GIRL POWAH!!!
- Thread starter FishThrower
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 11,973
- Location
- Bangor, Northern Ireland
Woman who feel the need to post "empowering" quotes and such guff just seem to be enforcing the inferior sex arguement as it looks like they are trying to hard to prove they arent just glorified dishwashers.
Last edited:
My fault !A friend of mine in Sweden just took his paternity leave. 7 months off work to bond with his new born. I don't have kids but if I did I would want this time off too! Not really on topic, sue me!
Yeah, see, loads of dads would go for that!
A friend of mine in Sweden just took his paternity leave. 7 months off work to bond with his new born. I don't have kids but if I did I would want this time off too! Not really on topic, sue me!
Bond with his new born? Watch a miniature human being, eat, cry, crap, and sleep for 7 months?
I wouldn't dare, imagine the overtime I'd miss out on. I'd be on the breadline, lol.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
The Monroe quote doesn't come across as girl power, just as a woman saying she has good and bad days and if you won't put up with her bad days you don't deserve the good days, the same is true for men and everyone really, I don't read any "girl power" crap in that at all. It could be shortened to, take me for who I am, don't assume I'm always at my best and be dissappointed when you find out I'm not.
The second quote is only missing something about giving a woman a penis, and watching it get bigger and better. But it also comes across as, woman are easy, smile and she'll love you, bring her food and she'll cook it, put her in a house and she'll become a homemaker. Should you choose to give her sperm, she'll give you a baby, its almost anti girl power, its the kind of list of things only a housewife would say......... housewives, clearly the frontrunners of the girlpower movement.
I have no idea why you think that is in any way relevant to my post that you're claiming it's a reply to.
Should I now stoop to the same level and pretend you've been saying that men should be kept only for manual labour?
I'd prefer not to, but if that's the level of argument you want I can move down to your level as a favour to you.
You're not misinterpreting. Although I think "suffering from a delusion" is a bit harsh. I wrote "conned", which isn't the same thing.
Also, it's not just about rights. It's about everything.
For example, healthcare. The feminist position is that more resources should be allocated to healthcare for women. That is not a radical feminist position - it's every feminist position.
Note that the question of what resources should be allocated to healthcare for men simply isn't considered. It's completely irrelevant within that framework whether women currently get 20% of the resources, 50% of the resources or 99% of the resources. It's simply about more for women, because that's what feminism is. More accurately, more for women who conform to what feminism says they should conform to - all biopolitical groups require at least some degree of conformity. The last time anyone bothered looking in the UK, healthcare spending on women was seven times as much as healthcare spending on men. All feminist campaigning on healthcare was still about more for women only. Which means less for men, as the amount of healthcare resources is finite, but that wasn't the point for the majority of feminists considering the issue because they simply don't consider men at all on a social/political scale. Perhaps on a personal scale, perhaps not, but not on a social/political scale.
To a person who advocates sexual equality, the correct allocation of resources would be on the basis of need, not on the basis of sex. That would probably result in the majority of healthcare spending going to women, but not 7 times as much and, far more importantly, because of need rather than sex.
I'd split parental leave into two parts:
i) Medical leave relating to pregnancy and childbirth. Variable, dependent on what a doctor says, because it genuinely varies a great deal. I've known women who were fine all the way through pregnancy, gave birth in very little time and were fine again not long afterwards. I've also known women who had a hell of a time during pregnancy and/or a serious medical emergency in childbirth, ended up in intensive care and weren't fit for anything for weeks.
Obviously, that only applies to people who've been pregnant and given birth.
ii) Parental leave. Minimum length of time specified by law, employers can offer more as an incentive/bonus for long service/whatever. Applies to all parents, including those who are parents by adoption. Can be split between parents as they wish, so they can arrange it to suit their specific relationship.
i) Medical leave relating to pregnancy and childbirth. Variable, dependent on what a doctor says, because it genuinely varies a great deal. I've known women who were fine all the way through pregnancy, gave birth in very little time and were fine again not long afterwards. I've also known women who had a hell of a time during pregnancy and/or a serious medical emergency in childbirth, ended up in intensive care and weren't fit for anything for weeks.
Obviously, that only applies to people who've been pregnant and given birth.
ii) Parental leave. Minimum length of time specified by law, employers can offer more as an incentive/bonus for long service/whatever. Applies to all parents, including those who are parents by adoption. Can be split between parents as they wish, so they can arrange it to suit their specific relationship.
Crikey, you don't need to start on the rampage, I clearly misinterpreted.
I guess the feminists I've met have been rather more balanced!
Yes you are.
Where is that feminist position found so we can read it? Where does it derive that it's every feminist position?
Is there an official feminist body that dictates what the feminist party is believing or fighting for? I thought feminism was a movement, and as such you get all extremes (from militant feminists to radical-lesbians to all sorts). Silly me, I should have known "they are all the same".
A lovely rant, but completely irrelevant to anything I wrote.
There are numerous varieties of feminism, as I have already said several times. As I have also already said, they can vary to such an extent that some are directly opposed to some others in many ways. But, and here's the amazing revelation, they all have certain core things in common because they're all feminism! Wow, who would have thought it?
No, that's just silly. You have opened my eyes! It's perfectly obvious that you're right and "feminism" doesn't actually mean anything at all. Thank you for the information. I shall carefully file it in the round folder.
I've met hundreds of feminists. Many were balanced. It's just that their balance point wasn't equality, with some rare exceptions.
To be precise, one exception that I'm sure of. One self-identified feminist who (a) understands what sexual equality is and (b) advocates it. I liked her - she's a genuinely good person. She signed my copy of one of her books for me as well, which is nice.
Some others who might be like that but I didn't know them at all well. I've also read dozens of feminist books - the closest one to sexual equality included positive consideration of men in just under 2 pages from a ~300 page book. It was startling to see anything like that at all, because it just doesn't fit. It's like positive consideration of communism in a book advocating capitalism or positive consideration of Wicca in a book advocating Christianity, or simply a painting of a person in a collection of paintings specifically chosen for being paintings of trees. Even if the collector does also like paintings of people, it can't fit into a collection of paintings of trees.
Hmm...I'm confusing myself now
I got ~90 minutes of sleep last night before an 11 hour shift and I'm too old for that. I'd be asleep now, but for some reason my brain has decided that it's not time to sleep.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Jun 2006
- Posts
- 38,367
facebook is for losers, geeks, and pedos. people need to start communicating more in real life rather than over the internet.
would you rather spend the time on the internet or going out and enjoying/living life?