NationStates

Bunker 51 wrote:The people who supported the decision to keep men out of a shelter just because it was near schools were being idiotic. With no established place to stay, who's to say the men that now can't live there won't sleep even closer to the aforementioned schools?

The shelter was always unwanted by College Point residents. They didn't suddenly agree to it because it switched to a womens only shelter despite the OP intention to make this thread yet another Two Minutes Hate on feminism.

Critics sue to block College Point homeless shelter

Gormwood wrote:

Bunker 51 wrote:The people who supported the decision to keep men out of a shelter just because it was near schools were being idiotic. With no established place to stay, who's to say the men that now can't live there won't sleep even closer to the aforementioned schools?

The shelter was always unwanted by College Point residents. They didn't suddenly agree to it because it switched to a womens only shelter despite the OP intention to make this thread yet another Two Minutes Hate on feminism.

Critics sue to block College Point homeless shelter

Like that's any better

Gormwood wrote:

Bunker 51 wrote:The people who supported the decision to keep men out of a shelter just because it was near schools were being idiotic. With no established place to stay, who's to say the men that now can't live there won't sleep even closer to the aforementioned schools?

The shelter was always unwanted by College Point residents. They didn't suddenly agree to it because it switched to a womens only shelter despite the OP intention to make this thread yet another Two Minutes Hate on feminism.

Critics sue to block College Point homeless shelter

Congrats, they’re still shitty. Now some of them are shitty to women too.

Rojava Free State wrote:

MineLegotia and Equestria wrote:
So, egalitraianism or however the fuck you spell it? I apologize for my shitty spellings, i suck at it

Egalitarianism and civility through the threat of force. You don't hit me, I don't hit you. We all get along

Can confirm. Horny teenagers can do that, why can't adults?

If it's a Job the lads need ship them to a red State where we're having a job/ economic boom.

Christian Confederation wrote:If it's a Job the lads need ship them to a red State where we're having a job/ economic boom.

The red state boom are in part because they let companies pay employees way less than blue states.

If men want to build, rich men can buy land and build it. Unfortunately, shit men receive higher salaries than women. Nevertheless, Men depends on the government like a socialist. Until now, women have been plagued by the government, which is composed of male legislators and powers. No tragedies will happen unless you rely on the government.

Diamond snow wrote:If men want to build, rich men can buy land and build it. Unfortunately, shit men receive higher salaries than women. Nevertheless, Men depends on the government like a socialist. Until now, women have been plagued by the government, which is composed of male legislators and powers. No tragedies will happen unless you rely on the government.

*Looks at 2008*

MineLegotia and Equestria wrote:

Diamond snow wrote:If men want to build, rich men can buy land and build it. Unfortunately, shit men receive higher salaries than women. Nevertheless, Men depends on the government like a socialist. Until now, women have been plagued by the government, which is composed of male legislators and powers. No tragedies will happen unless you rely on the government.

*Looks at 2008*

The Government isn't always reliable. I've seen it first hand with my IRL nation, idealists get into power, become corrupt, and become the very same people they once protested against. Bigger government means more power in the state, and more easier it is for the government's fucks up to influence you

Ors Might wrote:

Gormwood wrote:The shelter was always unwanted by College Point residents. They didn't suddenly agree to it because it switched to a womens only shelter despite the OP intention to make this thread yet another Two Minutes Hate on feminism.

Critics sue to block College Point homeless shelter

Congrats, they’re still shitty. Now some of them are shitty to women too.

There are not a lot of services for the homeless in that neighborhood. Nor is it easy for homeless to get there and back. The closest subway would be flushing main street.

Okay, you definitely make some valid points. I wholeheartedly agree with a lot of what you're saying, but could I see some sources? I believe the numbers, but putting in a source might make this more reliable for someone who doesn't agree.

Ethel mermania wrote:

Ors Might wrote:Congrats, they’re still shitty. Now some of them are shitty to women too.

There are not a lot of services for the homeless in that neighborhood. Nor is it easy for homeless to get there and back. The closest subway would be flushing main street.

For some reason I don't imagine that local opposition to the shelter had anything to do with the fact that homeless people would have a hard time getting there and back, nor do I buy the ''environmental concerns'' mentioned in that article. Trying to block this shelter was about NIMBY classism and snobbery.

Antityranicals wrote:Not really, but it's better than nothing. We shouldn't ban something just because it's suboptimal. Don't make the best the enemy of the good.

Can we make the good the enemy of the bad though?

Gormwood wrote:

Christian Confederation wrote:If it's a Job the lads need ship them to a red State where we're having a job/ economic boom.

The red state boom are in part because they let companies pay employees way less than blue states.

Off topic laddy, best stop while your ahead.

Page wrote:

Ethel mermania wrote:There are not a lot of services for the homeless in that neighborhood. Nor is it easy for homeless to get there and back. The closest subway would be flushing main street.

For some reason I don't imagine that local opposition to the shelter had anything to do with the fact that homeless people would have a hard time getting there and back, nor do I buy the ''environmental concerns'' mentioned in that article. Trying to block this shelter was about NIMBY classism and snobbery.

I haven't really followed the issue so I would have to do research about the how's and why's. I can say its not snobbery, that part of college point is not a wealthy part of the city.

But that does not matter to whether that is a suitable location for a homeless shelter.

Gormwood wrote:

Bunker 51 wrote:The people who supported the decision to keep men out of a shelter just because it was near schools were being idiotic. With no established place to stay, who's to say the men that now can't live there won't sleep even closer to the aforementioned schools?

The shelter was always unwanted by College Point residents. They didn't suddenly agree to it because it switched to a womens only shelter despite the OP intention to make this thread yet another Two Minutes Hate on feminism.

Critics sue to block College Point homeless shelter

I wait with baited breath for the National Organization for Women, or any state chapter including new York, to issue a condemnation on the sexist gender flip of the shelter.

Galloism wrote:

Gormwood wrote:The shelter was always unwanted by College Point residents. They didn't suddenly agree to it because it switched to a womens only shelter despite the OP intention to make this thread yet another Two Minutes Hate on feminism.

Critics sue to block College Point homeless shelter

I wait with baited breath for the National Organization for Women, or any state chapter including new York, to issue a condemnation on the sexist gender flip of the shelter.

It's not their job too, much like the NAACP is not expected to address discrimination against white people, it's not NOW's place to support men.

Ethel mermania wrote:

Galloism wrote:I wait with baited breath for the National Organization for Women, or any state chapter including new York, to issue a condemnation on the sexist gender flip of the shelter.

It's not their job too, much like the NAACP is not expected to address discrimination against white people, it's not NOW's place to support men.

That's certainly a position, but then, it's a given that they do not seek to address equality in general, just women's interests.

Which is fine! There's lots of lobbying groups - farmers, fossil fuel industry, unions. They all serve the interests of their constituents. I'm willing to accept feminist groups like NOW aren't about equality, just the interests of women.

But it does mean we need to call a spade a spade, and we need an interest group for men.

Galloism wrote:

Ethel mermania wrote:It's not their job too, much like the NAACP is not expected to address discrimination against white people, it's not NOW's place to support men.

That's certainly a position, but then, it's a given that they do not seek to address equality in general, just women's interests.

Which is fine! There's lots of lobbying groups - farmers, fossil fuel industry, unions. They all serve the interests of their constituents. I'm willing to accept feminist groups like NOW aren't about equality, just the interests of women.

But it does mean we need to call a spade a spade, and we need an interest group for men.

Agreed

Rojava Free State wrote:

Gormwood wrote:The shelter was always unwanted by College Point residents. They didn't suddenly agree to it because it switched to a womens only shelter despite the OP intention to make this thread yet another Two Minutes Hate on feminism.

Critics sue to block College Point homeless shelter

Like that's any better

I don't think anyone said it was. Just pointing out that the incident was being slanted to justify yet another tirade about how oppressed and victimised men are.

Vassenor wrote:

Rojava Free State wrote:
Like that's any better

I don't think anyone said it was. Just pointing out that the incident was being slanted to justify yet another tirade about how oppressed and victimised men are.

It's hardly being slanted, is it. The complaints were made on the basis the men would be dangerous to children and so on, and the response was to make it a womens shelter.

Gormwood wrote:

Christian Confederation wrote:If it's a Job the lads need ship them to a red State where we're having a job/ economic boom.

The red state boom are in part because they let companies pay employees way less than blue states.

Which is still more then they'd make in blue states once you account for costs of living.

Vassenor wrote:

Rojava Free State wrote:
Like that's any better

I don't think anyone said it was. Just pointing out that the incident was being slanted to justify yet another tirade about how oppressed and victimised men are.

Which arguments were agreed with, the ones of those not wanting more homeless people around them or of those complaining about the menz?

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
I don't think anyone said it was. Just pointing out that the incident was being slanted to justify yet another tirade about how oppressed and victimised men are.

It's hardly being slanted, is it. The complaints were made on the basis the men would be dangerous to children and so on, and the response was to make it a womens shelter.

They are more dangerous


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_dif ... s_in_crime

Ethel mermania wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
It's hardly being slanted, is it. The complaints were made on the basis the men would be dangerous to children and so on, and the response was to make it a womens shelter.

They are more dangerous


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_dif ... s_in_crime

“More dangerous” being a relative term here. Unless most men are violent criminals, that’s not a good basis for denying them access to shelters.