NationStates

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:I can't tell whether this is a self-depricatory joke, or a plain and proud statement.

The latter.

You sure?

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:I can't tell whether this is a self-depricatory joke, or a plain and proud statement.

The latter.

Definitely the latter.

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Diopolis wrote:Because I'm a sexist.

I can't tell whether this is a self-depricatory joke, or a plain and proud statement.

You don't know me, do you?

Diopolis wrote:

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:I can't tell whether this is a self-depricatory joke, or a plain and proud statement.

You don't know me, do you?

Not all that well. Why?

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:
The latter.

You sure?

Yes lol

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Diopolis wrote:You don't know me, do you?

Not all that well. Why?

It shows. Dio doesn't joke. Ever.

...That's what makes him so funny.

Nea Byzantia wrote:

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:Not all that well. Why?

It shows. Dio doesn't joke. Ever.

...That's what makes him so funny.

Fair enough. It seems I have a lot to learn.

---

So Dio, when you say you're a sexist, what does sexism mean to you?

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Nea Byzantia wrote:It shows. Dio doesn't joke. Ever.

...That's what makes him so funny.

Fair enough. It seems I have a lot to learn.

---

So Dio, when you say you're a sexist, what does sexism mean to you?

Men and women are different. Thus they have different rights and ought to have different privileges and social roles. Attempting to erase their differences is foolish and counterproductive; a civilized and sane society encourages its children to become manly men and womanly women.

Diopolis wrote:

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:Fair enough. It seems I have a lot to learn.

---

So Dio, when you say you're a sexist, what does sexism mean to you?

Men and women are different. Thus they have different rights and ought to have different privileges and social roles. Attempting to erase their differences is foolish and counterproductive; a civilized and sane society encourages its children to become manly men and womanly women.

In short, Sanity.

Nea Byzantia wrote:

Diopolis wrote:Men and women are different. Thus they have different rights and ought to have different privileges and social roles. Attempting to erase their differences is foolish and counterproductive; a civilized and sane society encourages its children to become manly men and womanly women.

In short, Sanity.

But anything sane is either racist or sexist these days. Unless it's also homophobic.

Diopolis wrote:

Nea Byzantia wrote:In short, Sanity.

But anything sane is either racist or sexist these days. Unless it's also homophobic.

So what if its all 3?

Nea Byzantia wrote:

Diopolis wrote:But anything sane is either racist or sexist these days. Unless it's also homophobic.

So what if its all 3?

Have to say one of them first, after all.

Diopolis wrote:

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:Fair enough. It seems I have a lot to learn.

---

So Dio, when you say you're a sexist, what does sexism mean to you?

Men and women are different. Thus they have different rights and ought to have different privileges and social roles. Attempting to erase their differences is foolish and counterproductive; a civilized and sane society encourages its children to become manly men and womanly women.

Righto. I still think that it's a good idea for a woman to try hard labour, and see if it suits her or if she gets anything out of it. I think anybody should try anything unless that thing is harmful.

I'd also recommend against deadpan calling yourself sexist you want give the impression that you hate women (or men) or remove legal gender equality.

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Diopolis wrote:Men and women are different. Thus they have different rights and ought to have different privileges and social roles. Attempting to erase their differences is foolish and counterproductive; a civilized and sane society encourages its children to become manly men and womanly women.

Righto. I still think that it's a good idea for a woman to try hard labour, and see if it suits her or if she gets anything out of it. I think anybody should try anything unless that thing is harmful.

I'm not totally opposed to the idea of national service for women, but not in the military or hard physical labor. A woman's nature is oriented to caretaking(and besides which, there are certain tasks which need a woman for more practical reasons, such as strip searches for women), and society ought to encourage women to be true to their natures.

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:

Diopolis wrote:Men and women are different. Thus they have different rights and ought to have different privileges and social roles. Attempting to erase their differences is foolish and counterproductive; a civilized and sane society encourages its children to become manly men and womanly women.

Righto. I still think that it's a good idea for a woman to try hard labour, and see if it suits her or if she gets anything out of it. I think anybody should try anything unless that thing is harmful.

I'd also recommend against deadpan calling yourself sexist you want give the impression that you hate women (or men) or remove legal gender equality.

I'm opposed to universal suffrage.

Diopolis wrote:

The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord wrote:
If I recall correctly, people with autism aren't (generally speaking) allowed to serve in the military. And thank you for wishing me well.

I had a blood pressure issue, so I didn't enlist. But if I hadn't I might well have joined ROTC and gone through college. How different it might have been...

If you could've joined, which Branch of the Military would you have liked to join?

Nea Byzantia wrote:

Diopolis wrote:I had a blood pressure issue, so I didn't enlist. But if I hadn't I might well have joined ROTC and gone through college. How different it might have been...

If you could've joined, which Branch of the Military would you have liked to join?

Probably an engineering specialty in the navy.

Diopolis wrote:

Nea Byzantia wrote:If you could've joined, which Branch of the Military would you have liked to join?

Probably an engineering specialty in the navy.

Given your serious, no-nonsense, temperament, that would probably suit you well.

Wow, I'm really glad sexism is back in style. Here I thought maybe that we had moved past seeing women as incubators and servants.

Conserative Morality wrote:Wow, I'm really glad sexism is back in style. Here I thought maybe that we had moved past seeing women as incubators and servants.

Did it ever go out of style?

Diopolis wrote:

The Xenopolis Confederation wrote:Fair enough. It seems I have a lot to learn.

---

So Dio, when you say you're a sexist, what does sexism mean to you?

Men and women are different. Thus they have different rights and ought to have different privileges and social roles. Attempting to erase their differences is foolish and counterproductive; a civilized and sane society encourages its children to become manly men and womanly women.

If you believe that people have certain natural roles and places within your social order, then having to enforce that social order proves that it is in fact (to at least some degree, anyway) an artificial construct. Otherwise, given freedom to choose, people will gravitate towards those tasks on their own, and there is no need to enforce it. (This is different from other forms of law enforcement because most other crimes, such as murder and theft, are crimes because they are unquestionably harmful in virtually every circumstance. Taking advantage of your economic freedoms to find the most efficient place in the economy isn't a crime in most countries, and the ones where it is a crime aren't known for having happy populations or productive economies.)
Forcing a woman to become a caregiver when her skills and interests lean more towards construction, and then forcing a man into the construction job she would have filled when his skills and interests lean more towards childcare, isn't just deeply unfair, it's also very inefficient, since neither of them will perform their assigned tasks as well as the other would have.

Conserative Morality wrote:Wow, I'm really glad sexism is back in style. Here I thought maybe that we had moved past seeing women as incubators and servants.

Suggesting we as a collective ever did move past that view.

Nea Byzantia wrote:Did it ever go out of style?

In civilized sections of society, yes.

Nea Byzantia wrote:

Diopolis wrote:Probably an engineering specialty in the navy.

Given your serious, no-nonsense, temperament, that would probably suit you well.

Once people hear me talk and realize I don't have a german accent, I usually get mistaken for former military. I suspect being into guns and having good posture just tends to have that effect, whether you have an overly serious temperament or not.

Conserative Morality wrote:

Nea Byzantia wrote:Did it ever go out of style?

In civilized sections of society, yes.

By "Civilized" do you mean Progressive?