Women and sexism.

[In Gentem Et De Libris Scientiam]

I love the patriarchy. I love being a man and having to sacrifice for everyone because I'm superior, but it's not a problem at all because I'm a guy and the patriarchy benefits all men.

I am talking about specifically how women are seen as weak, fragile things that needs defending in the patriarchy. Women can get away with domestic violence, abuse, rape and a lot of other things because women are seen as weak.

Then we need to set women up as evil creatures that NEED to repressed and humiliated.
#totalthoughtexperiement

[Haktiva]

I am talking about specifically how women are seen as weak, fragile things that needs defending in the patriarchy. Women can get away with domestic violence, abuse, rape and a lot of other things because women are seen as weak.

Then we need to set women up as evil creatures that NEED to repressed and humiliated.
#totalthoughtexperiement

they seem to do that pretty well themselves on the internet, you know the place where solipsistic and psychotic behavior is the norm.

[The Great Warrior Rivers]

And forcing a quota on a company to hire so many women in "manly" areas is economic suicide.

exactly. quota systems are garbage and just plain wrong if you prefer a free market system. of course, women are welcome to try and compete, but when they're just inserted or the standards are lowered for them, bad stuff happens.

I'm not usually a supporter of the free market ideal, but hell is the quota thing a bad idea. Does it really matter how many women work in a workplace? If you're not qualified, you just don't get the job. If you set a quota, you're just asking for unqualified people to take the roles of more qualified people.

Then we need to set women up as evil creatures that NEED to repressed and humiliated.
#totalthoughtexperiement

they seem to do that pretty well themselves on the internet, you know the place where solipsistic and psychotic behavior is the norm.

Everyone represses and humiliates each other on the internet. Maybe this "Internet" thing was just a social experiment?

[In Gentem Et De Libris Scientiam]

Then we need to set women up as evil creatures that NEED to repressed and humiliated.
#totalthoughtexperiement

they seem to do that pretty well themselves on the internet, you know the place where solipsistic and psychotic behavior is the norm.

Wouldn't it be nice.... if that was rl
i think that Gender roles are ok. Needs tweaking everyone once in a while though

[The Great Warrior Rivers]

they seem to do that pretty well themselves on the internet, you know the place where solipsistic and psychotic behavior is the norm.

Wouldn't it be nice.... if that was rl
i think that Gender roles are ok. Needs tweaking everyone once in a while though

Gender roles are okay, if they don't hold people back.

EDIT: Which is about 0.1% of the time

[Haktiva]

they seem to do that pretty well themselves on the internet, you know the place where solipsistic and psychotic behavior is the norm.

Wouldn't it be nice.... if that was rl
i think that Gender roles are ok. Needs tweaking everyone once in a while though

it's all societal pressure and norms. deviating from the norm isn't exactly a smooth process. Then again, with the way society is going nowadays, I don't think I wanna be normal. People are too obsessed with their feelings, both the politically correct/LGBT/minority crowd and the tradcons. Personally I think a lot of it is controlled opposition anyways, but I just go my own way for the most part. Can't do much else than that.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Come off it. First of all, this is a huge exaggeration. Even if all men stopped working and nobody stepped in to replace any of them, it would take more than a day for civilization to collapse to the point that we'd be eating spam by candlelight. Secondly, abolishing gender roles would not mean that all men stop working, just that those who prefer to focus more on home and family could do so without being called unmanly. And lastly, there are plenty of women in the workforce.

it's mostly a matter of where men work vs. where women work. men work the more crucial and dangerous stuff, women don't. men dominate in construction, oil, manufacturing, engineering and so on. Women simply don't make up a large enough percentage to compensate if men were to collectively take a day off.

And you could shut those down for a day without causing civilization to collapse. Worst that would happen is you would get some power outages.

men typically take those jobs because they pay well enough and men are suited to them, since it's more acceptable by virtue of gynocentrism that men take the risks while women stay relatively safe.

"Gynocentrism" is not a real thing.

it's all well and good that men don't care if people think they're manly(public perception is as malleable as it is worthless), but the fact of the matter is that men, and their efforts, are vital for the continuation of civilization as we know it.

Getting rid of gender roles includes getting more women into those jobs. There might still not be a perfect 50/50 split in every field because some jobs are physical and sexual dimorphism means there will be some things that one sex is better at on average. Right now, though, the natural differences between the sexes are badly exacerbated by social conditioning and gender roles.

Men continue to work like this because it makes them better providers. Women at large typically don't consider men to be good breeding material if they're not the provider, more or less the same way men don't want unattractive mates. People are shallow, that much I know.

As someone who works in a male-dominated environment and a mildly dangerous, somewhat dirty, and fairly physical job, I can tell you this is bullshit. A lot of guys who do grunt work are actually drawn to it because they get bored if they have to sit at a desk all day. Some people prefer hands-on work, even when it doesn't pay better than a desk job or a service job. Sometimes it's the only job they could get, but even then it is often about paying for their own bills and supporting themselves more than it is about attracting or caring for women. Some of them might have wives at home; others don't. Some might put in a few extra hours to buy something nice for a girlfriend, but others are just there because they need to pay their own rent -- same as people in any other line of work and same as most working women.

Regardless, it is usually not a choice between a dangerous job or no job. It's usually a choice between a dangerous job or a boring one, a job where you take risks or a job where you kiss ass all day. You can provide for a family by working in an office and kissing ass all day. A lot of men just don't want to go that route, whereas women, who are conditioned to avoid getting dirty or exerting themselves, are more likely to choose the boring ass-kissing job over the dirty and possibly dangerous one.

[Nazi Flower Power]

it's mostly a matter of where men work vs. where women work. men work the more crucial and dangerous stuff, women don't. men dominate in construction, oil, manufacturing, engineering and so on. Women simply don't make up a large enough percentage to compensate if men were to collectively take a day off.

men typically take those jobs because they pay well enough and men are suited to them, since it's more acceptable by virtue of gynocentrism that men take the risks while women stay relatively safe. it's all well and good that men don't care if people think they're manly(public perception is as malleable as it is worthless), but the fact of the matter is that men, and their efforts, are vital for the continuation of civilization as we know it.

Men continue to work like this because it makes them better providers. Women at large typically don't consider men to be good breeding material if they're not the provider, more or less the same way men don't want unattractive mates. People are shallow, that much I know.

And forcing a quota on a company to hire so many women in "manly" areas is economic suicide.

You're the only one who said anything about quotas.

[Benian Republic]

tag for further reading.

[Haktiva]

1. Possibly some falling airplanes too

2. How is gynocentrism not a thing? It's a natural instinct that prioritizes women's safety and welfare because they(for now) are the limiting factor in reproduction. as far as I can tell you have two types, feminism and what we call the patriarchy. Not too fond of either myself.

3. There will never be a perfect 50/50 split because different people will choose(hopefully) their jobs based on their needs and preferences. Hell, the gender gap gets bigger when you allow en and women to choose jobs and studies they prefer. gender quotas just hurt the bottom line and cause problems.

4. I did say at large, did I not? At any rate, I certainly prefer more hands on and daresay dangerous stuff too, and where I work there's hardly any women at all. They typically don't like this stuff. Just the same as most men don't wanna work in female dominated fields.

[The Lone Alliance]

Wow, what shitty websites ran by horrible people with idiotic ideas.

I really like the "I don't like the actual definition, so I substitute my own!"

Well of course it is, it's clear that these people have no real basis in reality but the one they wish to impose on everyone else.

[The Great Warrior Rivers]

And forcing a quota on a company to hire so many women in "manly" areas is economic suicide.

You're the only one who said anything about quotas.

You're also the only one who had a problem with me saying it. I was merely adding something that I thought was semi-relevant.

[The Great Warrior Rivers]

1. Possibly some falling airplanes too

2. How is gynocentrism not a thing? It's a natural instinct that prioritizes women's safety and welfare because they(for now) are the limiting factor in reproduction. as far as I can tell you have two types, feminism and what we call the patriarchy. Not too fond of either myself.

3. There will never be a perfect 50/50 split because different people will choose(hopefully) their jobs based on their needs and preferences. Hell, the gender gap gets bigger when you allow en and women to choose jobs and studies they prefer. gender quotas just hurt the bottom line and cause problems.

4. I did say at large, did I not? At any rate, I certainly prefer more hands on and daresay dangerous stuff too, and where I work there's hardly any women at all. They typically don't like this stuff. Just the same as most men don't wanna work in female dominated fields.

Is homocentrism not a thing? I think humanity should be prioritizing itself, and not certain sects of itself. Thinking of female above man isn't something I look forward to.

[Haktiva]

1. Possibly some falling airplanes too

2. How is gynocentrism not a thing? It's a natural instinct that prioritizes women's safety and welfare because they(for now) are the limiting factor in reproduction. as far as I can tell you have two types, feminism and what we call the patriarchy. Not too fond of either myself.

3. There will never be a perfect 50/50 split because different people will choose(hopefully) their jobs based on their needs and preferences. Hell, the gender gap gets bigger when you allow en and women to choose jobs and studies they prefer. gender quotas just hurt the bottom line and cause problems.

4. I did say at large, did I not? At any rate, I certainly prefer more hands on and daresay dangerous stuff too, and where I work there's hardly any women at all. They typically don't like this stuff. Just the same as most men don't wanna work in female dominated fields.

Is homocentrism not a thing? I think humanity should be prioritizing itself, and not certain sects of itself. Thinking of female above man isn't something I look forward to.

not yet I don't think. Gynocentrism is an instinct we've yet to move past.

[Nazi Flower Power]

1. Possibly some falling airplanes too

More like a few canceled flights.

2. How is gynocentrism not a thing? It's a natural instinct that prioritizes women's safety and welfare because they(for now) are the limiting factor in reproduction. as far as I can tell you have two types, feminism and what we call the patriarchy. Not too fond of either myself.

It's usually about infantilizing women rather than treating them as more important, so gynocentrism isn't the most appropriate term.

3. There will never be a perfect 50/50 split because different people will choose(hopefully) their jobs based on their needs and preferences. Hell, the gender gap gets bigger when you allow en and women to choose jobs and studies they prefer. gender quotas just hurt the bottom line and cause problems.

I have never advocated gender quotas.

4. I did say at large, did I not? At any rate, I certainly prefer more hands on and daresay dangerous stuff too, and where I work there's hardly any women at all. They typically don't like this stuff. Just the same as most men don't wanna work in female dominated fields.

So it's your own preference, not pressure from women to be a provider? Then we're on the same page now.

[Forsher]

tag for further reading.

Tagging threads is spamming threads. Word to the wise.

-- Tagging is considered spam as well, since we have the "thread subscription" feature (it's in your Profile and a menu option on every thread).

OSRS

There were plenty of short responses that you could have made a haphazard response to...

exactly. quota systems are garbage and just plain wrong if you prefer a free market system. of course, women are welcome to try and compete, but when they're just inserted or the standards are lowered for them, bad stuff happens.

I'm not usually a supporter of the free market ideal, but hell is the quota thing a bad idea. Does it really matter how many women work in a workplace? If you're not qualified, you just don't get the job. If you set a quota, you're just asking for unqualified people to take the roles of more qualified people.

Not sure if this was intentional, but you just assumed that inequal distributions are as a result of unqualified women...

When you look at anything, you want a distribution that is not statistically significant in terms of its difference from the population distribution. If you see a difference that is (say, for instance, that more than 90% of early childhood educators are women) then that distribution is a manifestation of some problems in society.

[Nazi Flower Power]

1. Possibly some falling airplanes too

2. How is gynocentrism not a thing? It's a natural instinct that prioritizes women's safety and welfare because they(for now) are the limiting factor in reproduction. as far as I can tell you have two types, feminism and what we call the patriarchy. Not too fond of either myself.

3. There will never be a perfect 50/50 split because different people will choose(hopefully) their jobs based on their needs and preferences. Hell, the gender gap gets bigger when you allow en and women to choose jobs and studies they prefer. gender quotas just hurt the bottom line and cause problems.

4. I did say at large, did I not? At any rate, I certainly prefer more hands on and daresay dangerous stuff too, and where I work there's hardly any women at all. They typically don't like this stuff. Just the same as most men don't wanna work in female dominated fields.

Is homocentrism not a thing? I think humanity should be prioritizing itself, and not certain sects of itself. Thinking of female above man isn't something I look forward to.

It's usually called anthropocentrism instead of homocentrism, but yes, the concept exists. There are people who argue both for and against it.

[Haktiva]

1. And a few out of control sewers, damn, nuclear power plants, and so on.

2. they seem to do a good job of infantilizing themselves. gynocentrism either goes towards feminism or patriarchy, it's whatever suites women's protection and provision, or rather the majority of them.

3. not the point I'm making

4. as far as I can tell, women get pressure to "have it all", meaning a family and a career. I suppose the same goes for men, but the harsh reality of it is that a lot of people have to work towards what will keep them alive, rather than what will allow them to enjoy their lives. I find it a good thing that the marriage and birth rates have been dropping, honestly, should provide a good crash the human race needs in order to advance after SHTF.

[The Great Warrior Rivers]

I'm not usually a supporter of the free market ideal, but hell is the quota thing a bad idea. Does it really matter how many women work in a workplace? If you're not qualified, you just don't get the job. If you set a quota, you're just asking for unqualified people to take the roles of more qualified people.

Not sure if this was intentional, but you just assumed that inequal distributions are as a result of unqualified women...

When you look at anything, you want a distribution that is not statistically significant in terms of its difference from the population distribution. If you see a difference that is (say, for instance, that more than 90% of early childhood educators are women) then that distribution is a manifestation of some problems in society.

Uh, excuse me? Are you denying difference between a man and a woman? Men tend to go to some jobs, females to others. That's not really a problem.

And I'm not trying to imply that all unequal distributions are the result of unqualified women. I'm just saying, it's a bad business practice and if you want a truly equal business a third party may have to review applications and make sure qualified women weren't turned down just for being women. That means that a business doesn't have to hire a 50/50 male/female staff. Just that people get job based on qualification and not sexism.

Is homocentrism not a thing? I think humanity should be prioritizing itself, and not certain sects of itself. Thinking of female above man isn't something I look forward to.

It's usually called anthropocentrism instead of homocentrism, but yes, the concept exists. There are people who argue both for and against it.

Why are some people against that?

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

Not sure if this was intentional, but you just assumed that inequal distributions are as a result of unqualified women...

When you look at anything, you want a distribution that is not statistically significant in terms of its difference from the population distribution. If you see a difference that is (say, for instance, that more than 90% of early childhood educators are women) then that distribution is a manifestation of some problems in society.

Uh, excuse me? Are you denying difference between a man and a woman? Men tend to go to some jobs, females to others. That's not really a problem.

And I'm not trying to imply that all unequal distributions are the result of unqualified women. I'm just saying, it's a bad business practice and if you want a truly equal business a third party may have to review applications and make sure qualified women weren't turned down just for being women. That means that a business doesn't have to hire a 50/50 male/female staff. Just that people get job based on qualification and not sexism.

It's usually called anthropocentrism instead of homocentrism, but yes, the concept exists. There are people who argue both for and against it.

Why are some people against that?

Anthropocentric isn't related to this. It has more to do about animal rights and the likings of making everyone and everything humanity's bitch

[Haktiva]

It's usually called anthropocentrism instead of homocentrism, but yes, the concept exists. There are people who argue both for and against it.

Why are some people against that?

They probably see it as a type of collectivism.

[Empire of the Rising Moon]

Personally, I think the woman was right (i skimmed it so i may have missed a few points) I personally think that there should be a new term besides "Feminism" as it has gained a rather bad outlook as being hyper aggressive (Public opinion, not fact). If their was another name for it that would better describe it and can't be taken amiss (such as renaming it equalizm or something) then it would be harder to get the vocal, violent minority that that is currently in feminism.

That's my two pieces, whats yours?

[Haktiva]

Personally, I think the woman was right (i skimmed it so i may have missed a few points) I personally think that there should be a new term besides "Feminism" as it has gained a rather bad outlook as being hyper aggressive (Public opinion, not fact). If their was another name for it that would better describe it and can't be taken amiss (such as renaming it equalizm or something) then it would be harder to get the vocal, violent minority that that is currently in feminism.

That's my two pieces, whats yours?

as far as I know, most women are going to "women against feminism". It's just another mating strategy if you ask me.

[Nazi Flower Power]

1. And a few out of control sewers, damn, nuclear power plants, and so on.

Because sewers and dams will totally implode if they are left unattended for a day and nuclear power plants don't have any safety features.

Would it take longer than usual to fix any pipes that did happen to burst on that day? Sure. But it wouldn't collapse civilization, and it wouldn't be all that much worse than what would happen if all the women in the world stopped working for a day. Of course some things will get delayed or disrupted if a big chunk of the workforce takes the day off on the same day, but that's true regardless of whether it is men or women, white people or black people, or just millions of people chosen at random.

2. they seem to do a good job of infantilizing themselves.

No, that's you doing that.

gynocentrism either goes towards feminism or patriarchy, it's whatever suites women's protection and provision, or rather the majority of them.

What?

4. as far as I can tell, women get pressure to "have it all", meaning a family and a career. I suppose the same goes for men, but the harsh reality of it is that a lot of people have to work towards what will keep them alive, rather than what will allow them to enjoy their lives. I find it a good thing that the marriage and birth rates have been dropping, honestly, should provide a good crash the human race needs in order to advance after SHTF.

It's good for the population not to grow out of control, but I'm not sure how the conversation got onto that subject.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Why are some people against that?

They probably see it as a type of collectivism.

No, it's more about respect for other species.