• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

"Why can't we hate men?"

Fudbucker said:
It's not a question of what group I'd rather be in. Nor is it about making sure every subgroup in society is represented.

Again, if I showed you the stats of a nameless country where a group that makes up 51% of the population is vastly underrepresented in government and business, what would you think about that country? I think you would think the obvious: that country has problems, power is not being shared fairly.

So if that's what's going on here, what are we doing about it and what should we do about it?
Click to expand...

I'd be finding out why and not just assume that it must be because all men are horrible and are blocking all women.....the poor defenseless things

How many women actually run for office compared to men?

How many women even want to get into politics compared to men?...The hours and travel are shocking
 
Fudbucker said:
It's not a question of what group I'd rather be in. Nor is it about making sure every subgroup in society is represented.

Again, if I showed you the stats of a nameless country where a group that makes up 51% of the population is vastly underrepresented in government and business, what would you think about that country? I think you would think the obvious: that country has problems, power is not being shared fairly.

So if that's what's going on here, what are we doing about it and what should we do about it?
Click to expand...

if I was a blank slate myself as well as a blank slatist, I might agree with you. But I'm not totally ignorant of the world and part of this is knowing that men and women are no identical. I'm sure you could find a similar split based on age demographics, as well.

Again: person with characteristic having one political piece of power does not mean others with said characteristic are somehow being represented better. Are you forgetting that women vote? (majority of voters iirc)
 
Fudbucker said:
can a nation really call itself "democratic" when 51% of the population has only 20% of the seats in Congress? And has never been president? And are underrepresented in the judiciary? If you just described such an imbalance of power without referencing the country, or the groups involved, you would probably think something very wrong is going on.
Click to expand...
Of course not. That's utterly inane blithering nonsense.
 
Fudbucker said:
Again, if I showed you the stats of a nameless country where a group that makes up 51% of the population is vastly underrepresented in government and business, what would you think about that country? I think you would think the obvious: that country has problems, power is not being shared fairly.
Click to expand...

That conclusion doesn't actually follow. For example, the median age in the US is about 38 years old. But there has never been a president younger than 42. Older people are disproportionately represented in politics. Is that unfair?

Well, no. You have to examine the actual details.

Regarding women in politics, why should we expect or demand anything close to parity? Women and men on average are not interested in the same things. Not everyone wants to be a politician. If the number of women who want to be politicians is smaller than the number of men who want to be politicians, then wouldn't it be rather natural for men to outnumber women in politics? And in a democracy, you don't share political offices. You share the vote, which we already have. If women are voting for men more than for women, then how are women being oppressed?

Lastly, in regards to the aforementioned apex fallacy: what makes anyone think that a multimillionaire man is going to identify with and therefore protect the interests of a poor man ahead of a multimillionaire woman? That makes no sense. Multimillionaires hang out with other multimillionaires of both sexes. They socialize together, get married, raise families, have children of both sexes. What they don't do much of is hanging out with poor people. Class is a bigger divide than gender.
 
Fudbucker said:
It's not a question of what group I'd rather be in. Nor is it about making sure every subgroup in society is represented.

Again, if I showed you the stats of a nameless country where a group that makes up 51% of the population is vastly underrepresented in government and business, what would you think about that country? I think you would think the obvious: that country has problems, power is not being shared fairly.

So if that's what's going on here, what are we doing about it and what should we do about it?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't think the obvious I'd look into the issue. It was obvious to the majority of people witches existed. I'll go for actual information versus my best guess thank you.
 
Ziggurat said:
That conclusion doesn't actually follow. For example, the median age in the US is about 38 years old. But there has never been a president younger than 42. Older people are disproportionately represented in politics. Is that unfair?

Well, no. You have to examine the actual details.

Regarding women in politics, why should we expect or demand anything close to parity? Women and men on average are not interested in the same things. Not everyone wants to be a politician. If the number of women who want to be politicians is smaller than the number of men who want to be politicians, then wouldn't it be rather natural for men to outnumber women in politics? And in a democracy, you don't share political offices. You share the vote, which we already have. If women are voting for men more than for women, then how are women being oppressed?

Lastly, in regards to the aforementioned apex fallacy: what makes anyone think that a multimillionaire man is going to identify with and therefore protect the interests of a poor man ahead of a multimillionaire woman? That makes no sense. Multimillionaires hang out with other multimillionaires of both sexes. They socialize together, get married, raise families, have children of both sexes. What they don't do much of is hanging out with poor people. Class is a bigger divide than gender.
Click to expand...
This is drivel. Women are under represented in professional life too, at the highest salary levels. Are we to believe that they're not interested in high salaries or advancement in the fields in which they work?
Class is openly hierarchical. To compare it with gender as a social division is to say that gender imparts social disabilities too. Women are certainly the victime of discrimination, but that doesn't justify vengeful supremacism on the part of certain categories of feminist propagandists.
 
Ziggurat said:
That conclusion doesn't actually follow. For example, the median age in the US is about 38 years old. But there has never been a president younger than 42. Older people are disproportionately represented in politics. Is that unfair?
Click to expand...

Of course not. The fact there are no two year-olds in Congress and the toddler demographic is not being fairly represented is not comparable to the situation regarding women. Today's youth is tomorrow's elderly. Everyone, barring misfortune, will eventually become older and enjoy the few benefits age confers.

Women, on the other hand, will not ever share in the power disparity men enjoy. An older woman is still going to be lagging behind an older man in every aspect of society. It's not like they "catch up" at some point.

Regarding women in politics, why should we expect or demand anything close to parity? Women and men on average are not interested in the same things. Not everyone wants to be a politician. If the number of women who want to be politicians is smaller than the number of men who want to be politicians, then wouldn't it be rather natural for men to outnumber women in politics? And in a democracy, you don't share political offices. You share the vote, which we already have. If women are voting for men more than for women, then how are women being oppressed?
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, there are gender differences. They make up some degree of the difference. There is also the fact women just secured reproductive rights in living memory, voting rights 100 years ago, #metoo, and a president who openly bragged about sexual assault and still got elected. I'm guessing most of the power imbalance (and any amount is too much) is due to rampant misogyny.

So 1, you don't really have a point, and 2, even if gender explains some of the imbalance, it doesn't explain all of the imbalance, so there's still a problem to be addressed.

Lastly, in regards to the aforementioned apex fallacy: what makes anyone think that a multimillionaire man is going to identify with and therefore protect the interests of a poor man ahead of a multimillionaire woman? That makes no sense. Multimillionaires hang out with other multimillionaires of both sexes. They socialize together, get married, raise families, have children of both sexes. What they don't do much of is hanging out with poor people. Class is a bigger divide than gender.
Click to expand...

Income inequality is a big problem. We can walk and chew gum.
 
Last edited:
Sabrina said:
I tend to fall more along the lines of this view. By the logic of the woman quoted in the OP, we must therefore hate all Germans because of the Nazis, [etc.]
Click to expand...

Actually, this part kind of makes sense to me. I mean, look at the penance the Germans had to pay, so that we'd stop holding Nazism against them. Not only a vehement renunciation, but also total military destruction, occupation, martial law... I think if men were to submit to the same kind of retribution that was forced upon Germany, this feminist would be willing to consider not hating men anymore.
 
Ryokan said:
No. There is no such thing as a queen of England. Elizabeth is Queen of the United Kingdom.
Click to expand...
Bit pedantic

If Trev' said "Gidday. I'm Trev'. Heard from me mate Davo' down on the farm you are a pommie bastard from England. England has a Queen don't it?"

"By Jove! Fine gentleman. Why yes!. Say....... Come hither with me, and I shall grace thee with fine tales of her grace and honour her name"

Then Trev could say she is the queen of England.

Yanks call her the queen of England all the time
 
Ryokan said:
No. There is no such thing as a queen of England. Elizabeth is Queen of the United Kingdom.
Click to expand...

Actually she's a reptilioid imposter from outer space. The real queen, whether of England or of the United Kingdom, was frozen in carbonite and sent to the mothership.
 
Fudbucker said:
We men have a lot to atone for.
Click to expand...

If you have been involved in discriminating against women then maybe you have something to atone for, but perhaps you should speak for yourself rather than "we men". I don't think I've ever done so myself.
 
Craig B said:
This is drivel. Women are under represented in professional life too, at the highest salary levels. Are we to believe that they're not interested in high salaries or advancement in the fields in which they work?
Click to expand...
On average: They are less interested in the fields that tend to have higher paying salaries. They are less interested in working 80 hour weeks than men. They are more interested in doing other things with their time, like raising a family.
 
Fudbucker said:
If a group holds all the levers of power in a country (as men currently do), then some men are going to suffer if we carve out a spot for women at the table. I would not be opposed to a law that guaranteed women at least 40% of the seats in Congress. They are over half the population and about 20% of Congress, and 5% of fortune 500 CEO's. It was only 100 years ago women were allowed to vote. That's shameful.
Click to expand...

Gender quotes are not the solution especially not in a democratic system. How many women are running for office? How many women are interested in running for office? Do you really want someone in power that is only there because of her gender and because noone else was allowed to run? That doesn't sound democratic.

I agree that it is a problem that women are underrepresented. This is not solved by forcing things via gender quotes. What must be done is a change of attitude both in the male but also female parts of the population.

We men have a lot to atone for.
Click to expand...

Please leave me out of your "we".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom