Printable View
Y'all (slow and ba) give me a headache. I'm going to post on a fun thread so I'm "up" and happy first, then I'll come back.
I'll give you this much...you two are persistent, despite being roundly trounced by women who are clearly your intellectual betters. But hey, why let a little thing like reality stand in the way of dogma?
Equal Pay Act
[align=center]Equal Pay and Compensation Discrimination[/align]
The right of employees to be free from discrimination in their compensation is protected under several federal laws, including the following enforced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC): the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
The Equal Pay Act requires that men and women be given equal pay for equal work in the same establishment. The jobs need not be identical, but they must be substantially equal. It is job content, not job titles, that determines whether jobs are substantially equal. Specifically, the EPA provides:
Employers may not pay unequal wages to men and women who perform jobs that require substantially equal skill, effort and responsibility, and that are performed under similar working conditions within the same establishment. Each of these factors is summarized below:
Skill - Measured by factors such as the experience, ability, education, and training required to perform the job. The key issue is what skills are required for the job, not what skills the individual employees may have. For example, two bookkeeping jobs could be considered equal under the EPA even if one of the job holders has a master's degree in physics, since that degree would not be required for the job.
Effort - The amount of physical or mental exertion needed to perform the job. For example, suppose that men and women work side by side on a line assembling machine parts. The person at the end of the line must also lift the assembled product as he or she completes the work and place it on a board. That job requires more effort than the other assembly line jobs if the extra effort of lifting the assembled product off the line is substantial and is a regular part of the job. As a result, it would not be a violation to pay that person more, regardless of whether the job is held by a man or a woman.
Responsibility - The degree of accountability required in performing the job. For example, a salesperson who is delegated the duty of determining whether to accept customers' personal checks has more responsibility than other salespeople. On the other hand, a minor difference in responsibility, such as turning out the lights at the end of the day, would not justify a pay differential.
Working Conditions - This encompasses two factors: (1) physical surroundings like temperature, fumes, and ventilation; and (2) hazards.
Establishment - The prohibition against compensation discrimination under the EPA applies only to jobs within an establishment. An establishment is a distinct physical place of business rather than an entire business or enterprise consisting of several places of business. However, in some circumstances, physically separate places of business should be treated as one establishment. For example, if a central administrative unit hires employees, sets their compensation, and assigns them to work locations, the separate work sites can be considered part of one establishment.
Pay differentials are permitted when they are based on seniority, merit, quantity or quality of production, or a factor other than sex. These are known as "affirmative defenses" and it is the employer's burden to prove that they apply.
In correcting a pay differential, no employee's pay may be reduced. Instead, the pay of the lower paid employee(s) must be increased.
Title VII, ADEA, and ADA
Title VII, the ADEA, and the ADA prohibit compensation discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability. Unlike the EPA, there is no requirement under Title VII, the ADEA, or the ADA that the claimant's job be substantially equal to that of a higher paid person outside the claimant's protected class, nor do these statutes require the claimant to work in the same establishment as a comparator.
Compensation discrimination under Title VII, the ADEA, or the ADA can occur in a variety of forms. For example:
An employer pays an employee with a disability less than similarly situated employees without disabilities and the employer's explanation (if any) does not satisfactorily account for the differential.
A discriminatory compensation system has been discontinued but still has lingering discriminatory effects on present salaries. For example, if an employer has a compensation policy or practice that pays Hispanics lower salaries than other employees, the employer must not only adopt a new non-discriminatory compensation policy, it also must affirmatively eradicate salary disparities that began prior to the adoption of the new policy and make the victims whole.
An employer sets the compensation for jobs predominately held by, for example, women or African-Americans below that suggested by the employer's job evaluation study, while the pay for jobs predominately held by men or whites is consistent with the level suggested by the job evaluation study.
An employer maintains a neutral compensation policy or practice that has an adverse impact on employees in a protected class and cannot be justified as job-related and consistent with business necessity. For example, if an employer provides extra compensation to employees who are the "head of household," i.e., married with dependents and the primary financial contributor to the household, the practice may have an unlawful disparate impact on women.
It is also unlawful to retaliate against an individual for opposing employment practices that discriminate based on compensation or for filing a discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or litigation under Title VII, ADEA, ADA or the Equal Pay Act.
Statistics
In Fiscal Year 2006, EEOC received 663 charges of compensation discrimination discrimination. EEOC resolved 743 compensation discrimination charges in FY 2006 and recovered $3.1 million in monetary benefits for charging parties and other aggrieved individuals (not including monetary benefits obtained through litigation).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardcore Newbie
This is the way I see feminists also. THESE women need to get all that goddamn sand out of their vagina and straighten the fuck up.
EDIT: If youre THAT type of feminist, then youre an idiot.:S3: :S4:
I'm all for people--not just women, I keep pointing out--who support other people for doing whatever the heck it is they want to. From supporting women and men who want to pose in bathing suits (physical beauty is fine with everyone I know) to women or men who want to be stay-at-home parents or working professionals. That's been my whole point here, and only a few have really gotten it.
I'm for people being open to anything and everything. And that darn well better include humanisim/peopleism/feminisim/masculinism. The folks I've argued with the most passionately here are people who are just the opposite.
BA, how many times do we need to tell you that law does NOT equal exercising of rights. Just because a law says something, doesn't mean it happens. Get it through your head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Geez you're tiring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutch.lover
I know right? I had to take a damn nap because of this thread today.:S2:
I've been working for more years than I care to say, at a lot of jobs, and I haven't seen very much of what you're claiming. Maybe you have, but I doubt it.Quote:
Originally Posted by dutch.lover
I suppose you been analyzing the payroll of the various companies you were employed for in the past? Or sitting in HR meetings. lmao.Quote:
Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat
The income disparity exists, especially among women who are deemed less attractive, or are overweight. Don't kid yourself that simply making The Equal Pay Act will eventually equal out everything. As humans, bias still exists past these safeguards.
I'll tell you a story about my experience with women who are victims of the income inequality. When I was 20, my company gave me a substancial raise, which was higher than the salary of most of the my female co-workers on my team, some who were responsible for more important functions. I heard about their complaints and I think they're warranted. Here I was, some 20 year old kid, who was getting paid more than my co-workers who had kids, worked there longer, and had substancially more experience. I felt I earned it because of my specialites and dedication, but I feel why they feel unfairly treated. They should've been paid as much as me, perhaps even more. They were minorities, women, and everyday had to work their asses off for little in return. The world is unfair. Even tho we strive for equality, the climate will never be equal. That's why you need laws and people to keep fighting inequality.
Yes, and whenever some of today's alleged disenfranchised get further along, they hire their own and discriminate against everybody else. This tendency of human nature is addressed by laws, which work a good deal of the time, but there are ALWAYS going to be exceptions.Quote:
Originally Posted by thcbongman
That's not fair, you know what I meant :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Mrs. Greenjeans
But to respond for a response's sake, I simply stated that I understand what they go through. Menstruation, I understand the idea of what happens physically and what can happen mentally and emotionally. People have different reactions to it. To say that it's impossible for me to imagine that some people have something happen to them once a month that they have seemingly no control over and don't know why they "act different" because of it, is being close minded. Will I ever know *exactly* what's happening to them? No. Will I ever know what it's like to be anyone but myself? No. Can I get a general idea? Sure.
And oppression is a pretty easy thing to understand, as almost all of us as humans have felt it.
I know you meant your post in jest, but I do feel that deserved a proper response nonetheless.
No need for all the exclamation marks. BA was (in my eyes) clearly replying to BirdGirl when he posted the Equity Pay Act. He stated that there were laws in place, and birdgirl's reply wasQuote:
Originally Posted by dutch.lover
He was simply correcting someone. He hasn't used any hostility so far from what I've seen, so I feel it's unfair to be hostile in return. Disagreeing is fine, agreeing to disagree is fine, agreeing not to talk or respond to him is fine, there's not need to be hostile with someone who is talking in a civil manner, no matter how "wrong" you may consider him, we are all equals here, regardless of gender creed or religion.Quote:
No we certainly do not. We have laws for equal opportunity employment which aren't always honored, but we don't have any such law for equal pay.
btw sorry about the bold print, I have no idea why it's bold after the quote.
A true story. I hope that this shows up on YOUTUBE someday.
Shortly after the original Godfather movie came out, James Caan, who played Sonny Corleone (the oldest son of Vito), was on a daytime talk show being interviewed. It was probably the Mike Douglas Show . This was around the time of the beginning of modern "Women's Lib". One of the other guests was the female world champion arm wrestler. Somebody on the panel suggested that Jimmy Caan, even with his recent success as the ultra-macho Sonny, could not beat the female champ in a match, and the audience was yelling for him to try. He balked, and said that he couldnâ??t do it, he wasnâ??t in shape, too old, etc. After much badgering, enduring taunts and catcalls, etc., the good natured actor acquiesced and sat down with her for a match. He won. :thumbsup:
Advocat wrote;
A true story. I hope that this shows up on YOUTUBE someday.
Shortly after the original Godfather movie came out, James Caan, who played Sonny Corleone (the oldest son of Vito), was on a daytime talk show being interviewed. It was probably the Mike Douglas Show . This was around the time of the beginning of modern "Women's Lib". One of the other guests was the female world champion arm wrestler. Somebody on the panel suggested that Jimmy Caan, even with his recent success as the ultra-macho Sonny, could not beat the female champ in a match, and the audience was yelling for him to try. He balked, and said that he couldnâ??t do it, he wasnâ??t in shape, too old, etc. After much badgering, enduring taunts and catcalls, etc., the good natured actor acquiesced and sat down with her for a match. He won.
Dude, that was very chivilrous of her to let him win. To imply that any man could beat any woman at anything physical is ludicrous. How about Stephen Hawkins kicking Martina Navratolova's But? NOT!
Hardcoe wrote;
He was simply correcting someone. He hasn't used any hostility so far from what I've seen, so I feel it's unfair to be hostile in return. Disagreeing is fine, agreeing to disagree is fine, agreeing not to talk or respond to him is fine, there's not need to be hostile with someone who is talking in a civil manner, no matter how "wrong" you may consider him, we are all equals here, regardless of gender creed or religion.
btw sorry about the bold print, I have no idea why it's bold after the
quote.
We have both noted the hostility here from some of the females. What gives? I feel like some of you need to be sent to the time out chair untill you can behave like civilized young ladies. The original post was open to men and asked for no male bashing. Seriously, what gives? Why all the personal attacks?
- Slow -
OH MY GODDDD! Now polymirize has given me negative reps!
who bitchs about rep? its like you're grovelling for pity
And you sounded like such an intelegent and reasoning woman. What a shame. Let me use small words for you so there is no confusion. I WAS MAKING A POINT!
I could give a hoot what some facless people on my computer think of me. Why don't you go bury your head back in the sand? Obviously the only opinion that counts to you is your own.
Since you brought it up though..What if I was the sensative type? What if the neg reps hurt my feelings? Enjoy adding salt to the wound do you?
Polly, you have made this very personal. You really do sound like a well educated woman. Why can't you keep this a discussion or even a debate? Why do you wish to turn it into a fight?
- Slow -
Polymirize is a man, Slow. One of the few. The proud. The evolved. You assumed because he was so articulate that he was a woman? Because women are the only ones who can be verbally articulate whereas men are the only ones who can do math and engineering? Wasn't that what you were saying back there when you were telling me you were a primary school teacher? Just like you were saying that only men can fight fires? And only women could initiate research studies showing that there's an inequity of teacher attention to female students?
You terrify me. I will be civil because I know I won't win any converts or change any other people's minds by getting strident or angry. And I already know your mind is unchangeable anyway. But you really do remind me of just how much more progress is needed in this area.
As one of my smartest correspondents told me behind the scenes, "What's scary is that for every two like BA and Slow who express those thoughts, there are dozens more men keeping silent who believe the same thing."
There are some serious double and triple standards present here, as elsewhere, but let's leave that one on the back-burner for now...............:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by slowlickitysplit
Ethics are the key. Congratulations, few people have much in the way of those anymore.
Birdgirl wrote;
Polymirize is a man, Slow. One of the few. The proud. The evolved. You assumed because he was so articulate that he was a woman? Because women are the only ones who can be verbally articulate whereas men are the only ones who can do math and engineering? Wasn't that what you were saying back there when you were telling me you were a primary school teacher? Just like you were saying that only men can fight fires? And only women could initiate research studies showing that there's an inequity of teacher attention to female students?
You terrify me. I will be civil because I know I won't win any converts or change any other people's minds by getting strident or angry. And I already know your mind is unchangeable anyway. But you really do remind me of just how much more progress is needed in this area.
No, I assumed that Polly was a womans name.
I have no idea how I have gotten so misunderstood here. I am not a chest thumping neaderthal as you all seem to think.
Let me say first off that I NEVER said women shouldn't be fire fighters or anything of the sort. My class validictorian was an all county shot putter and went to Anapoliss (sp) and she could have kicked my but up and down the halls all day long if she wished to.
I believe in equality. I'm the guy (and I'm proud to say my boys are too) who will risk his own safety to defend the weak. Be it the kindergardener who my son protected from two much older bullies on the bus, to throwing a skinhead type of jerk out of a party when he started spouting off about Jews. I don't put up with fanaticisim and I don't put up with repression. Maybe that's why I'm so angered by some of you. You appear to be trying to repress my opinions by coersion (IE. name calling, neg reps, speaking to eachother about me as though I weren't here.)
As one of my smartest correspondents told me behind the scenes, "What's scary is that for every two like BA and Slow who express those thoughts, there are dozens more men keeping silent who believe the same thing."
Behind the scenes? Birdgirl, I am starting to question weather you should be a moderator. I have seen you on numerous threads attacking B.A. with no apparent cause. I am begining to think you are abusing your position. I'm sorry, I know we tried to bury the hatchet but I have to call it as I see it. Particularly the one where you told him you were angered by something he wrote then errased before posting. That was some serious BS.
To the rest of you....
I am not an idiot. I have been provocative in an attempt to open a discusion on the assumptions of feminisim. Has it been good for America? Could it be the cause of our current moral crisis? Anyone want to discuss this issue? Anyone left with an open mind?
- Slow -
Purple bannana wrote;
How can you claim women learn better 'by the book?' I, for one, enjoy learning hands-on, and I don't enjoy sitting for hours on end. I'm not the only one.
Primary school is a whole different ballpark from secondary and post-secondary education. Different people learn different ways; I honestly can't see how you would equate learning styles to gender-specific categories. It's all relative to the individual, not some group consensus.
__________________
You're right. I made a generalization for simplicity sake. That does not change the fact though that there are very distict differences between the sexes and this is particularly true in the primary years. Girls have better fine motor skills and boys have better large motor skills. That is why girls have better penmanship and boys throw a football better at that age (Yes, generaly).
If any of you have looked in on a 6th grade classroom recently you might have been reminded of popcorn popping. Boys just can't sit still. There are simply differences between young girls and boys.
What a lot of you are alluding to is that boys take up a lot of the teachers time, primarily because of disruptive behavior. This is true. But overall girls get better grades in primary school because it is better suited to thier natures. The grade disparity slowly drops off in later years but I feel that is primarily due to societies expectation of girls and boys. It's a shame too. My 4th grade daughter is high honors and she can run circles around her two older brothers on the soccer field but, when she plays on the girl's team all she want's to do is socialize. It's not cool for her to be a good athlete. This is something that frustrates me no end. She has a niece who got a full boat scholarship to college for basketball but that has no influence. I can only pray that her two other nieces who are doctors will be enough influence to help her keep her grades up as she gets older.
Sorry. Went off on a tangent there. LOL
- Slow -
You need to read that thread again. Very slowly. Then read it again. Eventually you'll see that I simply told him I'd seen what he'd written previously and revised mine in similar fashion. I found that quite funny because, frankly, my revision was much more necessary than his. He's perfectly welcome to tell me what he thinks, as are you, and the rules of the road are a little different in politics. BA made his edit out of courtesy and respect to the debate and these boards, which was the same reason I changed my own. I happen to enjoy debating and talking with BA. We've done this since practically my first week here. I suspect he and I wouldn't keep at it with each other if we didn't get some fun out of it. Of all the people on these boards I'd like to meet and shake hands with, BA ranks up near the top.Quote:
Originally Posted by slowlickitysplit
I'm glad you question my being a mod!! Just like you've questioned women's ability to qualify physically to fight fires: http://boards.cannabis.com/womens-is...ml#post1323081 Or be anything other than verbal, emotional creatures who have ruined the economy and society by working outside the home. Means I've at least irritated you enough to get you looking at things differently for a brief time. And it shows, yet again, that when the going gets tough, you cry "insult!", question the most recent arguer or whoever's freely voiced an opinion on you by giving you negative reps, and try and redirect the conversation in another direction. You also sign off real quickly and read from the sidelines as a guest. I've been enjoying watching that happen, too.
I do rather think we're starting to go in circles here. Dutch Lover, since you were the brave soul who started this thread, I want you to say the word if you decide at some point you want to close it. I'm having fun, but I think some of the guys are licking their wounds, and I know that doesn't feel good. And that truly doesn't feel good for me, either. Let me know what you think!
Slow,
I remember reading, some 20 or more years ago, that a country in Scandanavia, or possibly the Netherlands, was conducting experimens in starting the education of boys later then girls. The theory was that the boys' were not suited to sit at a desk all day at as young an age as girls were. There are numerous studies that show boys mature later than girls, as well. It's happening in the high schools, also.
Here's an an interesting article.
Survey Finds Young Boys Failing in Schools Across the US
By Jeff Swicord
Washington, DC
13 April 2006
In classrooms across the U.S., there is a new trend that worries educators. In every category and demographic group, boys are falling behind in school.
Anita Doyle is a learning specialist who works with kids who are having academic troubles at the private Episcopal High School outside Washington D.C.
"In this year's freshman class, I met about five girls and about 30 boys but I have continued to meet with the boys and I don't see any of the girls. All of the girls have kind of figured out how to do things and they are on their own. Between myself and another learning specialist we meet with about 20 other boys," she says.
Episcopal is an elite private high school that admits students based on standardized test scores and grades. Students are generally of similar academic ability.
Yet Anita Doyle still sees dramatic differences in performance between the sexes. "A 14-year-old girl is academically more mature than a 14-year-old boy. This makes a huge difference, especially in the high school years. Because, what you are asking of high schoolers is to keep track of five or six subjects, plan ahead for their long term projects, decide what is important to study, to review for tests, to prioritize. And many boys are not ready to do that task."
Recent scientific research suggests that many of these differences may be hard-wired in the brain. Boys mature a year or more later than girls, and are twice as likely to have a learning disability. They tend to fidget and lose focus easily. Brain studies suggest they process language and emotions less efficiently than girls. Boys in the U.S. bring home 70 percent of poor or failing grades and receive the bulk of school suspensions.
Twenty years ago, it was the girls who had fallen behind, and efforts to improve their academic performance included hiring more female teachers, who were sensitive to girls' needs.
That has had an impact on boys, says Alvaro Devicente, the Headmaster of The Heights School, a private all-boys school in the Washington area. "I think that in many cases boys are falling behind because there has been a process over the last 20 years, a process of education becoming more feminine," he said. "And I mean that in sort of a realistic factual sense. Because if you look at the statistics there is a majority of women teachers and a majority of girls in the school that everything gets tailored to the girls and the young women."
Armed with the latest statistics, many parents are abandoning the idea of gender equality in schools, acknowledging the differences between the sexes, and turning to same-sex education. The faculty at The Heights School is all male and caters to what Devicente says are the special learning needs of young boys.
"There have been studies, very interesting studies about how boys hear differently than girls," Devicente notes. "For a boy to really hear the tone, the volume has to be louder. So that if the teacher is speaking at a volume that is comfortable for girls, the boy is going to get distracted because it is like elevator music almost. You start looking around and you are surely going to find a distraction if you are 12-years-old in a classroom."
At the Heights school, boys are given four breaks a day. They are allowed to play tackle football, throw snowballs and vent all of their pent-up energy. Mr. Devicente says that improves their concentration in class.
"I think that one thing that may happen in other schools is that the way that they try to control boys is by thwarting their passion," he says. "Keeping a lid on them and getting them to do the right thing. And that is very dangerous because you can't ask a boy to fake it. You have to redirect his passion, and they are going to be passionate and they should be passionate."
Ms. Doyle, says it is (sic) a character flaw. "You have got to understand that the way boys behave is not a character flaw. It is who they are," she says. "So you have to start with that premise. You have to start at a situation where they can see what they are capable of. "
Most educators agree that a wholesale change of teaching practices in schools runs the risk of doing more harm than good. But many believe accepting that differences do exist between the sexes is a starting point for realizing the full potential of every student.
Survey Finds Young Boys Failing in Schools Across the US
I'm not "licking my wounds" - because I do not get any from an internet discussion. If this resulted in anything more than a mild distraction and some brief entertainment, I'd give it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by birdgirl73
Not buying that. I agree with Mrs. G. Looks an awful lot like the ladies opened up a fairly big can of whoop-ass up above. I felt wounded for Slow just reading some of it. Looked like he felt wounded for you, BA. At least I think that's what he was trying to say.
Birdgirl wrote;
You need to read that thread again. Very slowly. Then read it again. Eventually you'll see that I simply told him I'd seen what he'd written previously and revised mine in similar fashion. I found that quite funny because, frankly, my revision was much more necessary than his. He's perfectly welcome to tell me what he thinks, as are you, and the rules of the road are a little different in politics. BA made his edit out of courtesy and respect to the debate and these boards, which was the same reason I changed my own. I happen to enjoy debating and talking with BA. We've done this since practically my first week here. I suspect he and I wouldn't keep at it with each other if we didn't get some fun out of it. Of all the people on these boards I'd like to meet and shake hands with, BA ranks up near the top.
I'm glad you question my being a mod!! Just like you've questioned women's ability to qualify physically to fight fires: Feminism (male input welcomed) Or be anything other than verbal, emotional creatures who have ruined the economy and society by working outside the home. Means I've at least irritated you enough to get you looking at things differently for a brief time. And it shows, yet again, that when the going gets tough, you cry "insult!", question the most recent arguer or whoever's freely voiced an opinion on you by giving you negative reps, and try and redirect the conversation in another direction. You also sign off real quickly and read from the sidelines as a guest. I've been enjoying watching that happen, too.
I do rather think we're starting to go in circles here. Dutch Lover, since you were the brave soul who started this thread, I want you to say the word if you decide at some point you want to close it. I'm having fun, but I think some of the guys are licking their wounds, and I know that doesn't feel good. And that truly doesn't feel good for me, either. Let me know what you think!
Yes, I log on and off to make posts. This is because I use a proxy server that is very slow so I log off and surf then log on to post. thank you for making that public. Great mod!
She is good, isn't she? She's also good-looking, a good cook, a good mother, a good wife, and hysterically funny. I'm a little biased.
Birdgirl, I still have hope that this thread will eventually turn itself around. It began very civil, and was quite a popular thread before all this arguing began, so I will hold out for awhile before giving you the word to close it. Thanks for asking me though, because I had been considering it. I will let you know when I decide.
Your point? Oh wait, I get it. We win!!! whoooooo! Take that women!Quote:
Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat
And slow, yeah, I'm a guy. Polymirize, or more correctly and without artistic license: polymerization. The production of polymers. That is, multiple molecules uniting to form something stronger than the mere sum of its parts.
But you know what they say about weak links in the chain, right slow?
No, not at all. My "point' was that it's not always a good idea to open a Pandora's box.Quote:
Originally Posted by Polymirize
At that time, in the early 1970's, many "feminists" were acting the way that they imagined men "used" to act. This is still happening, and is even apparent in some places, by some people, here.
We await this momentous decision with baited breath.Quote:
Originally Posted by dutch.lover
:thumbsup:
What kind of ethics? You seem to be arguing from a justice based view. Which is basically like saying, you stay out of my way, and I'll stay out of yours. It completely ignores the factors at work in society. Also, its subject to feminist critique.Quote:
Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat
Some good feminists recognise that we can't all live according to justice ethics. If a mother was to take this approach with her child, one of "you stay out of my way and I'll stay out of yours", the child dies of starvation. So it opens the doors to feminist moral theory. Which is basically a form of care ethics.
It's not feminist derived per say. I'd say that the buddhist ideal of compassion is the same thing. ideally that is.
I've heard it said that Compassion is the highest manifestation of Justice. May have been Krishnamurti, or Gibran... not really important though.
So, in this light... why are you so threatened to allow women to push for equal standing?
Or, rather, why are you threatened to allow for anyone to strive for equal standing?
ok. I'm not going to argue that women don't occasionally make complete asses out of themselves. But on the whole, I think that's a rather human flaw, and not gender biased.Quote:
Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat
In the end, my thoughts on the necessity of equality have nothing to do with how women think they should act, but everything to do with how I think a man actually should.
As far as "compassion", I'm one of the most compassionate people around - but I believe in self-reliance as well. Compassion should go to those that deserve it - not people that are wasting your time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Polymirize
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowlickitysplit
No, slow, your premise is off. I do not give bad rep to someone who disagrees with me any more than I give a bad grade to a student who disagrees with me. I tell my students that if they can make a cogent, well-informed argument in favor of any philosophical stance, then they will receive a good grade. However, if they present an opinion based on sloppy reasoning and scant evidence, they will have earned the D or F that I give them, as did you.
Likewise, if someone on this site makes a post that is insightful and intelligent, I give reps. Isn't that the point of the rep system?
^sure is!
I am posting out of sequence here, because I just had to say this is quoteworthy as all get out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Polymirize
Who's we? You got a mouse in your capri pockets?Quote:
Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat
i think he was mocking me...but whatever...
Demeter, in another forum you wrote "I wrote some disgustingly violent poems about ripping men's heads like lettuce..."
'nough said!
For the rest of you. Please, if any of you could explain to me what I did to deserve your wrath I will do my best to maintain an open mind. Seriously.....educate me. Mold my mind. Inform me.
- Slow -
^^As if you have never thought about murdering a woman! We have all had violent thoughts about the opposite sex at one time or another...so that's a very unfair thing to bring up, Slow.
And I told you why you upset us. You blame women for: child problems (we arent there to look after them so they end up messed up), the "decline" of America, our lavish lifestyles... You insinuated America would be a better place if we just stayed at home, and finally you have brought up gender stereotypes and played them off as fact. Like I said earlier, I'm sure you didn't realize the extent of our 'discontent'... but there it is. Don't try to deny it either, if you were in our shoes you would understand the insult you have inflicted upon us.
Dutchlover,
This was my original post ...
I would love to have this discussion in person becasue i speak much better then I type but...
I graduated HS in 1978 so I know of radical feminisim. I lost a quarter to my radical cousin on the Billy Jean/Bobby Rigs tennis match. Billionfold opened an interesting point but didn't follow through....
Pre-Feminisim a man could support his family on one income but, along came feminisim and the liberal wife next door got a part time job and they could suddenly afford a nicer vacation/car/education for the kids ect.. Well, if she can I can...suddenly all the women are working and you're living in an upscale neighborhood and two incomes is the norm....then, suddenly....it is a necessity.
I hate to be the devils advocate (Ok - not really true) but I think America started it's great decline the day they gave women the vote. I am not a neaderthal, this is simply my informed opinion.
PS.
I heard a story about a woman yelling at a guy for holding the door for her:
"You don't have to hold the door for me because I'm a woman!" she said.
"I'm not. I'm holding the door for you because I'm a gentelman." He repied.
Things that make you go Hmmm.
- Slow -
I don't blame women for anything. I am simply suggesting that feminisim and womens lib brought about unforsene consequences. Perhaps it is a MISinformed opinion to your way of thinking. None of which explains the rancor. I did suggest America MIGHT be a better place if the feminist reveloution had never happened. I was hoping to open a discussion. This is not something I believe! It is something I was hoping to explore with some open minded women.
I tried to listen to you with an open mind Dutchlover but I think you have made some wrong assumptions and read more into my posts then were there.
- Slow -
I tried to edit my last post but I took too long. After more consideration this is what i tried to post. Ignore the first one please..
Dutchlover,
This was my original post ...
I would love to have this discussion in person becasue i speak much better then I type but...
I graduated HS in 1978 so I know of radical feminisim. I lost a quarter to my radical cousin on the Billy Jean/Bobby Rigs tennis match. Billionfold opened an interesting point but didn't follow through....
Pre-Feminisim a man could support his family on one income but, along came feminisim and the liberal wife next door got a part time job and they could suddenly afford a nicer vacation/car/education for the kids ect.. Well, if she can I can...suddenly all the women are working and you're living in an upscale neighborhood and two incomes is the norm....then, suddenly....it is a necessity.
I hate to be the devils advocate (Ok - not really true) but I think America started it's great decline the day they gave women the vote. I am not a neaderthal, this is simply my informed opinion.
PS.
I heard a story about a woman yelling at a guy for holding the door for her:
"You don't have to hold the door for me because I'm a woman!" she said.
"I'm not. I'm holding the door for you because I'm a gentelman." He repied.
Things that make you go Hmmm.
- Slow -
I don't blame women for anything. I am simply suggesting that feminisim and womens lib brought about unforsene consequences. Perhaps it is a MISinformed opinion to your way of thinking. None of which explains the rancor. I did suggest America MIGHT be a better place if the feminist reveloution had never happened. I was hoping to open a discussion. I have always felt that the moral decline in our country is directly tied to the changes in the family dynamic brought about by feminisim. I was honestly hoping some of you well educated women would be able to throw out some facts to convince me I am wrong. I am bothered by my own conclusions. It seems too simple and obvious but I can come to no other conclusion on my own.
I tried to listen to you with an open mind Dutchlover but I think you have made some wrong assumptions and read more into my posts then were there.
- Slow -
I just re-read what you said Dutchlover and my response. I will keep it here for you to see but I think I am begining to see where your comming from and how I angered some members here. I suppose i could have presented my beliefes in a more gentle way but I have to say, none of you have done a thing to change my mind. I do still blame a lot of societies woes on feminisim. I still see a connection between the womans rights movement and the moral decline of America. I also think you (feminists) traded in your bondage to family for financial bondage.
Just my opinion.
- Slow -