to take on such a role because their brain chemistry fosters that role more so than the man's brain. Fewer hours means less pay. Equally, women get maternity leave in some businesses and I wonder if these female exclusive benefits are factored in to the wage gap calculation. Another factor is that the majority of women will go into social service jobs like teachers, psychologists, and nurses. These professions are not paid the greatest and most of those positions do not have overtime benefits which also slants the scale as I have previously stated. The study that said there is this almost quarter to a dollar wage gap is a travesty of compiling statistics, yet it floors me how much people buy it. It is comparing apples to oranges, a base average of male and female wages and normalizing it to a dollar. That is bad statistics and an exceptionally clunky conclusion.

 

 

 

I'm an egalitarian. It is a title that encompasses general equality for all people. The term feminism was created when there was a big discrepancy between men and women. It was made at the time for women, hence the name being more descriptive and relatable to women rather than being all encompassing. It was a position that modified itself to then begin fighting for equality for all, but it very much started as just fighting for women's equality to men.

 

Equally, feminism has been divided into waves with men hating feminists making up the third wave and the second wave being the ones that want gender fairness. We can pull a no true scotsman fallacy to clean the ranks of feminists to make it seem more pure and noble, but that is only sweeping the dust under the rug. We just have to admit that groups of people with ideologies have a spectrum of belief that tend to be in a bell curve. They are still feminists, but they are radical in some regard. Instead of ignoring their existence by just stating that they are not 'real feminists' it would just be better to call them radical feminists or even bad feminists.

 

As of right now there is more women employment then male employment. Right now there is more women in college than men in college. There are more women succeeding through high school than men. There are more rape help centers for women. There are more scholarships tailored to women than men. More men die at their workplace than women. Men commit more suicide than women. Women will make 8% more than men early in life, but will only in only some companies make 5% less (without factoring in the benefits). If we include prison statistics, men are raped more than women, normally by other men, but nothing is done about it. Woman cries rape and she is instantly believes and the man has to prove his innocence. Man cries rape and he is laughed at. When a man and woman get a divorce, who gets the kids? Who has to make child payments, who loses half of their property? It would be even fair to say that men are just as sexualized as women through toys and the media.

 

So I have to ask, how much more help do women need before they can stand on their own?

 

 

To what you said about equal wages, doesn't a woman earn 86 cents to a mans dollar? That's a big gap right there. The U.S needs to accept CEDAW, in my opinion, along with given women paid leave with newborns.

U.S.A can really make a-lot of changes with rights, though I'm not saying it's BAD. 

I'm just saying we can improve a lot more, in America. Not to mention countries all over the world. It's scary seeing how some countries treat women. 

 

 

#Hilaryforpresident

[Aidan OGain 112]

And the circle continues....

 

 

 

 

 

You can repeat as often as you much but it doesn't change the fact that your movement is hypocritical to the extreme.

I asked your bunch several times what femenism has done for men and each time either the question was avoided or ignored or the post was deleted.

You can judge me all you want, man. It's irrelevant to my life.

 

Statistics are like classical physics. The life of a person is like quantum physics. What applies in classical physics does not apply on the quantum scale. What appears to apply to broad populations does not apply to an individual's experience. Point is you don't know me well enough to make that call.

 

As for feminism, it's fantastic for guys like me. Guys who like MLP. Guys who believe in kindness teamwork and cooperation. If you're doing well with the classic alpha scene, that's good for you. But what's good for you comes at a cost to the vast majority of non-alpha males along with women in general. It's tyrannical to expect 90% of society to hold up so few. You should be allowed to be who you are, but that doesn't mean others can't be who they are too. If that's really who you are and what you believe in than I have every right to rebel against you, King George III. But I don't believe that's who you really are. You're on an MLP chat board, after all. (Apologies if that's a bit blunt of me, but since you've been so blunt with me then I figure you can take it without offense)

[HaroldGenhi 82]

To what you said about equal wages, doesn't a woman earn 86 cents to a mans dollar? That's a big gap right there.

That gap doesn't exist. If you read my post I explained that the wage gap is dependent on age, relationship status, and if you have kids as women would make 8 cents more per male dollar earned in the early years while only in a select few companies women will be paid 5 cents less. There is basically no gap.

 

Why is this the case? Look no further than the Equal Pay Act of 1963 which guarantees by federal law that your wages will not be influenced (increased or decreased) because of your gender. This act is still in effect today.

 

And if we stop comparing all of men's collective wages to all of women's collective wages and we only compare two individuals in the same job working the same hours with the same experience there is no wage gap. It's just when you take the collective average of all jobs and positions does the numbers begin to drop. As explained, this is due primarily from women working less hours and in jobs that don't have overtime. Equally these statistics don't take into account any benefits that women receive like maternity leave and other women exclusive benefits. The studies are shoddy at best when they ignore all the factors that generate the discrepancy in the pay.

Edited April 17, 2015 by HaroldGenhi

[Commissar Alexer 763]

 

 

As for feminism, it's fantastic for guys like me. Guys who like MLP. Guys who believe in kindness teamwork and cooperation. If you're doing well with the classic alpha scene, that's good for you. But what's good for you comes at a cost to the vast majority of non-alpha males along with women in general. It's tyrannical to expect 90% of society to hold up so few. You should be allowed to be who you are, but that doesn't mean others can't be who they are too. If that's really who you are and what you believe in than I have every right to rebel against you, King George III. But I don't believe that's who you really are. You're on an MLP chat board, after all. (Apologies if that's a bit blunt of me, but since you've been so blunt with me then I figure you can take it without offense)

 

As i said before, you can be who you want but it comes at a cost.  And as for feminists, what exactly did they do for you? I keep hearing it all the time and yet no answer...

[Aidan OGain 112]

As i said before, you can be who you want but it comes at a cost.  And as for feminists, what exactly did they do for you? I keep hearing it all the time and yet no answer...

With feminists I can be who I want to be and it doesn't come at as high a cost. You seem to think every girl is a cheater.

[Commissar Alexer 763]

With feminists I can be who I want to be and it doesn't come at as high a cost. You seem to think every girl is a cheater.

 

You are avoiding my question: What exactly have the feminists done for you?