REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Is this really "the lowest point in our nation’s history that they can remember"?

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 07:45
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1823
PAGE 1 of 4

Wednesday, November 1, 2017 6:32 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Americans Are Officially Freaking Out

Almost two-thirds say this is the lowest point in U.S. history—and it’s keeping a lot of them up at night.

For those lying awake at night worried about health care, the economy, and an overall feeling of divide between you and your neighbors, there’s at least one source of comfort: Your neighbors might very well be lying awake, too.

Almost two-thirds of Americans, or 63 percent, report being stressed about the future of the nation, according to the American Psychological Association’s Eleventh Stress in America survey, conducted in August and released on Wednesday. This worry about the fate of the union tops longstanding stressors such as money (62 percent) and work (61 percent) and also cuts across political proclivities. However, a significantly larger proportion of Democrats (73 percent) reported feeling stress than independents (59 percent) and Republicans (56 percent).

The “current social divisiveness” in America was reported by 59 percent of those surveyed as a cause of their own malaise. When the APA surveyed Americans a year ago, 52 percent said they were stressed by the presidential campaign. Since then, anxieties have only grown.

A majority of the more than 3,400 Americans polled, 59 percent, said “they consider this to to be the lowest point in our nation’s history that they can remember.” That sentiment spanned generations, including those that lived through World War II, the Vietnam War, and the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. (Some 30 percent of people polled cited terrorism as a source of concern, a number that’s likely to rise given the alleged terrorist attack in New York City on Tuesday.)

“We have a picture that says people are concerned,” said Arthur Evans, APA’s chief executive officer. “Any one data point may not not be so important, but taken together, it starts to paint a picture.”

The survey didn’t ask respondents specifically about the administration of President Donald Trump, Evans said. He points to the “acrimony in the public discourse” and “the general feeling that we are divided as a country” as being more important than any particular person or political party.

Yet he and the study note that particular policy issues are a major source of anxiety. Some 43 percent of respondents said health care was a cause. The economy (35 percent) and trust in government (32 percent) also ranked highly, as did hate crimes (31 percent) and crime in general (31 percent).



“Policymakers need to understand that this is an issue that is important to people, that the uncertainty is having an impact on stress levels, and that stress has an impact on health status,” Evans said, pointing out that the relationship between stress and health is well-established.

And keeping up with the latest developments is a source of worry all its own. Most Americans—56 percent—said they want to stay informed, but the news causes them stress. (Yet even more, 72 percent, said “the media blows things out of proportion.”)

The APA survey did find, however, that not everyone is feeling the same degree of anxiety. Women normally report higher levels of stress than men, though worries among both genders tend to rise or fall in tandem. This year, however, they diverged: On a 10-point scale, women reported a slight increase in stress, rising from an average 5.0 in 2016 to 5.1 in 2017, while the level for men dropped, from an average 4.6 to 4.4.

Racial divides also exist in reported stress. While the levels among blacks and Hispanics were lower in 2016 than the year before, they rose for both groups in 2017, to 5.2 for Hispanic adults and 5.0 for black adults. Among whites, meanwhile, the average remained the same, at 4.7.


The report also notes that many Americans are finding at least one healthy way to feel better: 53 percent reported exercising or doing other physical activity to cope. Social support is also important, Evans said. “Third,” he says, “I think it’s really important for people to disconnect from the constant barrage of information.”



https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-01/americans-are-offic
ially-freaking-out

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 1, 2017 7:44 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly


“You Can’t Go Any Lower”: Inside the West Wing, Trump Is Apoplectic as Allies Fear Impeachment.
www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/11/the-west-wing-trump-is-apoplectic-as-a
llies-fear-impeachment


Remember Steve Bannon, Trump's brain? He is worried that Trump's Cabinet, all selected by Trump, will replace him with Pence.

Two weeks ago, according to a source, Bannon did a spitball analysis of the Cabinet to see which members would remain loyal to Trump in the event the 25th Amendment were invoked, thereby triggering a vote to remove the president from office. Bannon recently told people he’s not sure if Trump would survive such a vote. “One thing Steve wants Trump to do is take this more seriously,” the Bannon confidant told me. “Stop joking around. Stop tweeting.”

When crazy man Steve Bannon thinks you’re being too outrageous and need to rein it in, things are getting ugly.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 1, 2017 9:01 PM

WISHIMAY

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!----------------------------------------- "Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry


Yeah. 2005-10 was the worst financially, but I think most people are going to remember 2017 as the "Year of Total Shit".

Between the Trump Circus, living in Man-grope-istan, another damn storm or fire or shooting every day, horrible horrible movies...Oh yeah, and I got hit by a SEMI .

Hubby is trying to find a new job AND EVERY PLACE IS RATED TWO STARS OR LESS FOR EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION, so he's considering staying in his awful job (two and a HALF stars lest it get WORSE). Reading the Glassdoor reviews, it's amazing most of this country doesn't shoot their bosses more often. I can't believe some of these jobs call for having ANY kind of degree and then pay $10 an hour???

Then, there's the fact that LITERALLY half the people I know have cancer... and whether they have insurance or not it doesn't even matter, because they really CAN'T do much for them either way.

We have new people living on the corner, and in less than six months they've managed to make a cute house look like ghetto town, they never ever turn on lights, talk to people, clean up their leaves...and they sit in their cars for hours in the middle of the night... smoking.

People are just freaking weird these days, man. Not safe to go outside anywhere...


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 2, 2017 10:57 PM

OONJERAH


"the lowest point in our nation’s history that" I can remember
was, probably, Watergate.
  That was no doubt more sinister than now, because Nixon was
a professional politician & knew damn well what he was doing.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 3, 2017 12:32 AM

WISHIMAY

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!----------------------------------------- "Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry


Quote:

Originally posted by Oonjerah:
I can remember...,Watergate.




I'm pretty sure Trump has crawled beneath that bar several times already. We've yet to find out everything...

And that was just politically. I think we've hit new lows socially as well.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 3, 2017 1:19 AM

OONJERAH



^@Wishy

Yes, I agree. Nixon may have been a crook, but he knew what he was doing.

Trump is far more scary to me. He doesn't know or care about the Law of
the Land. He's more like a kid running amok in a toy store ... Being PotUS
is fun; he can do whatever he wants.

If the notion of nuclear war appeals to him instead of putting the fear of
God & Hellfire into him, he's dangerous.

Yes, and he's not at all Presidential. Doesn't inspire respect.


... oooOO}{OOooo ...

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 5, 2017 1:18 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK






Huh.... wouldn't ya know it....

I don't see Russia at all on those graphs.

Take note, Democrats looking to win seats in 2018.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 5, 2017 1:23 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by Wishimay:
...living in Man-grope-istan...



Yanno... Maybe you should talk to a woman living in one of the actual "istans" and see the life they have to lead compared to how women in this country have it.

You are a part of the most privileged women that the history of the planet has ever seen, and you constantly whine and bitch about this every single day.


Is it any wonder why less than 20% of women in the US identify as Feminists, and only 7% of women in the UK do?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 5, 2017 9:40 PM

WISHIMAY

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!----------------------------------------- "Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:


Yanno... Maybe you should talk to a woman living in one of the actual "istans" and see the life they have to lead compared to how women in this country have it.



Yeah, dumbass, we should TOTALLY compare ourselves and aspire to be the armpit of the planet. No woman should EVER complain about being groped or raped because women in Afghanistan have it worse??

Only a COMPLETE IDIOT...oh wait, you are a complete idiot. Never mind...


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 12:41 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Learn how to read you freakin' idiot. Nowhere was it said or even vaguely implied that we should aspire to be one of them.

You are simply the most unpleasant person I have ever known in my life. The only reason I would ever touch you is if you had CTRL ALT DELETE buttons so I could shut you down.

That's probably what your daughter wants to do too.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 12:48 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


figures are all over the map

https://www.yahoo.com/news/only-1-in-3-women-identify-as-feminists-des
pite-feminist-beliefs-153424581.html

Only 1 in 3 Women Identify as Feminists — Despite ‘Feminist’ Beliefs

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/feminism-project/poll/
63 percent of women ages 18 to 34 said they considered themselves feminists, compared with 60 percent of women altogether. The only group more likely to identify with feminism was women ages 50 to 64. Feminism's popularity took a dip among women ages 35 to 49, with 51 percent identifying with it, but it looks like it's making a long-overdue comeback.

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2015/04/09/82-percent-of-am
ericans-dont-consider-themselves-feminists-poll-shows
/.
82 percent of Americans don’t consider themselves feminists, poll shows

https://www.glamour.com/story/majority-teen-girls-feminists
YES: The Majority of Teen Girls Now Identify As Feminists




HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 1:16 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/only-1-in-3-women-identify-as-feminists-des
pite-feminist-beliefs-153424581.html

Only 1 in 3 Women Identify as Feminists — Despite ‘Feminist’ Beliefs



634 women out of 150+ million polled

Quote:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/feminism-project/poll/
63 percent of women ages 18 to 34 said they considered themselves feminists, compared with 60 percent of women altogether. The only group more likely to identify with feminism was women ages 50 to 64. Feminism's popularity took a dip among women ages 35 to 49, with 51 percent identifying with it, but it looks like it's making a long-overdue comeback.



1,122 women out of 150+ million polled. 488 men out of 150+ million polled.

Quote:

http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2015/04/09/82-percent-of-am
ericans-dont-consider-themselves-feminists-poll-shows
/.
82 percent of Americans don’t consider themselves feminists, poll shows



1,067 "people" out of 300+ million polled.

Quote:

https://www.glamour.com/story/majority-teen-girls-feminists
YES: The Majority of Teen Girls Now Identify As Feminists



No polling data provided. I'm assuming unimportant information like this was left out because right after putting this article together the author had a tight deadline on her big story about what boots Ariana Grande was wearing last night.



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 2:31 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


So, you admit you pulled your numbers out of your ass ! GREAT !




HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 2:45 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I pulled them out of "somebodies" ass. Not my own.

Those numbers were probably from the NY Times article, or some similar poll.

Polls don't mean shit though, as is evidenced by Hillary Clinton's loss. You know that.


I've only ever met one women in RL who claims she's a feminist. She's an asshole.

I've only ever met one person online who claims they're a feminist. I'm assuming it's a female. Female or male it's repulsive.


I'm sure there are other women I've met that would identify as a Feminist if they were asked about it. The point is that they don't hang their entire existence on that and any other type of identity politics. The only women these days that everyone knows are feminists are truly miserable people.


Look at Wishy. She is identity politics personified. Feminist? Check. Athiest? Check. White apologist? Check.

How do I know all of that? lol... A completely rhetorical question since 90% of hateful posts have something to do with one of those issues.

She'll go around calling everybody else a nazi, behave as poorly as she wants to, abuse other people constantly, and then cry like a baby about everything and play the victim because.... vagina.

She's disgusting.

That's why most women don't want to talk about Feminism in regular conversation these days. They don't want to be associated with the likes of her.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 3:36 AM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



Quote:

That's why most women don't want to talk about Feminism in regular conversation these days. They don't want to be associated with the likes of her.
I admit, my sampling of 'women' is limited. I've interacted with perhaps a dozen waitresses at length at my local diner over the last 25 years. Then there's the Hispanic neighbor-lady that lives on one side. (The other side is a rental, and lately the renters have been flowing thru at roughly yearly intervals.) Then there's my mom, grandmother, aunts, all my cousins, and assorted female relatives. And the three or so dozen co-workers. All the students I've trained over the years. Professors. And so on.

Most women I know don't call themselves feminists any more than they call themselves vertebrates, because the name just doesn't matter to them that much, one way or the other.

But if you ask them, what they want is to be treated fairly. To have the same opportunities, recognition, and pay, as a man. To not be groped, or ogled, or rudely talked about. To not have to ask permission to make decisions about their health. They think birth control is a right, and abortion should be available.

These are women who span a large age range, from my age - from before the time that female birth control existed, abortion was legal, and it was illegal to bar women from medical school or union apprenticeships - to young women who grew up knowing nothing else, who could be my granddaughters.

I don't know what general points you think you're trying to make. But you sure have peculiar ideas about women.




HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 7:37 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Women in America have all of that today. I agree that they should.

On a case by case basis I'm sure there are women being mistreated, possibly only because they are a woman. But the same could be said for men on a case by case basis as well.

You didn't bring up a single one of the points I have any contention with. Most women don't.

I actually prefer the company of females over males. In real life I don't know any that I even have any discussions like this with.

I'm hard pressed to even think of a time that I ever did except for the one that I told you I knew who says she is a Feminist.


EDIT:

I think that the problem may lie in the fact that the word Feminist means a whole lot of different things to a whole lot of different women.

It's my opinion that the ones who loudly proclaim that they are a Feminist in 2017 are the ones who have a lot of problems and want to hurt other people, specifically men.

I'll admit that it's unfortunate, since it is kind of shitty for me to then in turn insult ALL Feminists, whom many of which I don't think are like Wishy at all.

I dunno.... Did you read all of the articles you linked to me. Quite a few high profile women have come out and said that they are not Feminists because though they believe in equality for both sexes they don't hate men. There is a real problem with the Feminist label today. I mentioned this months ago when I said the "movement" has co-opted by radical nut jobs.



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 8:34 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Did you read all of the articles you linked to me.
Yes. I even read the links. I posted what I posted because I was surprised at the discord between results, which, among other things, shows the numbers you keep quoting as being a VERY limited and unreliable indicator of what people think.




HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 10:01 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Well I think that's probably the least important part of my last post, but sure... polling data for everything is largely BS. I'm not surprised this is all over the map. Anybody could skew stats for whatever reason they want to, and they do it everyday.

Can we get off that point now?

I'm not going say any more myself because I'd just be repeating what I said in the last post that you didn't respond to.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 10:18 PM

BRENDA


Quote:

Originally posted by Oonjerah:

^@Wishy

Yes, I agree. Nixon may have been a crook, but he knew what he was doing.

Trump is far more scary to me. He doesn't know or care about the Law of
the Land. He's more like a kid running amok in a toy store ... Being PotUS
is fun; he can do whatever he wants.

If the notion of nuclear war appeals to him instead of putting the fear of
God & Hellfire into him, he's dangerous.

Yes, and he's not at all Presidential. Doesn't inspire respect.


... oooOO}{OOooo ...



I agree with you Oonj. I've never been this scared of one of your Presidents and I have lived through a few of them, starting with Nixon.

ETA. I was born when LBJ was President but my first memory of one of your Presidents is Nixon.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 6, 2017 11:12 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I've only ever met one women in RL who claims she's a feminist. She's an asshole.
I've only ever met one person online who claims they're a feminist. I'm assuming it's a female. Female or male it's repulsive.

You've met two women who call themselves feminists and you think they're assholes.
Quote:


I'm sure there are other women I've met that would identify as a Feminist if they were asked about it. The point is that they don't hang their entire existence on that and any other type of identity politics. The only women these days that everyone knows are feminists are truly miserable people.

You've concluded that 'everyone' thinks the way you do on the basis of your personal reaction to two women who are feminists.
Quote:

Look at Wishy. She is identity politics personified. Feminist? Check. Athiest? Check. White apologist? Check.
How do I know all of that? lol... A completely rhetorical question since 90% of hateful posts have something to do with one of those issues.

Actually, she just dislikes 'people'. Because. people. That's her schtick.
Quote:

She'll go around calling everybody else a nazi ...
I don't recall her calling 'people' nazis often - if at all - though she does call you one iirc.
Quote:

... behave as poorly as she wants to, abuse other people constantly, and then cry like a baby about everything and play the victim because.... vagina.
She thinks very badly of her female neighbor, video game players and makers, people who own pit bulls, and anyone who disagrees with her.
Quote:

She's disgusting.
She's a hoot!
Quote:

That's why most women don't want to talk about Feminism in regular conversation these days.
'People' don't talk about being feminists because of Wishi? Dood! You're giving her WAY too much credit.

And like I said, they also don't talk about being vertebrates. It doesn't make them any less of a vertebrate, or a feminist.
Quote:

They don't want to be associated with the likes of her.
I know you and Wishi have a particularly hostile interaction. OTOH Wishi has hostile interactions with a LOT of people. It doesn't have anything to do with feminism. She treats a lot of people like shit on the board - even women. It's just her.




HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 7, 2017 4:37 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:




Huh.... wouldn't ya know it....

I don't see Russia at all on those graphs.

Take note, Democrats looking to win seats in 2018.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

that is funny. Democraps are on the losing end of each if those topics, until you get so far down that they needed to include the last item.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 7, 2017 8:07 AM

WISHIMAY

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!----------------------------------------- "Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:


You are a part of the most privileged women that the history of the planet has ever seen, and you constantly whine and bitch about this every single day.





I think what I am angry about is the FACT FACT FACT that men in power take advantage of and abuse women in more ways every day than one could ever possibly count. THAT is what I have a problem with, the rampant murdering of women and children by MEN. The constant sexual and physical abuse that is predominately perpetrated by MEN. Men trying to control reproductive choices they can't even BEGIN to understand... The last 500,000 years of human history of being enslaved by men because they are the more violent. Women weren't even allowed to get a job until about 75 years ago. Women were only allowed to drive THIS YEAR in Saudi Arabia, which only further proves my point about male enslavement.

That you take issue with me pointing out we live in Man-grope-istan, proves you JUST DON'T GET IT. In fact EVERY TIME I point out statistical fact about males being more violent, you take offence and call me a feminist.

If you aren't violent and you are taking offence on behalf of all men, WOW are you a narcissistic twit. If you can't see you are part of the problem by not acknowledging the overwhelming preponderance of evidence about male violence and calling everyone who points it out a feminist, then you are a DENSE narcissistic twit, as well.

Either way, every day in every way...you prove you don't have a CLUE.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 7, 2017 12:38 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Wow... that was actually a semi-pleasant response from Wishy. I'll ignore the insults because I know that must have been hard for you to do.


I don't deny stats about violence. I don't deny history. I don't hate women. I don't feel that women shouldn't be granted the same rights as men, and I don't take issue with the fact that in America today they are granted those rights.

What I take issue with is how people like you use those stats to attack every human who has a penis. Most men are NOT like that. We do NOT live in Man-Grope-istan. MOST men would lose their jobs, whatever limited status they may have, a chance at any future jobs, their families and more for doing anything like what you're talking about.

Look at your posts. Every one of them drips with misandry.

I think your problem is whenever you see a man, particularly a white man, you see President Trump, or Harvey Weinsten.

I think you need to redirect your hatred and phobias from men in general to ALL people with power, whether male or female.



Kiki says you hate everybody though. So maybe you should work on that first.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 7, 2017 9:13 PM

WISHIMAY

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!----------------------------------------- "Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:



What I take issue with is how people like you use those stats to attack every human who has a penis. Most men are NOT like that. We do NOT live in Man-Grope-istan. MOST men would lose their jobs, whatever limited status they may have, a chance at any future jobs, their families and more for doing anything like what you're talking about.

Look at your posts. Every one of them drips with misandry.





THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE NOT GETTING, YET AGAIN. If you haven't been reading the news for the last two months beyond Weinstein, you'd know it's a MUCH MUCH bigger problem than what you think it is. It's such a problem that many women give up talking about it because EVERY woman has a story of how a man's sex drive or violence has affected their lives. I know of at least two dozen women who have been raped or molested. EVERY WOMAN ON THIS PLANET DOES TOO. MEN DON'T LOSE THEIR JOBS, THEY GET HIGH-FIVED.


You can scream "misandry" all you want but it will NEVER change the FACT FACT FACT that males are more violent than females. WE live in Man-grope-istan, you live IN DENIAL.

I'm not posting that stats again, I've made my point a thousand times over. You have YET to provide any evidence to the contrary.

DONE WITH YOU.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 7, 2017 9:48 PM

WISHIMAY

There will be fire and brimstone and Earth will be destroyed!... in several billion years!----------------------------------------- "Well, so long Earth. Thanks for the air... and what-not." -Philip J. Fry


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Actually, she just dislikes 'people'. Because. people. That's her schtick.


Can't IMAGINE why I hate people...


(1) Drug abuse violations 1,841,182
(2) Driving while Intoxicated 1,427,494 (aka Felony DUI)
(3) Property crime 1,610,088 (includes burglary, larceny, theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.)
(4) Larceny-theft 1,172,762
(5) Assault 1,305,693
(6) Disorderly conduct 709,105
(7) Liquor laws 633,654
(8) Violent crime 597,447 (including murder, non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault.
(9) Drunkenness 589,402
(10) Aggravated assault 433,945
(11) Burglary 303,853
(12) Vandalism 291,575
(13) Fraud 252,873
(14) Weapons violations (carrying or possession) 188,891
(15) Curfew and loitering 143,002
(16) Robbery 126,715
(17) Offenses against family and children 122,812
(18) Stolen property (buying, receiving, possession) 122,061
(19) Motor vehicle theft 118,231
(20) Forgery and counterfeiting 103,448

Poisoning the general public with bad pharmaceuticals, bad food, chemicals and pesticides
Having affairs
Animal abuse
Sport Hunters
Being a manipulative dick
Bible thumping
Narcissists
People who talk at the theater
People who don't understand personal space
People who leave large dogs alone with small children
People who take obliviousness to an art form
Wars
Genocide
Racial Crimes
People who use their kids to get "likes" or "views" on social media
Attention Whores
Hoarders
People who think sports are more important than EDUCATION in the school systems
Bad Doctors who are content to let the system scam people into believing they could EVER help them
Neighbors who don't understand what a property line is and let their spawn run all over your property all day long
People who can't put down a goddamn cell phone or video game long enough to not walk in traffic
Extremely patriotic people who don't understand that country lines are not an indicator of greatness, nor are flags a "team banner"

Here, Dr Cox sums it up pretty well...













NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 8, 2017 8:12 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


WISHI, you spew an endless stream of bile. I guess that's because you're in pain and your life really sucks. Plus it probably makes you feel superior, which is the one bright spot in your life. But, hon, many of the targets of your irritability aren't even worth your attention. All you're doing is making yourself miserable, making your family miserable, and probably shortening your life even more than it already is.


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 8, 2017 9:01 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:



What I take issue with is how people like you use those stats to attack every human who has a penis. Most men are NOT like that. We do NOT live in Man-Grope-istan. MOST men would lose their jobs, whatever limited status they may have, a chance at any future jobs, their families and more for doing anything like what you're talking about.

Look at your posts. Every one of them drips with misandry.





THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE NOT GETTING, YET AGAIN. If you haven't been reading the news for the last two months beyond Weinstein, you'd know it's a MUCH MUCH bigger problem than what you think it is. It's such a problem that many women give up talking about it because EVERY woman has a story of how a man's sex drive or violence has affected their lives. I know of at least two dozen women who have been raped or molested. EVERY WOMAN ON THIS PLANET DOES TOO. MEN DON'T LOSE THEIR JOBS, THEY GET HIGH-FIVED.


You can scream "misandry" all you want but it will NEVER change the FACT FACT FACT that males are more violent than females. WE live in Man-grope-istan, you live IN DENIAL.

I'm not posting that stats again, I've made my point a thousand times over. You have YET to provide any evidence to the contrary.

DONE WITH YOU.




1. I reject that you know two dozen women who have been raped or molested. That is purely anecdotal and considering the source it falls on deaf ears. Not only by me, but by everybody on this board, I'm sure.

2. Define rape. Define molestation. YOUR definition of these words.

3. Men DO lose their jobs. Men lose scholarships. Men get kicked out of school. Men lose their family. This is often true even if it is proven afterwards that the allegations were untrue. Just having the alligation against them is enough to do any of these things.

4. Men DO NOT get high fives for raping or molesting women. At least they don't from me, and not from any decent person on the planet.

5. If by Man-grope-istan, you mean the entire world, that term might mean something. But you're refering to the USA which is part of the Western World in 2017 that has the most liberated women who ever lived with equal rights and protections granted to them that men have.

They actually have additional rights and benefits that men don't have, such as not having a system where the parents can choose whether or not to mutilate their genitalia upon birth, full reproductive rights, not being forced to enlist for the draft and access to battered women shelters... to name a few.

Not only are you being silly and melodramatic, but you're insulting every woman who does live in a place where what you're talking about ACTUALLY HAPPENS.

YOU have lived a privileged and sheltered life. You complain about stuff that you have NO IDEA about.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 8, 2017 3:18 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, I have to say that this thread is certainly an example of the discord between Americans!

SIX, it's just as wrong to say that women in the USA (or people of color, or old people, or the disabled, or short people) live in perfect equality with tall white males because they have "formal" legal protections, because our laws say so.

That's wrong. We continue to subtly - and not so subtly- treat people prejudicially based on all kinds of characteristics. There are too many studies (and sting operations) of - for example- "blinded" evaluations or comparative success in credit, loan, job, or rental applications that demonstrate a widespread undercurrent of prejudice.

Men ARE, on the average, more violent than women. Given the crime stats, this may be the one characteristic where there is, in fact, very little overlap of the bell curves of men and women, where it would be fair to say that MOST men are more violent than MOST women. Whether that plays out as men being more assertive, or aggressive, or violent, that constant "bent" in male behavior subtly shapes this society's distribution of rewards, especially since THIS society rewards competition more than it rewards cooperation.

Maybe what WISHY is reacting to isn't the severity of the aggression (Altho there's plenty of that!) but its pervasiveness. It's impossible not to live, work, shop, or interact with men without experiencing it in some fashion ... from being interrupted, ignored, or patronized to being smacked (or worse).

At the same time, men are also subject to prejudices; the expectation that they are SUPPOSED to be tough must be a burden to many men.

So maybe we just admit that men and women are treated differently, and then figure out which (if any) differential treatment make sense, and then how to get rid of the rest. Why keep arguing about something that clearly exists?

At the same time, I will also admit that there is indeed reverse prejudice. But since women, people of color etc don't generally have their hands on the levers of reward, that prejudice tends to remain in the psychological realm, not in the practical one.

AND FINALLY- if there were meaningful jobs for everyone who could work, we wouldn't have to fight over them. The BIGGEST prejudice is against the 99%.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 8, 2017 3:27 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


HERE IS ANOTHER STRESSOR NOT MENTIONED IN THE FIRST POLL.

By the way, every time I see these kinds of "list" polls, I'm wary of the results. I frequently get polls from the DNC ... rank your concern about the following ... pick your top three (or five) concerns.

MOST OFTEN, my top concerns aren't even in the pick list! I alway write them in, even if I have to write in teeny-tiny letters in the margin, but I'm sure my answers are thrown out. As hubby likes to say: "I can determine the answers if you let me ask the questions."

Quote:

Corruption Of Government Officials Ranked Americans' Top Fear Of 2017

With Halloween just around corner, a recent survey shows what really keeps Americans awake at night. The Chapman University Survey of American Fears polled 1,207 U.S. adults on their level of fear across 80 different categories ranging from crime to personal anxieties and natural disasters. As in previous years, corruption of government officials was top by a significant margin in 2017 with 74.5 percent of U.S. adults saying it makes them either "afraid" or "very afraid".

This year's ranking reflects the political unrest and uncertainty brought about by Donald Trump's election to the presidency.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2017/10/19/corruption-of-go
vernment-officials-ranked-americans-top-fear-of-2017-infographic/#1eb035d21dff


I have to call BULLSHIT on that. The same result about corruption in government was found in a Gallup poll in 2015.


Quote:

75% in U.S. See Widespread Government Corruption

http://news.gallup.com/poll/185759/widespread-government-corruption.as
px


Corruption in government. The swamp. The deep state. Whatever you want to call it, corrupt politicians - which is most of them - have no interest in noticing this issue.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 8, 2017 4:16 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Well there's obvious psychological "reverse discrimination" as you called it.

I just call it discrimination. There is no "reverse" about it. Part of the problem is the use of that word "reverse" before discrimination or racism or sexism or anything else. It's loosely tied to the pervasive myth that racism is prejudice + power, so it is impossible for anybody to be racist against white people.


At least women have equal protections under the law, even if they aren't always enforced as they should be in some case by case basis. Men in America do not have that privlidge.

There is not a single law or protection the government grants men that women aren't also granted. I can name more than several that men do not benefit from in 2017.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 8, 2017 9:09 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I just call it discrimination. There is no "reverse" about it.- SIX
Agreed. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter which direction it's flowing. Also, not too keen on the designation "hate" crime, either. It's either a crime, or it's not. I don't see any "extra-special-crime" designation being useful.

Quote:

Part of the problem is the use of that word "reverse" before discrimination or racism or sexism or anything else. It's loosely tied to the pervasive myth that racism is prejudice + power, so it is impossible for anybody to be racist against white people.- SIX
I think I know what you're saying, and I agree. It IS possible to be racist against whites, I've seen it all the time and had my "whiteness" held against me.

Quote:

There is not a single law or protection the government grants men that women aren't also granted. I can name more than several that men do not benefit from in 2017.
You can? I can't think of a single statute or law that allows women more privilege than men. If you have some examples, let me know.

BUT if you're going to bring up the whole "abortion" thing again, I will flatly disagree with you. Since women bear the social and professional burdens and medical risk of pregnancy - and there is no way for men to take that on themselves (For example, what if a pregnancy gets in the way of a job or promotion? Is the father of the baby going to be able to undo that lost opportunity?) then men have- IMHO- no say in the pregnancy or its outcome. "Donating" sperm simply isn't taking on enough responsibility to ensure any kind of authority, and in my book responsibility should = authority.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 8, 2017 9:43 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I just call it discrimination. There is no "reverse" about it.- Agreed. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter which direction it's flowing. Also, not too keen on the designation "hate" crime, either. It's either a crime, or it's not. I don't see any "extra-special-crime" designation being useful.



Well, that's the thing. "hate" before crime is useful, just as "reverse" before any "ism" is useful to certain groups. It's simply a double standard that all other races have on whites. It's also a double standard that gays have over straights. It's also a double standard that women have over men.

Quote:

I think I know what you're saying, and I agree. It IS possible to be racist against whites, I've seen it all the time and had my "whiteness" held against me.


Well there you go. Now imagine being a man and having that also held against you.

Quote:

You can? I can't think of a single statute or law that allows women more privilege than men. If you have some examples, let me know.

BUT if you're going to bring up the whole "abortion" thing again, I will flatly disagree with you. Since women bear the social and professional burdens and medical risk of pregnancy - and there is no way for men to take that on themselves (For example, what if a pregnancy gets in the way of a job or promotion? Is the father of the baby going to be able to undo that lost opportunity?) then men have- IMHO- no say in the pregnancy or its outcome. "Donating" sperm simply isn't taking on enough responsibility to ensure any kind of authority, and in my book responsibility should = authority.



"Donating" sperm is just as bad as using any of those other terms. If that's really how you look at it, then how can I even argue the point?

The way I look at it, it should be one way or the other. Give women 100% choice in the matter, but they do not have the ability to come after a man for any financial support. OR, make men completely accountable for the child after the fact in all cases, but also give men a say on whether the abortion takes place.



But that's not the only law or privlidge that women have on men. I've talked about them before, but here's a few.

1. At birth, a male has no say whether or not his parents can mutilate his reproductive organ. Women have that protection. (It is unimportant whether or not you believe circumcision to be genital mutilation. I do, and many other people do).

2. Men have to register for the draft. Women don't.

3. In the military, women are held to lower standards of physical ability than men are.

4. In a divorce it is always assumed that the children will be with the mother. It is the burden of the father to make a case and pay the legal fees and make the choice to drag his children through what will likely be a very long and drawn out process that will harm the children psychologically. In cases where the mother is simply unstable this puts the father in the no-win situation of harming the children either way.

5. There are battered wives shelters. There aren't any for men. Vocal feminists will and have argued and protested against Men's Rights Activists who fight against this.

6. Women have the right to exclusive tax benefits for being business owners.


To name a few...


EDIT:

More on number 5.

http://www.saveservices.org/pdf/SAVE-VAWA-Discriminates-Against-Males.
pdf



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 9, 2017 2:37 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I just call it discrimination. There is no "reverse" about it.- SIX

Agreed. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter which direction it's flowing. Also, not too keen on the designation "hate" crime, either. It's either a crime, or it's not. I don't see any "extra-special-crime" designation being useful.- SIGNY

Well, that's the thing. "hate" before crime is useful, just as "reverse" before any "ism" is useful to certain groups. It's simply a double standard that all other races have on whites. It's also a double standard that gays have over straights. It's also a double standard that women have over men.- SIX

I agree with you about that. The concept of "hate crime" means that some people are afforded more protection under the law than others, which is clearly discriminatory.

Quote:

I think I know what you're saying, and I agree. It IS possible to be racist against whites, I've seen it all the time and had my "whiteness" held against me.- SIGNY

Well there you go. Now imagine being a man and having that also held against you.- SIX

I don't have to imagine, since being female is constantly being held against ME. Can we reach a mutual understanding on this point? That sexism is uncomfortable no matter which way it flows?

Quote:

You can? I can't think of a single statute or law that allows women more privilege than men. If you have some examples, let me know. BUT if you're going to bring up the whole "abortion" thing again, I will flatly disagree with you. Since women bear the social and professional burdens and medical risk of pregnancy - and there is no way for men to take that on themselves (For example, what if a pregnancy gets in the way of a job or promotion? Is the father of the baby going to be able to undo that lost opportunity?) then men have- IMHO- no say in the pregnancy or its outcome. "Donating" sperm simply isn't taking on enough responsibility to ensure any kind of authority, and in my book responsibility should = authority.- SIGNY

"Donating" sperm is just as bad as using any of those other terms. If that's really how you look at it, then how can I even argue the point?

The way I look at it, it should be one way or the other. Give women 100% choice in the matter, but they do not have the ability to come after a man for any financial support. OR, make men completely accountable for the child after the fact in all cases, but also give men a say on whether the abortion takes place.- SIX

Sounds fair. I pick option #1.

Quote:

But that's not the only law or privlidge ...- SIX
Now you're moving the goalposts. We were talking about laws or statutes, not custom or practice.

Quote:

... that women have on men. I've talked about them before, but here's a few.

1. At birth, a male has no say whether or not his parents can mutilate his reproductive organ. Women have that protection.

You can thank the Jewish lobby for that. Since Nazis used circumcision as a means of identifying Jewish males, Jews here agitated to have circumcision made the standard practice so that their population could never be identified amongst all of the other males.
Quote:

(It is unimportant whether or not you believe circumcision to be genital mutilation. I do, and many other people do).- SIX
As do I. I think it's a barbaric custom foisted on us by Jews and should be done away with. How do we go about it?

Quote:

2. Men have to register for the draft. Women don't.- SIX
Yeah, you're right. Abolish registration.

Quote:

3. In the military, women are held to lower standards of physical ability than men are.- SIX
Not a law or statute. But now you're putting women in a no-win situation. You want them to be drafted just like men and treated just like men when it's clear that women are smaller than men (on the average) with less muscle mass. Either (1) change the requirements so that women can meet them (for example, require less ammo which weighs less*) or (2) create tiered assignments/duties based on something like height and muscle mass to account for different physiologies in a non-sexist way.

* As I understand it, even in "fire groups" which is the lowest level of front line combat organization there is a division of labor. You usually have the gunner, the ammo-carrier/ back-watcher, and the spotter. Now, carrying ammo prolly requires a strong back, but smaller people could be very effective spotters.

Quote:

4. In a divorce it is always assumed that the children will be with the mother. It is the burden of the father to make a case and pay the legal fees and make the choice to drag his children through what will likely be a very long and drawn out process that will harm the children psychologically. In cases where the mother is simply unstable this puts the father in the no-win situation of harming the children either way.- SIX
Not a law or statute as far as I know, but certainly an unfair practice. BOTH parents should be evaluated for fitness.

Quote:

5. There are battered wives shelters. There aren't any for men. Vocal feminists will and have argued and protested against Men's Rights Activists who fight against this.- SIX
This is not only NOT a law or statute, it has nothing to do with the legal system whatsoever. Men need to get together and set these up for themselves, just like women had to get together, raise money, raise awareness, and set up shelters for each other.

Quote:

6. Women have the right to exclusive tax benefits for being business owners.
They do? Like what? That's sure a new one on me!



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 9, 2017 8:54 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I agree with you about that. The concept of "hate crime" means that some people are afforded more protection under the law than others, which is clearly discriminatory.



Yep.

Quote:

I don't have to imagine, since being female is constantly being held against ME. Can we reach a mutual understanding on this point? That sexism is uncomfortable no matter which way it flows?


You say that, but I don't understand what you mean by that. I've never experienced this happening in retail jobs or even in the professional jobs that I've held. We must have just been working in different environments or something.

I'm a white male who is almost 40 without a college degree. It is extremely hard for somebody like me to get a job these days because I don't fill up a spot on any race or gender quotas. There might not be laws that state that you have to hire a certain amount of "diversity", but there certainly are big tax incentives to do so.

Quote:

The way I look at it, it should be one way or the other. Give women 100% choice in the matter, but they do not have the ability to come after a man for any financial support. OR, make men completely accountable for the child after the fact in all cases, but also give men a say on whether the abortion takes place.- SIX


Quote:

Sounds fair. I pick option #1.


That's progress. It's not the option I'd prefer, but that's the price of negotiations. I realize that not everyone in the world views abortion as murdering babies, so I can't use that as an argument. But I do think that relinquishing the ability to go after men for child support would suffice in making the woman's choice of what to do with her body deemed as a fair choice. (Because they way it is now, it's not only the choice she has about her body, but the very livelihood of the man in question for the next 18 or so years)

Quote:

Now you're moving the goalposts. We were talking about laws or statutes, not custom or practice.


Not moving the goalposts. I said this before. Not much of a difference between a law and a practice if the practice happens 100% of the time and the outcome is expected.

Quote:

You can thank the Jewish lobby for that. Since Nazis used circumcision as a means of identifying Jewish males, Jews here agitated to have circumcision made the standard practice so that their population could never be identified amongst all of the other males.
Quote:

(It is unimportant whether or not you believe circumcision to be genital mutilation. I do, and many other people do).- SIX
As do I. I think it's a barbaric custom foisted on us by Jews and should be done away with. How do we go about it?



I'm not really looking for a history lesson here. I'm glad that you agree that it should be done away with though. I don't know how to do away with it. I'm not an MRA and I don't subscribe to any type of group like that, but I do know it's one of the things that is high on their list of priorities.

Quote:

Yeah, you're right. Abolish registration.


Good enough for me.

Quote:

Not a law or statute. But now you're putting women in a no-win situation. You want them to be drafted just like men and treated just like men when it's clear that women are smaller than men (on the average) with less muscle mass. Either (1) change the requirements so that women can meet them (for example, require less ammo which weighs less*) or (2) create tiered assignments/duties based on something like height and muscle mass to account for different physiologies in a non-sexist way.


I actually don't want them to be drafted just like men, or treated just like men. That's supposedly what they've fought for. I was just using the draft as one of the most hypocritical things about the feminist movement. It's all about equality until we talk about the draft.

If the draft is eliminated, this point is moot anyhow.

There have been plenty of men who have been deemed unfit for the military, based off of physical attributes. In that time the same standard of physical ability has been applied, no matter the situation. I don't see why the fact that women are now in the military should necessitate changing that system, since we're all equal.

I'd imagine that breaking down people further into groups and testing them that way would be a lot more paperwork and cost more money. Our military expenses are obscene as it is. I don't think we need to do something that would probably create a whole new agency to keep track of. Male or female, you need to reach the same standard since everyone will be relying on everyone else regardless of gender.

Quote:

* As I understand it, even in "fire groups" which is the lowest level of front line combat organization there is a division of labor. You usually have the gunner, the ammo-carrier/ back-watcher, and the spotter. Now, carrying ammo prolly requires a strong back, but smaller people could be very effective spotters.


I do get your point. In a perfect world something like this makes sense. I was more pointing out the hypocrisy of the entire situation as it is. You talk about me arguing that everyone should be a part of the draft AND that women (who many of which presumably would be drafted) would then be forced to those higher physical standards.

What I'm saying is, in the system as it is now, this is just another example of women getting ALL of the preferred treatment. They DON'T have to register for the draft, and they DON'T have to be held to the same standards.

There is also the fact that we haven't had a draft in my entire life, and unless the entire world goes to shit it wouldn't never happen again because wars are fought much differently with today's technology. Either making women sign up for the draft or eliminating the draft altogether would really be nothing more than a symbolic gesture.

Quote:

Not a law or statute as far as I know, but certainly an unfair practice. BOTH parents should be evaluated for fitness.


No. Not a law or a statute as far as I know either, but it absolutely happens 100% of the time. The only exception being if the woman has a easily damning history of mental problems, drug addiction, spousal or child abuse, etc.

I lived through it. That was my childhood. It's likely the largest reason that I have no interest in ever getting married.

Quote:

This is not only NOT a law or statute, it has nothing to do with the legal system whatsoever. Men need to get together and set these up for themselves, just like women had to get together, raise money, raise awareness, and set up shelters for each other.


Read the report I linked. It has a LOT to do with federal funds, of which none go to mens shelters and all go to women's shelters.

There is also an extremely high suicide rate among men who go through this, especially those who are forced to leave the home, some of which become homeless.

Quote:

6. Women have the right to exclusive tax benefits for being business owners. -SIX


Quote:

They do? Like what? That's sure a new one on me!


https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/business-resources-
for-women/information-on-women-owned-business-opportunities-assistance




-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 9, 2017 1:04 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Hey SIX, thanks for your detailed and on-point response.

Quote:

I agree with you about that. The concept of "hate crime" means that some people are afforded more protection under the law than others, which is clearly discriminatory. - SIGNY
Yep. - SIX



I actually heard this brought up by a law professor in CA a few months ago, when "they" were thinking of adding yet-another category of crimes to the list of potential "hate" crimes. I DO hope that means "they're" re-thinking the whole concept.

Quote:

I don't have to imagine, since being female is constantly being held against ME. Can we reach a mutual understanding on this point? That sexism is uncomfortable no matter which way it flows?- SIGNY

You say that, but I don't understand what you mean by that. I've never experienced this happening in retail jobs or even in the professional jobs that I've held. We must have just been working in different environments or something. - SIX

Yes, definitely. For example, I was prevented from field work by an old-fashioned supervisor who told me quite openly that "We've always had a woman in the lab". He thought he was doing me a favor, I wasn't mad about it because he was just an nice old-fashioned guy from Lithuania, but it sure was frustrating! KIKI experienced being told that she wouldn't be accepted into medical school because she was a woman. Even today, many engineering and science building have male and female bathrooms on alternate floors because they were originally built only with male bathrooms. So you wouldn't see discrimination against women in "traditionally" female jobs, like teaching or retail or secretarial work or nursing, but once you get outside of those areas then yes, you do.

Quote:

I'm a white male who is almost 40 without a college degree. It is extremely hard for somebody like me to get a job these days- SIX
It's extremely hard for ANYbody to get a job these days! You're either too young or too old, or too raw or "overqualified", or too good-looking or not good-looking enough, etc.

But I have been part of over a couple of HUNDRED screening interviews and a couple dozen HIRING decisions in my career (it was a "hire by committee" kind of thing) and aside from technical or personality considerations (for example we work in a cooperative lab where we have to share equipment, and extremely territorial people simply wouldn't work out) the only discrimination that I have heard openly expressed more than once is against people over 50. As in "Why would we want to train a person when they'll just retire in ten years anyway?" Seems awfully short-sighted to me. Most 50-year-olds bring a wealth of experience to a job.

By focusing on things like that, we're made to feel as if the problem is with each other, when in reality the problem is NOT ENOUGH JOBS CREATED BY THE SO-CALLED JOB CREATORS. And I can get into the whys and wherefores of THAT, but that's a whole 'nother discussion.

Quote:

... because I don't fill up a spot on any race or gender quotas. There might not be laws that state that you have to hire a certain amount of "diversity", but there certainly are big tax incentives to do so.- SIX

There are? - SIGNY

So, did I miss something about tax incentives to hire by gender or race?

Quote:

The way I look at it, it should be one way or the other. Give women 100% choice in the matter, but they do not have the ability to come after a man for any financial support. OR, make men completely accountable for the child after the fact in all cases, but also give men a say on whether the abortion takes place.- SIX

Sounds fair. I pick option #1.- SIGNY

That's progress. It's not the option I'd prefer, but that's the price of negotiations. I realize that not everyone in the world views abortion as murdering babies, so I can't use that as an argument. But I do think that relinquishing the ability to go after men for child support would suffice in making the woman's choice of what to do with her body deemed as a fair choice. (Because they way it is now, it's not only the choice she has about her body, but the very livelihood of the man in question for the next 18 or so years)- SIX

Indeed. The decision to have a baby, or not, potentially affects the father as well.

Quote:

Now you're moving the goalposts. We were talking about laws or statutes, not custom or practice.- SIGNY

Not moving the goalposts. I said this before. Not much of a difference between a law and a practice if the practice happens 100% of the time and the outcome is expected. - SIX

That throws open the discussion again. I was hoping to limit the discussion to laws and statutes, which are documented, as opposed to practices and customs, which can be argued forever because they're hard to prove.

Quote:

You can thank the Jewish lobby for that. Since Nazis used circumcision as a means of identifying Jewish males, Jews here agitated to have circumcision made the standard practice so that their population could never be identified amongst all of the other males. - SIGNY

It is unimportant whether or not you believe circumcision to be genital mutilation. I do, and many other people do.- SIX

As do I. I think it's a barbaric custom foisted on us by Jews and should be done away with. How do we go about it?- SIGNY

I'm not really looking for a history lesson here. I'm glad that you agree that it should be done away with though. I don't know how to do away with it. I'm not an MRA and I don't subscribe to any type of group like that, but I do know it's one of the things that is high on their list of priorities.- SIX

I can't imagine why anyone would be against ending circumcision. I know doctors who say that circumcision prevents penile cancer, but really, the answer is washing well. Males can always get it later, if they're so inclined, when they reach the age of majority.

Quote:

Yeah, you're right. Abolish registration- SIGNY

Good enough for me.- SIX

Yay!

Quote:

Not a law or statute. But now you're putting women in a no-win situation. You want them to be drafted just like men and treated just like men when it's clear that women are smaller than men (on the average) with less muscle mass. Either (1) change the requirements so that women can meet them (for example, require less ammo which weighs less*) or (2) create tiered assignments/duties based on something like height and muscle mass to account for different physiologies in a non-sexist way.- SIGNY

I actually don't want them to be drafted just like men, or treated just like men. That's supposedly what they've fought for. I was just using the draft as one of the most hypocritical things about the feminist movement. It's all about equality until we talk about the draft.

- I don't know what the women's movement position is on the draft.

Quote:

If the draft is eliminated, this point is moot anyhow.

There have been plenty of men who have been deemed unfit for the military, based off of physical attributes. In that time the same standard of physical ability has been applied, no matter the situation. I don't see why the fact that women are now in the military should necessitate changing that system, since we're all equal.- SIX

Maybe not "unfit" in general, but can you really expect a 5' 100-pound person to perform the same as a 6' 200-pound person, no matter which sex?

Quote:

I'd imagine that breaking down people further into groups and testing them that way would be a lot more paperwork and cost more money. Our military expenses are obscene as it is. I don't think we need to do something that would probably create a whole new agency to keep track of. Male or female, you need to reach the same standard since everyone will be relying on everyone else regardless of gender.- SIX
Okay, then screen people out based on that standard. But I think you'd be leaving a lot of talent on the table.

Quote:

* As I understand it, even in "fire groups" which is the lowest level of front line combat organization there is a division of labor. You usually have the gunner, the ammo-carrier/ back-watcher, and the spotter. Now, carrying ammo prolly requires a strong back, but smaller people could be very effective spotters.- SIGNY

I do get your point. In a perfect world something like this makes sense. I was more pointing out the hypocrisy of the entire situation as it is. You talk about me arguing that everyone should be a part of the draft AND that women (who many of which presumably would be drafted) would then be forced to those higher physical standards.

What I'm saying is, in the system as it is now, this is just another example of women getting ALL of the preferred treatment. They DON'T have to register for the draft, and they DON'T have to be held to the same standards.- SIX

Agreed.

Quote:

There is also the fact that we haven't had a draft in my entire life, and unless the entire world goes to shit it wouldn't never happen again because wars are fought much differently with today's technology. Either making women sign up for the draft or eliminating the draft altogether would really be nothing more than a symbolic gesture.- SIX
But symbolism is important.

Quote:

Not a law or statute as far as I know, but certainly an unfair practice. BOTH parents should be evaluated for fitness.- SIGNY

No. Not a law or a statute as far as I know either, but it absolutely happens 100% of the time. The only exception being if the woman has a easily damning history of mental problems, drug addiction, spousal or child abuse, etc.

I lived through it. That was my childhood. It's likely the largest reason that I have no interest in ever getting married.- SIX

There's an interesting story there, I'm sure.

Quote:

This is not only NOT a law or statute, it has nothing to do with the legal system whatsoever. Men need to get together and set these up for themselves, just like women had to get together, raise money, raise awareness, and set up shelters for each other.- SIGNY

Read the report I linked. It has a LOT to do with federal funds, of which none go to mens shelters and all go to women's shelters. There is also an extremely high suicide rate among men who go through this, especially those who are forced to leave the home, some of which become homeless. - SIX

You're right. It's unfair.

Quote:

6. Women have the right to exclusive tax benefits for being business owners. -SIX

They do? Like what? That's sure a new one on me!

SIX: https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/business-resources-
for-women/information-on-women-owned-business-opportunities-assistance

I'll look into this.

There is another aspect that you haven't touched on, and it's the whole idea of "protected classes". We are made to take a class every year on discriminatory behavior which puts our employer at legal liability, and the "protected classes" have expanded to include sex, sexual preference, race, ethnicity, religion etc etc. The only person NOT protected is the white 20-50 y/o hetero male, who can (technically) be the butt of endless jokes and harassment and not be able to appeal to any Equal Opportunity Board for redress. I personally find that unfair. My employer has more or less superseded that law by demanding professional behavior from anyone to anyone; and you can be fired for unprofessional behavior. IN PRACTICE, women are still be groped, ogled, and marginalized; and suspected gays are definitely excluded from promotion; but I'm glad that our organization demands professional behavior from everyone, at least by written policy.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, November 9, 2017 1:15 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I think that the answer to our identity politics problem is like Saker suggested: A demand to drop identity politics, ALONG WITH a process of "truth and reconciliation" and a forward commitment to real equality, as opposed to "window-dressing" equality.

Of course, people aren't all the same. There will always be some who are smarter, stronger, more compassionate, more focused etc. But if you're going to select people for various positions, just do it on the basis of job-related qualifications, not on random stuff.

ALSO, I think we should restructure what society rewards, because right now we reward psychopathy. The rest of us are just left fighting it out over crumbs. It's like we live in the Warsaw ghetto, and don't even realize it. If there were meaningful jobs with living wages for everyone who could work, we wouldn't be fighting over them so much. If we had any sort of real agency in our lives, we wouldn't be so depressed.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 12:50 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hey SIX, thanks for your detailed and on-point response.



No problem. I don't know what good this is doing anything, but it's nice to talk it out with a reasonable person.

Quote:

I agree with you about that. The concept of "hate crime" means that some people are afforded more protection under the law than others, which is clearly discriminatory. - SIGNY
Yep. - SIX

I actually heard this brought up by a law professor in CA a few months ago, when "they" were thinking of adding yet-another category of crimes to the list of potential "hate" crimes. I DO hope that means "they're" re-thinking the whole concept. - SIGNY



It's nice to dream, but somehow I doubt it. Probably going to make it worse.

Quote:

I don't have to imagine, since being female is constantly being held against ME. Can we reach a mutual understanding on this point? That sexism is uncomfortable no matter which way it flows?- SIGNY

You say that, but I don't understand what you mean by that. I've never experienced this happening in retail jobs or even in the professional jobs that I've held. We must have just been working in different environments or something. - SIX

Yes, definitely. For example, I was prevented from field work by an old-fashioned supervisor who told me quite openly that "We've always had a woman in the lab". He thought he was doing me a favor, I wasn't mad about it because he was just an nice old-fashioned guy from Lithuania, but it sure was frustrating! KIKI experienced being told that she wouldn't be accepted into medical school because she was a woman. Even today, many engineering and science building have male and female bathrooms on alternate floors because they were originally built only with male bathrooms. So you wouldn't see discrimination against women in "traditionally" female jobs, like teaching or retail or secretarial work or nursing, but once you get outside of those areas then yes, you do. - SIGNY



Well you definitely work in a higher level of things than I ever have. Maybe it's something among highly educated people. I've had a couple of jobs peaking at around 60k/yr. plus benefits, but I've never had to wear a lab coat. I've personally never seen any sexist or particularly any anti-female behavior at any place I've worked.

It seems strange to me that this would be the case though. Usually it's the college types who are against that type of behavior. My suspicion is that's the "old dogs" doing it in positions like yours and the landscape is about to have a major shift.

Quote:

I'm a white male who is almost 40 without a college degree. It is extremely hard for somebody like me to get a job these days- SIX

It's extremely hard for ANYbody to get a job these days! You're either too young or too old, or too raw or "overqualified", or too good-looking or not good-looking enough, etc.

But I have been part of over a couple of HUNDRED screening interviews and a couple dozen HIRING decisions in my career (it was a "hire by committee" kind of thing) and aside from technical or personality considerations (for example we work in a cooperative lab where we have to share equipment, and extremely territorial people simply wouldn't work out) the only discrimination that I have heard openly expressed more than once is against people over 50. As in "Why would we want to train a person when they'll just retire in ten years anyway?" Seems awfully short-sighted to me. Most 50-year-olds bring a wealth of experience to a job.

By focusing on things like that, we're made to feel as if the problem is with each other, when in reality the problem is NOT ENOUGH JOBS CREATED BY THE SO-CALLED JOB CREATORS. And I can get into the whys and wherefores of THAT, but that's a whole 'nother discussion. - SIGNY



Yeah.... We're going way out of bounds here now. That goes with my overpopulation discussion which is a completely different topic I don't want to even get into here.

Quote:

... because I don't fill up a spot on any race or gender quotas. There might not be laws that state that you have to hire a certain amount of "diversity", but there certainly are big tax incentives to do so.- SIX

There are? - SIGNY

So, did I miss something about tax incentives to hire by gender or race? - SIGNY



I'm assuming it's been a long time since you filled out an application at a low level position like a retail job.

They ask a lot of questions about your sex, your race, if you are or were recently on food stamps or TANF, if you served in the military.

Large corporations get tax incentives the more people they hire that tick off any of those boxes. I'm too busy ATM to look for that now, but I've been wanting to respond to this very long post all day and didn't want to put it off any longer.

Quote:

The way I look at it, it should be one way or the other. Give women 100% choice in the matter, but they do not have the ability to come after a man for any financial support. OR, make men completely accountable for the child after the fact in all cases, but also give men a say on whether the abortion takes place.- SIX

Sounds fair. I pick option #1.- SIGNY

That's progress. It's not the option I'd prefer, but that's the price of negotiations. I realize that not everyone in the world views abortion as murdering babies, so I can't use that as an argument. But I do think that relinquishing the ability to go after men for child support would suffice in making the woman's choice of what to do with her body deemed as a fair choice. (Because they way it is now, it's not only the choice she has about her body, but the very livelihood of the man in question for the next 18 or so years)- SIX

Indeed. The decision to have a baby, or not, potentially affects the father as well.



Thank you. It's nice to have somebody recognize that fact.

Quote:

Now you're moving the goalposts. We were talking about laws or statutes, not custom or practice.- SIGNY

Not moving the goalposts. I said this before. Not much of a difference between a law and a practice if the practice happens 100% of the time and the outcome is expected. - SIX

That throws open the discussion again. I was hoping to limit the discussion to laws and statutes, which are documented, as opposed to practices and customs, which can be argued forever because they're hard to prove.



Yes and no. I do believe that the ones I'm bringing up here are kind of "Universal Truths" that don't really need to be proven. Is there any in particular I've brought up that you feel this is not the case?

Quote:

You can thank the Jewish lobby for that. Since Nazis used circumcision as a means of identifying Jewish males, Jews here agitated to have circumcision made the standard practice so that their population could never be identified amongst all of the other males. - SIGNY

It is unimportant whether or not you believe circumcision to be genital mutilation. I do, and many other people do.- SIX

As do I. I think it's a barbaric custom foisted on us by Jews and should be done away with. How do we go about it?- SIGNY

I'm not really looking for a history lesson here. I'm glad that you agree that it should be done away with though. I don't know how to do away with it. I'm not an MRA and I don't subscribe to any type of group like that, but I do know it's one of the things that is high on their list of priorities.- SIX

I can't imagine why anyone would be against ending circumcision. I know doctors who say that circumcision prevents penile cancer, but really, the answer is washing well. Males can always get it later, if they're so inclined, when they reach the age of majority. - SIGNY



I don't know why anybody would be against it either. I actually never heard any Feminist groups that are against ending it. All I'm doing by bringing it up is showing how Women in general are more revered, especially when it comes to government protections and general practices in all spots in life.

The moment a male is born, part of his reproductive organs are chopped off.

Think about that for a moment.

We gasp in horror to hear that this is a regular practice on women among Middle Eastern cultures, but we don't even bat an eye when it comes to doing it to males right here.

Quote:

Yeah, you're right. Abolish registration- SIGNY

Good enough for me.- SIX
Yay! - SIGNY




Quote:

Not a law or statute. But now you're putting women in a no-win situation. You want them to be drafted just like men and treated just like men when it's clear that women are smaller than men (on the average) with less muscle mass. Either (1) change the requirements so that women can meet them (for example, require less ammo which weighs less*) or (2) create tiered assignments/duties based on something like height and muscle mass to account for different physiologies in a non-sexist way.- SIGNY

I actually don't want them to be drafted just like men, or treated just like men. That's supposedly what they've fought for. I was just using the draft as one of the most hypocritical things about the feminist movement. It's all about equality until we talk about the draft. -SIX

I don't know what the women's movement position is on the draft. - SIGNY





Whoopie Goldberg gets it.

That's a sentence I just said.

Quote:

If the draft is eliminated, this point is moot anyhow.

There have been plenty of men who have been deemed unfit for the military, based off of physical attributes. In that time the same standard of physical ability has been applied, no matter the situation. I don't see why the fact that women are now in the military should necessitate changing that system, since we're all equal.- SIX

Maybe not "unfit" in general, but can you really expect a 5' 100-pound person to perform the same as a 6' 200-pound person, no matter which sex? - SIGNY



No, but for basic military service the 200 lb 6' person has an exceedingly easy time passing the basic requirements. I wrestled at 97 lbs Freshman year and only 125 lbs by Senior year. In 7th and 8th grade I was only 75 lbs. I had no problem getting the Presidential Physical Fitness award 6 years in a row starting in Jr. High.

The standard for males is fairly low for basic training. Actually, lowering that further for women now could be a bad thing for women if the draft was enacted and they were forced to be a part of it. If it was kept to the minimum male requirements a lot of women would be able to get out of service by not qualifying. But since it is lower, those chances are a lot more slim.

Quote:

I'd imagine that breaking down people further into groups and testing them that way would be a lot more paperwork and cost more money. Our military expenses are obscene as it is. I don't think we need to do something that would probably create a whole new agency to keep track of. Male or female, you need to reach the same standard since everyone will be relying on everyone else regardless of gender.- SIX

Okay, then screen people out based on that standard. But I think you'd be leaving a lot of talent on the table. - SIGNY



True, but for the really talented they have alternative options. My brother tested into Military Intelligence. He said that Basic Training was a breeze. He was no athlete. I've never heard anybody say that about basic training in my life.

Quote:

* As I understand it, even in "fire groups" which is the lowest level of front line combat organization there is a division of labor. You usually have the gunner, the ammo-carrier/ back-watcher, and the spotter. Now, carrying ammo prolly requires a strong back, but smaller people could be very effective spotters.- SIGNY

I do get your point. In a perfect world something like this makes sense. I was more pointing out the hypocrisy of the entire situation as it is. You talk about me arguing that everyone should be a part of the draft AND that women (who many of which presumably would be drafted) would then be forced to those higher physical standards.

What I'm saying is, in the system as it is now, this is just another example of women getting ALL of the preferred treatment. They DON'T have to register for the draft, and they DON'T have to be held to the same standards.- SIX

Agreed. - SIGNY



Thank you again.

Quote:

There is also the fact that we haven't had a draft in my entire life, and unless the entire world goes to shit it wouldn't never happen again because wars are fought much differently with today's technology. Either making women sign up for the draft or eliminating the draft altogether would really be nothing more than a symbolic gesture.- SIX

But symbolism is important. - SIGNY



Absolutely.

Quote:

Not a law or statute as far as I know, but certainly an unfair practice. BOTH parents should be evaluated for fitness.- SIGNY

No. Not a law or a statute as far as I know either, but it absolutely happens 100% of the time. The only exception being if the woman has a easily damning history of mental problems, drug addiction, spousal or child abuse, etc.

I lived through it. That was my childhood. It's likely the largest reason that I have no interest in ever getting married.- SIX

There's an interesting story there, I'm sure. - SIGNY



Oh, there is. Add to it having to deal with my brother's brain hemorrhage right around that time and it's even more unique. It's not worth telling if there isn't a happy ending though. Only time will tell.

Quote:

This is not only NOT a law or statute, it has nothing to do with the legal system whatsoever. Men need to get together and set these up for themselves, just like women had to get together, raise money, raise awareness, and set up shelters for each other.- SIGNY

Read the report I linked. It has a LOT to do with federal funds, of which none go to mens shelters and all go to women's shelters. There is also an extremely high suicide rate among men who go through this, especially those who are forced to leave the home, some of which become homeless. - SIX

You're right. It's unfair. - SIGNY



It's a pattern.

Quote:

6. Women have the right to exclusive tax benefits for being business owners. -SIX

They do? Like what? That's sure a new one on me!

SIX: https://www.bizfilings.com/toolkit/research-topics/business-resources-
for-women/information-on-women-owned-business-opportunities-assistance


I'll look into this. - SIGNY



OK

Quote:

There is another aspect that you haven't touched on, and it's the whole idea of "protected classes". We are made to take a class every year on discriminatory behavior which puts our employer at legal liability, and the "protected classes" have expanded to include sex, sexual preference, race, ethnicity, religion etc etc. The only person NOT protected is the white 20-50 y/o hetero male, who can (technically) be the butt of endless jokes and harassment and not be able to appeal to any Equal Opportunity Board for redress. I personally find that unfair. My employer has more or less superseded that law by demanding professional behavior from anyone to anyone; and you can be fired for unprofessional behavior. IN PRACTICE, women are still be groped, ogled, and marginalized; and suspected gays are definitely excluded from promotion; but I'm glad that our organization demands professional behavior from everyone, at least by written policy.



Thank you as well for taking note of that, Sigs. I have brought that up here before, but I usually just get called a mysoginst/racist by T or have my manhood questioned by Wishy whenever the subject comes up.

Good on your employer for making their own addendums.

Honestly though, do you really have women being groped in your workplace? I've worked around some pretty shady characters in some of my jobs and I've never seen that behavior before. I'm starting to think this is a middle class/rich class problem or something.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 6:38 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Honestly though, do you really have women being groped in your workplace?
Yes. We have a diverse and international workplace, and problems tend to come from people who grew up in the Middle East, who can't seem to leave that part of their culture behind.

Quote:

I've worked around some pretty shady characters in some of my jobs and I've never seen that behavior before. I'm starting to think this is a middle class/rich class problem or something.
The other set of miscreants seem to be ... wait for it ... lawyers.

I was going to add that those at my workplace who complain about the bias against white hetero males are assholes. It would be a lot more compelling argument if it came from the mouths of those who weren't constantly horn-dogging their way thru the female staff. The only reason why I give it any credence at all is because it's been raised in the past by men who were real angels towards women.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 10:59 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Don't you guys have an HR department that takes care of these things? None of that would have been tolerated at all at my last job making 60k+, and I was one of the relatively lower level employees. My manager was easily making close to 6 figures if not above that. One of the other shift managers was fired for e-mailing what was considered to be inappropriate pictures to a female employee. She was crying about it after the fact. They were friends. She didn't report it. Either the system was in place to look at pictures that were sent, he was the victim of a random email check or somebody already had it out for him and was just waiting for an excuse to get rid of him.

Then again, if a majority of this behavior is coming from middle easterners, they are of a protected class that ranks higher than women. I'm not saying that one couldn't get one of them fired, but they'd probably have to have some proof or at least one witness. All they'd pretty much have to do if it was a white guy was say it happened and it's over.


BTW... did you watch that video from The View. (That's a sentence I just said).

I'd never seen that one. I just picked one of the first videos that came up on youtube about Feminism and the Draft. I assumed that it would be everybody complaining about it. I was actually very surprised to hear Whoopie Goldbergs take on it. Pretty adult response if you ask me.

You can find plenty of videos of Feminists protesting against the draft being expanded to females on youtube.

Again, it's hard to say that "Feminists are against the Draft", because that word can mean a lot of different things. When you have a "movement" that isn't an actual organization with a non-changing Mission Statement that can be read, it's hard to pin down any actual beliefs of the movement. Generally speaking, especially these days, it is the loudest voices that get recognized.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 6:34 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Don't you guys have an HR department that takes care of these things?
Yes, but I think they're grossly incompetent.

The Egyptian who grabbed a boob in the elevator was fired. The lawyer who made a drunken and deeply offensive comment at a staff party was also fired.

But the guy who horndogged his way thru the female staff was kind of railroaded. He was accused of doing something that didn't happen, but what he DID do was never confronted. Basically, he had a very sarcastic sense of humor, which nobody appreciated, but they would have tolerated it better if he had worked harder and more competently. On top of that he would lean just a little too close to some women, invite some female staff to "just a lunch", and stared a little too long at some boobs. Overall, he was kind of a jerk who complained about being discriminated against because he was a white hetero male.

The guy who had an explosive temper was never investigated; and the manager who ogled women was never disciplined. It was kind of a crap shoot.

On top of that, the investigation process was a joke. People could be accused of things and never know who accused them, and would never have a chance to speak up in their defense. It was so ridiculous that I was put in the position of having to tell someone "I can't tell you what you did because that would ID the complainant, but whatever you did you'll have to stop".

I really think that these kinds of complaints should be investigated and tried the same way that you would in court, with a chance to confront your accusers, and with sworn testimony.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 6:50 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


https://www.bustle.com/articles/118139-4-statistics-that-prove-we-need
-to-teach-people-about-consent


1. Men Are More Likely To Say They'll Rape If They Don't Consider It Rape
In the previously-referenced survey published in Violence and Gender, 32 percent of college men said they would have “intentions to force a woman to sexual intercourse” if ‘‘nobody would ever know and there wouldn’t be any consequences." Only 13.6 percent of these men said they would have “any intentions to rape a woman” in the same situation. This suggests that when we teach people to recognize rape as rape, they're less likely to do it.

2. 33.1 Percent Of Women, 39.1 Percent of TGQN People, And 8.6 Percent Of Men Experience Nonconsensual Sexual Contact During College
... more recent research published in JAMA Pediatrics in 2015 found that 10.8 percent of college men had committed rape in either high school or college. That's a significant proportion — too large to just be considered a fringe population ...

3. 18 Percent Of College Students Think Someone Has Consented As Long As They Don't Say "No"
This statistic comes from a poll conducted by The Washington Post between January and March of 2015.

4. Victims Say They Didn't Report Their Sexual Assaults Because They Didn't Know They Were Assaulted
These victims did not understand that it is always a crime to engage in sexual contact with someone without having given their consent.





HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 6:53 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/05/01/campus_sexual_assault_
statistics_so_many_victims_but_not_as_many_predators.html

The White House spent this week rolling out its task force for combating sexual violence on campus, and part of the campaign has been to routinely cite the claim that 1 in 5 female college students is sexually assaulted during her time in school.




HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 6:54 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 6:57 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Anyway - we teach our girls and boys very badly, via our TV, and games, and other media.

But tho I have more to say, I have other things to do right now.




HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 7:02 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


KIKI, women suffer from one form of predation, but men suffer from another.

Men are supposed to "stand up for themselves", to physically defend themselves if necessary. Many men automatically scan a room to see who they might be able to take on, and who can take THEM on. Rewards accrue to the most physical or the most violent. MOST men don't fare well in such a system especially not a small, big-nosed, frizzy-haired, four-eyed nebbish.

It's a system that doesn't work well for most people in it.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 7:06 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I completely reject any poll that states that 13.2% of college age men would rape.

I'll even play ball with you and not argue the truth of that statistic.

Let's say that statistic were true. What do you think the likelihood that the 13.2% of college age men that would rape would actually admit to anyone that they would rape?

Sorry. Completely bogus stats that I'm not even going to bother reading the rest.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 7:11 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I completely reject any poll that states that 13.2% of college age men would rape.
Hubby works on the campus of a large private university, and I'd say that's a lowball estimate. It prolly describes just about every frat boy on campus, for starters, because while they (usually) wouldn't threaten a girl with a knife or a gun, they would think nothing of liquoring her into insensibility before sex. Which is, btw, rape.

But this kind of comparative victimhood is exactly the kind of argument that the elite would like to see: identity groups comparing who has the bigger boo-boo, or insisting on their relative righteousness.

How about that we all just accept whatever part it is that we have played in discrimination, realize that we are mostly victims and perps in one way or another, and just vow to forge ahead with equality. Equality isn't a zero-sum game, yanno.


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 9:11 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


So, my post made me wonder... why ARE we arguing over equality as if it were a zero-sum game?

That's one of the things that should apply to everyone. Equally.

It's not fairness or equality that's a zero-sum game, but privilege. When you start laying your identity-politics on the table for measurement, you're not arguing for fairness, you're arguing for PRIVILEGE, that you might have something more than someone else.

WISHY, take this to heart: Do you really think women deserve MORE equality than men?

SIX, take this to heart: Do you really think that men are entirely blameless?

Can't you set your old grudges aside and just try to work out a way that we can all be fair to each other?



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 9:51 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I think maybe kids should stop drinking so much at college.

Maybe it wouldn't be such a big deal if kids were able to drink with parental supervision at 16 like they do in other countries.


No. Men obviously aren't entirely blameless. You know I don't deal in absolutes.


I just reject polls which state that 1 in every 5 women on college campuses will be raped and that 13.2% of men on campus say that they would rape. (I a ABSOLUTELY SURE that not a single man in that survey said they would rape. They were just classified as potential rapists because of how they answered questions on the test.)

Define rape.

Personally, I view rape as threatening violence for it, or unwittingly drugging somebody.

If everybody is drinking and sex happens, that's not rape. Don't drink so much you don't like the decision you made the night before. Period.

If we're all equal, and we're talking about strong and independent women here, take some fucking responsibility for your own actions and choices.

I've slept with a few women who I NEVER would have slept with unless I was plastered. Some of them because of their looks sure, but others because they were batshit crazy too. I wasn't raped. I was just stupid and drunk.

There have also been a few girls I slept with that I really regretted after the fact because I did enjoy their company as friends but didn't want anything more with them. Sleeping with somebody ruins friendship. Every time. At least it has for me.



When you call everything rape, then nothing is rape.

It's like idiots around here calling me a Nazi or you a Communist. When the words are used every day to describe everything, it takes away from the people who have gone through horrible things in their lives and just makes other people shrug whenever they hear the words because they hear them all the time.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 10, 2017 10:04 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
I think maybe kids should stop drinking so much at college.

Maybe it wouldn't be such a big deal if kids were able to drink with parental supervision at 16 like they do in other countries.


No. Men obviously aren't entirely blameless. You know I don't deal in absolutes.

Ok

Quote:

I just reject polls which state that 1 in every 5 women on college campuses will be raped and that 13.2% of men on campus say that they would rape.

Define rape.

It's a sex act performed on a person against their will, or when they aren't able to say no.

Quote:

Personally, I view rape as threating violence for it, or unwittingly drugging somebody.

If everybody is drinking and sex happens, that's not rape. Don't drink so much you don't like the decision you made the night before.

If we're all equal, and we're talking about strong and independent women here, take some fucking responsibility for your own actions and choices. I

I've slept with a few women who I NEVER would have slept with unless I was plastered. Some of them because of their looks, but others because they were batshit crazy too. I wasn't raped. I was just stupid and drunk.

Do Right, Be Right. :)



I agree with you that women need to take responsibility for their actions, and yet the whole culture is going the wrong way. Also, if you expect women to take responsibility for not getting drunk, how about expecting men to not fuck girls who're just barely this side of conscious? Are you sure you aren't expecting a double standard?

I read parts of Hepola's Blackout: Remembering the Things I Drank to Forget and it describes a woman who was convinced that being sexually liberated meant engaging in endless hookups, and drinking was a way to numb herself to that paradigm.

I heard an interview of Orenstein (Girls and Sex) about what's going on with girls today ... it's horrific, they think they need to be "hot" or to offer sex for conferred status. and drinking is definitely part of that too ... they drink to absolve themselves of responsibility.

As I walked past a group of boys at the pharmacy the other day, who couldn't have been more than 13 or 14, I overheard one tell another Well, at least I kept it in longer than YOU did and I couldn't help wondering how the girls became pieces of a game.

Women endlessly blaming someone else for their own victimization robs them of their power. But how to get women to stop victimizing themselves? Do they feel that they just don't know how to say "no"? Are they trying to live up to a media-hyped example? Online porn? Athletic-team entitlement?

Which brings me to the role of the media on our collective shit-fitting, but I guess that's for later.


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
The Evidens
Thu, November 23, 2017 13:32 - 722 posts
Evidence: So where are we now(II) ?
Thu, November 23, 2017 12:59 - 108 posts
Countdown Clock to Trumps impeachment " STARTS"
Thu, November 23, 2017 12:59 - 646 posts
Mueller, Trump and the case for Obstruction of Justice
Thu, November 23, 2017 12:56 - 105 posts
Shout out to Second - hope you are doing well
Thu, November 23, 2017 06:54 - 188 posts
The predictions thread
Thu, November 23, 2017 05:50 - 686 posts
The Scumbag from Alabama - 5th Accusser Surfaces
Thu, November 23, 2017 05:18 - 27 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!!!
Thu, November 23, 2017 02:08 - 242 posts
Is Trump Nuts?
Thu, November 23, 2017 00:43 - 857 posts
Russia wants to upend Western democracy
Wed, November 22, 2017 20:40 - 50 posts
A thread for Democrats Only
Wed, November 22, 2017 20:30 - 191 posts
Another Putin Disaster
Wed, November 22, 2017 16:49 - 44 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL