Chivalry is dead. And wymen/womyn killed it.

[Good morning blues]

Long

I'm glad you share your tasks with your girlfriend. You are the exception to this rule. Women are still expected to bear the brunt of household work most of the time; people like you and me that fight this trend are still far in the minority. Some people are perfectly happy with this, too; it's the expectation, the double standard, that is the problem. I fail to see how this has anything to do with the wage gap being self-imposed. My point is that these differences are based on social concepts, not any intrinsic, natural differences between men and women.

I would argue that men being prone to violence is an issue with men, and moreover an issue with gender roles - the same gender roles that these men use to justify their abuse of these women.

Claiming that women are "naturally disinterested" in certain fields is completely asinine. I assume from what you're saying is that one of the fields that women would be "naturally disinterested" in is math, but this is completely untrue in other cultures [http://www.newsweek.com/id/164523], meaning that it's a social difference. The stereotype is that girls aren't good at math, or good with computers, or good at business, so they're not encouraged to excel in them, so they don't work on it, so they end up making less money.

You're right; the problem is double standards, and that is sexism. The reason that there are so many organizations for women is the same that there are so many organizations for other oppressed groups - sure, women have it better than they have in the past, but it's a man's world, and it's been built by men to ensure that men succeed. Just because there are efforts underway to address this doesn't mean that it's been taken care of.

 

[KarumaK]

http://warrenfarrell.org/TheBook/index.html

Interesting stuff that might help the discussion.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

A: So you are saying that everybody that is in power is sexist and won't let women into the club? Seriously are you arguing that thousands of people in high power are sexist? And not something like I dunno... Women not applying themselves for said job? Take gamestop and such for example. Most employees there are men, Because they apply themselves.
Would you want a corporation to turn away men and hold out for a women just to fill a status quo of female workers just to keep the average wage relatively even?

An example is, Hard sciences. More men then women focus on these jobs. This isn't sexist because less women study hard sciences jobs so less women work in the hard sciences.

B: Wait so your saying the women should not seek legal help? Wah? Would you not call the police is somebody shot you? I would be scared if somebody shot me but I would be the first one calling the police who would arrive sometime in the near future and hall said person off.

If somebody is unwilling to change their life then the blame rests solely on them. I am NOT advocating that women should be beaten. If they are in fear and refuse to break said fear then what the fuck are you supposed to do?

C. But internet porn isn't really and industry as the same could be said for some kid drug dealing on a corner.

Exotic Dancing - Bouncers? Need I say more?
Prostitution - Women who chose it chose it.
Slavery - Well whos going to stop them if nobody stands up? The police won't know until somebody does something.

Also last time I checked most of what you are talking about is breaking of laws..Its not like this goes unpunished.(Well maybe in crooked southern towns but thats another drum can full of spicy topics.)

 

[Drakstern]

I once got yelled at for holding a door open for a woman at college.

"How dare you call me weak by holding open the door!" she said.

"How dare you oppress me by stereotyping me as a misogynist because I was polite!" I replied.

She shut up quite fast.

Anyhow, it's only really a problem when one or more parties involved is crazy. Let it go.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

Yeah I guess if you ignore the divisions of household labour, difference in wages, difference in positions, domestic abuse, the sex industry, depictions of gender-based power relations in culture, and rape, it would be perfectly reasonable to say that women have long achieved equality with men. I mean, they can vote so what more do they want amirite?

Let's not forget divisions of *non* household labor, difference in spending, difference in education and ambition, and the fact that women are more likely to *kill* their spouse.

I don't have trouble with doing the dishes and cleaning the house if I don't have to shingle the roof and mow the lawn.

As long as we have political equality, we can handle any other "problems" we may have with men ourselves.

Shingling a roof isn't that bad just so you know. Airgun+Nails plus somebody to haul up a 50lb bag of shingles its really not that bad...I helped my brother who is a roofer himself and a architect roof and it really isn't bad. A lot of bending and such and the cutting of said shingles.

 

[Good morning blues]

All right, there's too many people quoting me for me to respond to each of them now, so I'll just sum up my argument in a nutshell, and if anybody has a problem with it they can poke holes in it at their leisure.

In general, women in our society have a shittier deal than men, and it's because of entrenched gender roles that place men in positions of power and women in positions of submission. It's easy to get over these on an individual basis, but it's still a massive problem in our society, to the point where most of these completely baseless social constructs are accepted as natural - even biological - by men and women alike. Sure, there are a couple of crazy feminists out there, but they are far outnumbered by crazy misogynists and they do not do nearly as much to harm women or society at large as the misogynists do. Someone being rude at a Timmy-Ho's certainly isn't cause for a reaction against feminism, because it's still an important issue in this day and age; these gender roles need to be subverted and destroyed, because they're making life worse for 50% of us in a very concrete way and the other 50% more indirectly.

EDIT: Actually, I guess there's not too much to respond to here, let's see if I can do it briefly.

Beatings

Frankly, we're never going to agree on this one. Sure, you need to seek help, but I don't see how we can condemn these people for being too afraid (and these are very real, concrete fears) to do so.

Sex industry

If you can thrive in the sex industry, good for you; I completely honestly don't have any problem with that. In some ways and for some people, I *DO* believe that it can be empowering. That doesn't change the fact that a large number of women in that industry are there as a result of coercion, or are subject to violence, or have been sold into sexual slavery and sent to the first world.

Minorities can be dangerous

Yes, some minorities can fuck things up. If the worst that "womyn" have done is start some womens' only gyms and yell at some guy at a Timmy-Ho's, I don't think it's a problem.

The flip side of all of my examples

Okay, mostly valid points (I'd argue a couple - most female out-of-home labour is unskilled and badly paid, women kill their spouses in response to abuse, etc.), but it doesn't change my point that gender roles and widespread misogynistic attitudes are harmful to women, and I'm not going to stop fighting against them, partly because I want to improve things for women, and partly because I feel that gender roles are damaging to men, too.

By the way, word "womyn" is completely ridiculous; anyone who actually traces the origins of the words "man" and "woman" in the English language will see that the similarity between them is a complete coincidence.

Just so that nobody gets the wrong idea, I think that "womyn" is a completely retarded concept, too.

 

[jim_doki]

*puts his coat over a mudhole*
*opens a door*
*slaps someone for insulting a woman*
*offers a totally platonic hug and hand when needed*
*refuses to apologise for any of the above*

 

[Susan Arendt]

If women are afraid of one man and refuse to seek civil help from the police then yes I they get what they get. If 3 button presses and a quick little chat with 911 is to much then they deserve what they get for being lazy.

You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about if you think it's really that simple. For you to even suggest that a woman who doesn't leave her abuser is simply "lazy" is positively obscene.

 

[Scorpio3002]

The fact is that while there is certainly some amount of sexism toward women in our culture, feminists have achieved their goals to a degree where they can safely begin dialing things down a bit. Sadly, many of the women who claim to fight for women's rights are an example of history repeating itself over and over again: they are a group of people who have power and started off with none. How many times in history have people fought against their oppressors? Many. How many times have those same people, once victorious, not gone on to become oppressors themselves? Very few; I can only name a couple individuals (George Washington and Gandhi, off the top of my head), and even then not without some heavy resistance from their followers.

By the way, word "womyn" is completely ridiculous; anyone who actually traces the origins of the words "man" and "woman" in the English language will see that the similarity between them is a complete coincidence.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

If women are afraid of one man and refuse to seek civil help from the police then yes I they get what they get. If 3 button presses and a quick little chat with 911 is to much then they deserve what they get for being lazy.

You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about if you think it's really that simple. For you to even suggest that a woman who doesn't leave her abuser is simply "lazy" is positively obscene.

Again my shooting example, If somebody shot you would you not stay the hell away so you don't get shot again?

It is simple If you are to lazy to take 10 seconds dial 3 numbers and have a 2 minute or so talk for help then like I said what can somebody do to help you? Swoop down from the sky and magically fix things with fairy dust? No?

If a spouse is being beaten then there are two options. Continue or stop it. There are various ways to stop it as stated by others such as killing the person but then that breaks laws in itself.

My solution breaks zero laws, takes less then 5 minutes, And fixes the problem.

 

[Scorpio3002]

-Dismissal of male-by-female sexual abuse cases.

-Failure on all levels of government and society to address prison rape as an issue.

-Single females being permitted to adopt a child, but single males being denied.

-Higher incarceration rates and longer sentences for men (compared to women) for the same crimes.

-Statutory rape laws enforced more vehemently in instances where the victim is female and/or the perpetrator is male.

-The fact that far more people die annually of prostrate cancer than breast cancer, without a corresponding movement to increase awareness of prostrate cancer.

-Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them! (Look it up.)

-Dubay v. Wells. (LOOK IT UP.)

These are just a few of the concerns that are completely neglected by modern feminists, which fall to the rising men's rights (or masculinist) movement to address.

Also, is it just me, or have women stopped writing love songs? Whenever I turn on the radio, if it's a woman singing, she's singing about some form of empowerment (I'm not gonna write you a love song!)

 

[Zeke109]

Oh god, not the resurgence of these threads again.

PUUUSH!!
I actually hate these people and they're toes should be stubbed on the nearest coffee table corner.

 

[Blade3dge]

Long

I'm glad you share your tasks with your girlfriend. You are the exception to this rule. Women are still expected to bear the brunt of household work most of the time; people like you and me that fight this trend are still far in the minority. Some people are perfectly happy with this, too; it's the expectation, the double standard, that is the problem. I fail to see how this has anything to do with the wage gap being self-imposed. My point is that these differences are based on social concepts, not any intrinsic, natural differences between men and women.

I would argue that men being prone to violence is an issue with men, and moreover an issue with gender roles - the same gender roles that these men use to justify their abuse of these women.

Claiming that women are "naturally disinterested" in certain fields is completely asinine. I assume from what you're saying is that one of the fields that women would be "naturally disinterested" in is math, but this is completely untrue in other cultures [http://www.newsweek.com/id/164523], meaning that it's a social difference. The stereotype is that girls aren't good at math, or good with computers, or good at business, so they're not encouraged to excel in them, so they don't work on it, so they end up making less money.

You're right; the problem is double standards, and that is sexism. The reason that there are so many organisations for women is the same that there are so many organizations for other oppressed groups - sure, women have it better than they have in the past, but it's a man's world, and it's been built by men to ensure that men succeed. Just because there are efforts under way to address this doesn't mean that it's been taken care of.

I'm glad you're willing to debate this rather than getting all offended and defensive

Women simply need to learn to empower themselves, by being your typical upper middle class male I am at a disadvantage in society. Minorities are given every tool nescesary in life to thrive and women... Heck they're not even a minority.

If I was a woman:
I would be working the same job being paid the same wage I am.
I would in fact be granted more rights in the workplace.
I would do as much housework as I do at the moment.
I would be studying the exact same degree.
I would have a science degree scholarship which is restricted to women.
I would be much less expected to pay for dates (despite earning more than a male as a result of my scholarship).
I would be able to choose exploitation by doing something I enjoy (women like sex too) and getting paid a crap load of money for it and doing very little work. Oh how exploitative.
People would be much less likely to threaten me with violence (men fight other men MUCH more often than they fight women)
If I was attacked by a man it would be like the witch hunts and the man would be burnt at the stake.
I would have organisations devoted to me and a much stronger representation at my university.
And many more...

If I was a woman this life that I lead would be easier. So many of the issues faced by women are either not issues or self-imposed, you can argue that society leads to women imposing these values on themselves but I have never seen a woman being told women are naturally bad at maths, in fact they are more often than not given incentives due to the rarity of a mathematically minded woman.

 

[Scorpio3002]

If women are afraid of one man and refuse to seek civil help from the police then yes I they get what they get. If 3 button presses and a quick little chat with 911 is to much then they deserve what they get for being lazy.

You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about if you think it's really that simple. For you to even suggest that a woman who doesn't leave her abuser is simply "lazy" is positively obscene.

Again my shooting example, If somebody shot you would you not stay the hell away so you don't get shot again?

It is simple If you are to lazy to take 10 seconds dial 3 numbers and have a 2 minute or so talk for help then like I said what can somebody do to help you? Swoop down from the sky and magically fix things with fairy dust? No?

If a spouse is being beaten then there are two options. Continue or stop it. There are various ways to stop it as stated by others such as killing the person but then that breaks laws in itself.

My solution breaks zero laws, takes less then 5 minutes, And fixes the problem.

The problem with your argument is your choice of words. "Laziness" is not what prohibits women from seeking help when abused by a spouse. It is a far deeper psychological issue, rooted in security of the familiar and fear of the unknown, as well as fear of repercussions and unwillingness to trust in the people who might help them. To call it laziness is ignorant, but to repeatedly defend this statement is embarrassingly so.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

If women are afraid of one man and refuse to seek civil help from the police then yes I they get what they get. If 3 button presses and a quick little chat with 911 is to much then they deserve what they get for being lazy.

You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about if you think it's really that simple. For you to even suggest that a woman who doesn't leave her abuser is simply "lazy" is positively obscene.

Again my shooting example, If somebody shot you would you not stay the hell away so you don't get shot again?

Humans don't always behave in a rational manner. There's an entire applied science under the business curriculum devoted to it: it's called marketing.

Sure your argument makes sense in theory. In the real world, though, it breaks down. Many women who are otherwise smart and motivated stay in abusive relationships, just like many people who are otherwise smart and motivated are influenced by advertising.

In academia, the study of such phenomena is called sociology.

+++++

Also, leaving a guy isn't as easy as you think. It's not just 'sue and get half his paycheck'. It's often 'sue and never be able to find the guy and serve papers' or 'sue and wake up with him standing over your bed with a shotgun pointed at your face talking about if he can't have you no one will'

A lot of times, women don't leave because as quick as you think it is to call 911, it's a lot quicker for him to murder you out of jealousy for trying to get away.

Men have more to fear in a relationship then women. Women kill more men then men kill women in domestic matters.

But I do agree its not simple to get back to yourdaily life. But it is simple to stop beatings and such.

I did not say sue also, I stated martial matters with kids involved the man would be crippled for life. That is to say if he delivers which is a problem with this I agree.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

If women are afraid of one man and refuse to seek civil help from the police then yes I they get what they get. If 3 button presses and a quick little chat with 911 is to much then they deserve what they get for being lazy.

You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about if you think it's really that simple. For you to even suggest that a woman who doesn't leave her abuser is simply "lazy" is positively obscene.

Again my shooting example, If somebody shot you would you not stay the hell away so you don't get shot again?

It is simple If you are to lazy to take 10 seconds dial 3 numbers and have a 2 minute or so talk for help then like I said what can somebody do to help you? Swoop down from the sky and magically fix things with fairy dust? No?

If a spouse is being beaten then there are two options. Continue or stop it. There are various ways to stop it as stated by others such as killing the person but then that breaks laws in itself.

My solution breaks zero laws, takes less then 5 minutes, And fixes the problem.

The problem with your argument is your choice of words. "Laziness" is not what prohibits women from seeking help when abused by a spouse. It is a far deeper psychological issue, rooted in security of the familiar and fear of the unknown, as well as fear of repercussions and unwillingness to trust in the people who might help them. To call it laziness is ignorant, but to repeatedly defend this statement is embarrassingly so.

Laziness is synonymous with refusal and such. Take the 'to' right before lazy and after out and replace it with refusing and the statement does not change. (I do stretch lazy out of dictionary terms yes.)

 

[jockslap]

All right, there's too many people quoting me for me to respond to each of them now, so I'll just sum up my argument in a nutshell, and if anybody has a problem with it they can poke holes in it at their leisure.

In general, women in our society have a shittier deal than men, and it's because of entrenched gender roles that place men in positions of power and women in positions of submission. It's easy to get over these on an individual basis, but it's still a massive problem in our society, to the point where most of these completely baseless social constructs are accepted as natural - even biological - by men and women alike. Sure, there are a couple of crazy feminists out there, but they are far outnumbered by crazy misogynists and they do not do nearly as much to harm women or society at large as the misogynists do. Someone being rude at a Timmy-Ho's certainly isn't cause for a reaction against feminism, because it's still an important issue in this day and age; these gender roles need to be subverted and destroyed, because they're making life worse for 50% of us in a very concrete way and the other 50% more indirectly.

EDIT: Actually, I guess there's not too much to respond to here, let's see if I can do it briefly.

Beatings

Frankly, we're never going to agree on this one. Sure, you need to seek help, but I don't see how we can condemn these people for being too afraid (and these are very real, concrete fears) to do so.

Sex industry

If you can thrive in the sex industry, good for you; I completely honestly don't have any problem with that. In some ways and for some people, I *DO* believe that it can be empowering. That doesn't change the fact that a large number of women in that industry are there as a result of coercion, or are subject to violence, or have been sold into sexual slavery and sent to the first world.

Minorities can be dangerous

Yes, some minorities can fuck things up. If the worst that "womyn" have done is start some womens' only gyms and yell at some guy at a Timmy-Ho's, I don't think it's a problem.

The flip side of all of my examples

Okay, mostly valid points (I'd argue a couple - most female out-of-home labour is unskilled and badly paid, women kill their spouses in response to abuse, etc.), but it doesn't change my point that gender roles and widespread misogynistic attitudes are harmful to women, and I'm not going to stop fighting against them, partly because I want to improve things for women, and partly because I feel that gender roles are damaging to men, too.

By the way, word "womyn" is completely ridiculous; anyone who actually traces the origins of the words "man" and "woman" in the English language will see that the similarity between them is a complete coincidence.

Just so that nobody gets the wrong idea, I think that "womyn" is a completely retarded concept, too.

in response to your response to superfriendBFG, it's not that i just chose a couple examples that I happen to relate to, the point wasn't the specific incidences but the movement behind them.

 

[mshcherbatskaya]

Women are actually MORE likely to be killed by their abuser after trying to leave him. I posted the data in another thread if you need be to go dig it up.

A woman trying to leave her abuser usually triggers the abuser to escalate the violence. Leaving an abusive home is a leading cause of homelessness in women, because they have no where else to go. Their families are either too far away, or their abuser hunts them down there, so they end up on the street, sometimes with their kids.

If you think law enforcement and restraining orders can actually keep women safe from their abusers, you are wrong.