PDA

View Full Version : Can you be a "feminist" and support the concept of "transgender"?



Alyosha
09-28-2013, 12:50 PM
In my Women's Studies class--and mind you the textbooks were reprints from the heyday of feminism, the 1970's--we were told over and over that "gender is a social construct" and that women and men are not "different" on the insides, that what was/is considered a masculine pursuit or desire is really just a social construct meant to keep women in the kitchen and men in the board room.

My college professor explained that these social constructs are ever-changing, using the color "pink" as an example of how "pink" is only recently associated with women and not men and that liking the color pink does not identify someone as having a feminine trait blahbbity blah blah.

At the time, 1999 the height of the new riot gurrrl era, he established that what we perceive as gender doesn't exist and that feminism is the breaking of the ties that bind us to superficial understanding of what "gender" is, that women are not naturally more nurturing or better parents--that it's just hogwash, essentially.

http://thefeministagenda.blogspot.com/2009/04/social-construction-of-gender.html

As a feminist describes it:



As our culture changes, so do our constructs. Some constructs come into being and then fall into disuse and thus go out of existence. Others remain but change from one culture and historical period to another. Gender is one such construct. The traits and behaviors that are thought to be "masculine" and "feminine" differ dramatically from one culture and time period to another. Appropriate ways of behaving, the labor that's assigned to gender groups, beliefs about natural abilities and propensities, etc. change significantly. And this variation and adaptation to conditions and social pressures reinforces the idea that gender is a social construction rather than some sort of essence that arises from biology. Because if gender was determined by physical sex, then it wouldn't vary in this way, but would remain constant, just as other biologically determined attributes remain constant. Instead, gender varies with cultural change.

Okay, so liking "girlie things" doesn't make you a girl, right? Liking "boy things" doesn't make you a boy, right?


Okay, great, cool, whatever--explain how someone can feel like a woman or man on the inside enough to change the outside to match the inside?

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/05/22/health/child-is-transgender-at-age-5/

This child "knows" at 5, based on what the child "gravitates" to, that she is a "he".

From the article



“In children, gender solidifies at about 3 to 6,” explained Patrick Kelly, a psychiatrist with the division of child and adolescent psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Children’s Center (http://www.hopkinschildrens.org/index.aspx).That’s about the age when girls gravitate to girl things and boys to boy things. It’s when the parents who ban baby dolls or toy guns see their little girl swaddle and cradle a stuffed animal or watch in awe as their boy makes guttural, spitting Mack truck sounds while four-wheeling his toast over his eggs, then uses his string cheese as a sword.And it’s the age when a child whose gender orientation is at odds with his or her biology begins expressing that disconnect — in Kathryn’s case, loudly.The American Psychiatric Association (http://www.psychiatry.org/) has an official diagnosis for this: gender identity disorder in children.



So, if young children who have not been inundated with societal gender markers "know" they are the gender assigned to the sex opposite them, how is it a "construct"?

If it is still a construct then why change the outward appearance to look biologically like the sex that gender is only superficially aligned with?

Isn't that a failure of the Hippocratic oath to do no harm? You are changing someone's body, physically mutilating it and hopping it up on hormones it was not biologically instilled with me to meet some pseudo-science conception of what "female" or "male" is based off of a mere social construct.

If it is not a construct then it is a biological event, and if that biological event is tied to an appearance--after all, a transwoman receives breast implants and hormones and has a vagina created to take on the physical appearance that matches the "gender" they feel inside-- then are women really about pretty things, having babies, and being nurturing?


Just questions I ask myself as I read about young children being "transitioned".

Peter1469
09-28-2013, 01:03 PM
I don't think that they would admit to it.

BTW, why would you take a Woman's Studies class at college?

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 01:07 PM
I don't think that they would admit to it.

BTW, why would you take a Woman's Studies class at college?

I wanted to have a high GPA so that I could get into law school. I took as many fluff classes as possible so I didn't have to study too much on the general education courses.

I didn't realize that I would have a male teacher who was so frickin' patronizing and self-loathing that every hour spent in his class would be so boring that I would want to cry.

Peter1469
09-28-2013, 01:14 PM
I wanted to have a high GPA so that I could get into law school. I took as many fluff classes as possible so I didn't have to study too much on the general education courses.

I didn't realize that I would have a male teacher who was so frickin' patronizing and self-loathing that every hour spent in his class would be so boring that I would want to cry.

That is what I suspected. :wink: Did you get into law school?

Tulane, 1998.

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 01:15 PM
That is what I suspected. :wink: Did you get into law school?

Tulane, 1998.

Maaaaaybeeeee :D

Peter1469
09-28-2013, 01:17 PM
Maaaaaybeeeee :D

Good luck. Where did you apply?

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 01:26 PM
Good luck. Where did you apply?

I went to Georgetown, but now I wish I'd stayed at my undergrad for law school. I loved my undergrad institution.

But, we digress. :)

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 02:02 PM
I wanted to have a high GPA so that I could get into law school. I took as many fluff classes as possible so I didn't have to study too much on the general education courses.

I didn't realize that I would have a male teacher who was so frickin' patronizing and self-loathing that every hour spent in his class would be so boring that I would want to cry.


...and who says it doesn't pay to take the easy road...

Adelaide
09-28-2013, 02:03 PM
The best and most simplistic way that I have heard feminism described is that it's intended to challenge assumptions about women and the role of women.

There are a couple long-held beliefs by feminists that are falling out of favour or still highly debated within modern feminists; the existence of a distinction between sex and gender, how involved or what role social constructionist beliefs plays in those concepts, so forth. Every female experiences womanhood differently than another based on an innumerable amount of factors. Most of those factors are socially, politically, and culturally determined. While females are most often born with female genitalia, our womanhood or idea of womanhood is mostly determined by gender roles and socialisation. Gender is a fluid concept with variables.

Can feminists support the idea/existence of transgenderism? Of course. We don't want to be told what our role is or forced into a role so naturally we sympathize and should champion anyone who believes the same thing that challenges the assumptions of society. It takes a lot of courage.

While views are changing and many feminists and women are accepting they have unique experiences specific to their biologically assigned sex, there still exists women who can't or won't experience those experiences for one reason or another and that doesn't make them less female. So if a male chooses to outwardly change their sex and identify with the gender they feel inwardly they are (female), it doesn't make them less female because they won't experience things such a pregnancy, childbirth or breastfeeding. Those experiences only account for so much of what it means to be a woman.

I hardly speak for all feminists, of course.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 02:05 PM
The best and most simplistic way that I have heard feminism described is that it's intended to challenge assumptions about women and the role of women.

There are a couple long-held beliefs by feminists that are falling out of favour or still highly debated within modern feminists; the existence of a distinction between sex and gender, how involved or what role social constructionist beliefs plays in those concepts, so forth. Every female experiences womanhood differently than another based on an innumerable amount of factors. Most of those factors are socially, politically, and culturally determined. While females are most often born with female genitalia, our womanhood or idea of womanhood is mostly determined by gender roles and socialisation. Gender is a fluid concept with variables.

Can feminists support the idea/existence of transgenderism? Of course. We don't want to be told what our role is or forced into a role so naturally we sympathize and should champion anyone who believes the same thing that challenges the assumptions of society. It takes a lot of courage.

While views are changing and many feminists and women are accepting they have unique experiences specific to their biologically assigned sex, there still exists women who can't or won't experience those experiences for one reason or another and that doesn't make them less female. So if a male chooses to outwardly change their sex and identify with the gender they feel inwardly they are (female), it doesn't make them less female because they won't experience things such a pregnancy, childbirth or breastfeeding. Those experiences only account for so much of what it means to be a woman.

I hardly speak for all feminists, of course.

...feminist is the opposite of masculine...fairly simple...

Adelaide
09-28-2013, 02:07 PM
...feminist is the opposite of masculine...fairly simple...

I think you mean femininity and no, it's not that simple.

countryboy
09-28-2013, 02:14 PM
...feminist is the opposite of masculine...fairly simple...Not when we're talking about the "feminist movement". Not necessarily.

Hey, maybe we should start a "masculinist movement"! :woohoo:

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 02:16 PM
I think you mean femininity and no, it's not that simple.

...only if you want to make it complex...there's 2 ways to look at everything, feminine and masculine...for example bullying, a chic (feminine) looks at it like "OMG MAKE IT STOP IT'S HORRIBLE I MUST CALL THE POLICE OR THE SCHOOL I MUST PROTECT MY CHILD AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!"...while a guy says, "come on son (or daughter) we're going to take you to self defense class so you can learn to kick that bully's butt"...it's kind of like giving a man a fish vs teaching a man to fish...

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 02:20 PM
Not when we're talking about the "feminist movement". Not necessarily.

Hey, maybe we should start a "masculinist movement"! :woohoo:


...not going to work...do you watch Ultimate Fighter?...this season is a mixture of males and females...it's funny...watching the girls talk to the guys like they can whoop them and watching the guys talk about holding back with them...a feminist would tell her (or his) daughter that she can compete with the boys...it's funny how mouthy these gals are with the guys...

Peter1469
09-28-2013, 02:23 PM
...not going to work...do you watch Ultimate Fighter?...this season is a mixture of males and females...it's funny...watching the girls talk to the guys like they can whoop them and watching the guys talk about holding back with them...a feminist would tell her (or his) daughter that she can compete with the boys...it's funny how mouthy these gals are with the guys...

That is really a bad idea. But then the UFC has really slacked off since its beginnings.

kilgram
09-28-2013, 02:26 PM
Not when we're talking about the "feminist movement". Not necessarily.

Hey, maybe we should start a "masculinist movement"! :woohoo:
Why should you?

There are rights that women have and we don't? We've changed the society to a matriarchy and the women are the rulers?

It is the same argument as doing heterosexual parades. Or a demonstration for being able to go to metal concerts in USA.

KC
09-28-2013, 02:32 PM
Feminism is as broad as a term as liberal, conservative, libertarian, etc. It can be used to describe anything from early advocates of female suffrage, to full political equality, to economic and gender equality. So I think if we take the wide view there certainly can be feminists who support the concept of transgender and others who don't.

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 02:34 PM
But my question is based on feminist doctrine that states that gender is a social construct. If this is true, and it is a social construct than to alter a person's, in this case a child's, physical being based upon a social construct's version of which physical form that gender should take, is it not medical malpractice and doesn't it do "harm"?

In other words if the physical form of a girl also correlates to a gender construct tightly to the point where you will medically and pharmacologically intervene, then gender is not a social construct at all and the feminists were wrong.

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 02:36 PM
Feminism is as broad as a term as liberal, conservative, libertarian, etc. It can be used to describe anything from early advocates of female suffrage, to full political equality, to economic and gender equality. So I think if we take the wide view there certainly can be feminists who support the concept of transgender and others who don't.


Well, you're getting to where I'm going on this. Can you advance feminist agendas such as comingling the military by decrying gender constructs of who is better suited and still say that transgender medical interventions should be supported?

jillian
09-28-2013, 02:39 PM
I don't think that they would admit to it.

BTW, why would you take a Woman's Studies class at college?

why not?

and, really, someone who went to law school shouldn't take potshots at feminists because but for the women who fought for her, we'd have been laughed at for wanting an education.

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 02:44 PM
why not?

and, really, someone who went to law school shouldn't take potshots at feminists because but for the women who fought for her, we'd have been laughed at for wanting an education.

How did I take a potshot at "feminists"? Do explain jillian

jillian
09-28-2013, 02:45 PM
...feminist is the opposite of masculine...fairly simple...

no. feminine is the opposite of masculine.

feminist means you don't believe a woman's place is in the stove

and you believe she has CHOICES.

jillian
09-28-2013, 02:46 PM
How did I take a potshot at "feminists"? Do explain @jillian (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=719)

you mean aside from posting a link to a site called the feminist agenda and conflating issues of social acceptance and feminism because the author conflates those issues?

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 02:47 PM
For the record, Alice Paul, a woman I hold with high, high regard was a pro-human, pro-individual, suffragette. I abhor collectivism in all regards, therefore I have difficulty with the concept of "feminist" because I don't believe that I am a "female" before I am a human being.

You see, I don't believe in limiting myself or separating myself from the human struggle for liberty just because I have tits and a vagina. I believe in human rights and individual freedoms. Upon those two all races, gender, and spiritual beliefs are catered to.

kilgram
09-28-2013, 02:49 PM
But my question is based on feminist doctrine that states that gender is a social construct. If this is true, and it is a social construct than to alter a person's, in this case a child's, physical being based upon a social construct's version of which physical form that gender should take, is it not medical malpractice and doesn't it do "harm"?

In other words if the physical form of a girl also correlates to a gender construct tightly to the point where you will medically and pharmacologically intervene, then gender is not a social construct at all and the feminists were wrong.
And if are they both? A social construct and something genetic? And the hard thing is separate both.

For example, what is a social construct is that girls should play with dolls and boys play playmobil and lego.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 02:50 PM
That is really a bad idea. But then the UFC has really slacked off since its beginnings.

...it's good in theory because they aren't competing against the opposite sex, just staying in the same house...I've always liked Rhonda Rousey until now...she's a mouthy bitch...

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 02:51 PM
no. feminine is the opposite of masculine.

feminist means you don't believe a woman's place is in the stove

and you believe she has CHOICES.


...if you say so...

GrassrootsConservative
09-28-2013, 02:53 PM
Most of the groups that Democrats embrace have obvious reasons why they wouldn't get along.

Obviously gay males and feminists are bound to have unworkable problems with each other. What about the following you might not have thought about?:

Muslims - Feminists (The first practices Sharia Law and is very oppressive of women, even more-so than the pro-death-to-fetuses Democrats themselves)

Gays - Blacks (I lived in the south for awhile, in an area that was predominately black, the one openly gay kid in high school had 4 or 5 blacks beat the shit out of him out behind the Spanish wing one day, and from what I've heard blacks mostly aren't embracing of the whole "homosexual movement" at all.)

Are there more, too?

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 02:53 PM
you mean aside from posting a link to a site called the feminist agenda and conflating issues of social acceptance and feminism because the author conflates those issues?

I queried but did not posit. The author posited. I am not the author. However, "social acceptance" belies that point of designing "what is woman" and "what is female" when you now move into medical intervention, hence my question to the board.

I met some lesbian feminists who surprised me by being very anti MTF trans, and I engaged them in conversation wherein they told me that I could not be a feminist and believe that someone could be a "female" on the inside. I replied that I don't consider myself a "feminist" as I am not a collectivist and am open to the possibilities of whatever.

kilgram
09-28-2013, 02:53 PM
For the record, Alice Paul, a woman I hold with high, high regard was a pro-human, pro-individual, suffragette. I abhor collectivism in all regards, therefore I have difficulty with the concept of "feminist" because I don't believe that I am a "female" before I am a human being.

You see, I don't believe in limiting myself or separating myself from the human struggle for liberty just because I have tits and a vagina. I believe in human rights and individual freedoms. Upon those two all races, gender, and spiritual beliefs are catered to.
The problem is with this idea, that should be the ideal. That there are people who discriminate to others. And this discrimination becomes massive to a determinate group of people? How do you fight this discrimination?

Let's go to historical examples of this affirmation.

Let's considere that all people are human. How women would be able to get their rights in the XIX century, if they not fought to be considered as equal to the rest, that they are not different, but in that fight they fought as a group, as women. I am not explaining as good as I had the ideas in mind, but I think that it can be understood.

The same goes with the blacks. They were inferior, they were considered subhumans, but in the civil rights movement they fought to be considered like the rest. That they were no different. But during the fight, they had to fight the concept that they were subhuman.

Then, there are groups, and some groups have had less rights than others. The ideal, would be what you say, that all are humans, but that is far from reality.

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 02:55 PM
no. feminine is the opposite of masculine.

feminist means you don't believe a woman's place is in the stove

and you believe she has CHOICES.

Does it? Is that really all it means, that you're not a casserole? So you can be an anti-abortion female and a feminist?

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 02:57 PM
The problem is with this idea, that should be the ideal. That there are people who discriminate to others. And this discrimination becomes massive to a determinate group of people? How do you fight this discrimination?

Let's go to historical examples of this affirmation.

Let's considere that all people are human. How women would be able to get their rights in the XIX century, if they not fought to be considered as equal to the rest, that they are not different, but in that fight they fought as a group, as women. I am not explaining as good as I had the ideas in mind, but I think that it can be understood.

The same goes with the blacks. They were inferior, they were considered subhumans, but in the civil rights movement they fought to be considered like the rest. That they were no different. But during the fight, they had to fight the concept that they were subhuman.

Then, there are groups, and some groups have had less rights than others. The ideal, would be what you say, that all are humans, but that is far from reality.

Aren't you just making my case that we're really just all human and we should fight for human rights and individual freedoms?

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 02:58 PM
Does it? Is that really all it means, that you're not a casserole? So you can be an anti-abortion female and a feminist?

...sex is biological gender is mental...

GrassrootsConservative
09-28-2013, 02:58 PM
Does it? Is that really all it means, that you're not a casserole? So you can be an anti-abortion female and a feminist?

You cannot be both pro-abortion and a feminist. Someone who embraces their femininity would protect their conceived child to their own death if need-be. They WOULD NOT sentence it to the womb gas chamber for sake of "convenience" as so many females do.

Last I was aware feminism was not about being a pathetic coward afraid to do what is right.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 03:00 PM
You cannot be both pro-abortion and a feminist. Someone who embraces their femininity would protect their conceived child to their own death if need-be.

...I could be wrong but imo a "feminist" would choose the rights of a woman/female of those of a fetus...

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 03:03 PM
Once men realize that the gender roles are a prison for them too, then they become really valuable allies. Because
they’re not just helping someone else, they’re freeing themselves. ~ Gloria Steinem (http://www.feminist.com/resources/artspeech/interviews/gloriasteinem.html)

kilgram
09-28-2013, 03:03 PM
Aren't you just making my case that we're really just all human and we should fight for human rights and individual freedoms?
Yes and no. I mean that there are people who have less rights for different reasons, and that cases must be treated independently. I don't know if I make me to understand or not.

I mean that I see logic behind the feminist movement, pro-gay movement, black movement, immigrants... it is the movements for the civil rights. The ideal should be considere every human as equal. But when there are groups that are discriminated and divided in groups, there is a logic of the existance of movements defending their rights.

That maybe all that should be unified, maybe.

GrassrootsConservative
09-28-2013, 03:04 PM
...I could be wrong but imo a "feminist" would choose the rights of a woman/female of those of a fetus...

Well then my definition of what is "feminist" is different from most self-centered Liberal females.

Big surprise there. Is feminism not still about social equality to males?

kilgram
09-28-2013, 03:04 PM
You cannot be both pro-abortion and a feminist. Someone who embraces their femininity would protect their conceived child to their own death if need-be. They WOULD NOT sentence it to the womb gas chamber for sake of "convenience" as so many females do.

Last I was aware feminism was not about being a pathetic coward afraid to do what is right.
I disagree. And it would be other topic. I am pro-feminist and I am pro-abortion, as many feminists that I've met in my whole life.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 03:05 PM
once men realize that the gender roles are a prison for them too, then they become really valuable allies. Because
they’re not just helping someone else, they’re freeing themselves. ~ gloria steinem (http://www.feminist.com/resources/artspeech/interviews/gloriasteinem.html)

...wtf?!?!?...

GrassrootsConservative
09-28-2013, 03:06 PM
Once men realize that the gender roles are a prison for them too, then they become really valuable allies. Because
they’re not just helping someone else, they’re freeing themselves. ~ Gloria Steinem (http://www.feminist.com/resources/artspeech/interviews/gloriasteinem.html)

Gender roles are a myth. Ask my girlfriend. She and I have the most unorthodox relationship ever.

/Edit: And no, neither of us are "feminists," we're good, hardworking people with morals who would take care of a baby were we to conceive one. The very opposite of modern "feminists."

Peter1469
09-28-2013, 03:08 PM
...it's good in theory because they aren't competing against the opposite sex, just staying in the same house...I've always liked Rhonda Rousey until now...she's a mouthy bitch...

I still like her!

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 03:09 PM
Yes and no. I mean that there are people who have less rights for different reasons, and that cases must be treated independently. I don't know if I make me to understand or not.

I mean that I see logic behind the feminist movement, pro-gay movement, black movement, immigrants... it is the movements for the civil rights. The ideal should be considere every human as equal. But when there are groups that are discriminated and divided in groups, there is a logic of the existance of movements defending their rights.

That maybe all that should be unified, maybe.

I believe that all humans are created equal, that we are endowed with certain unalienable rights. When one individual loses liberty, it is an affront to all. I am not a female struggling for liberty and the freedom to make choices for myself and my family, but a human with natural rights to privacy and the pursuit of happiness.

Alyosha
09-28-2013, 03:20 PM
I disagree. And it would be other topic. I am pro-feminist and I am pro-abortion, as many feminists that I've met in my whole life.

So, you must believe in abortion to be a feminist? :)

Who says? Trying to make a point, sorry if I make it at your expense.

kilgram
09-28-2013, 03:23 PM
So, you must believe in abortion to be a feminist? :)

Who says? Trying to make a point, sorry if I make it at your expense.
I've not said that. I've said that many feminists are like that. THere is a big difference. And by the way, abortion is an evil. But many times it is necessary. Also it is a trauma for the woman who have to abort, but many times there is no other option. So, abortion always should exist as an option, the last option and a bad option, always is a bad option.

By the way, I think that I used wrongly the words, I am pro-choice. I don't like abortions. But I accept that sometimes there is no other choice, then you must be able to abort in the safest ways.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 04:52 PM
I still like her!

...she's a good fighter but she lacks respect...

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 04:55 PM
I believe that all humans are created equal, that we are endowed with certain unalienable rights. When one individual loses liberty, it is an affront to all. I am not a female struggling for liberty and the freedom to make choices for myself and my family, but a human with natural rights to privacy and the pursuit of happiness.


...this is false...complete bs...and this tells me you live in a fantasy world...

Peter1469
09-28-2013, 04:56 PM
...this is false...complete bs...and this tells me you live in a fantasy world...

How so?

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 05:03 PM
How so?


...because all of us would be living by the same standard and we aren't...there's people that still run around in loin cloths in Africa, same as in Australia, same with New Guinea and the jungles of South America...there's people that drive Ferraris in Saudi and some that drive camels...it's nice in theory but it's not realistic at all...

kilgram
09-28-2013, 05:31 PM
...because all of us would be living by the same standard and we aren't...there's people that still run around in loin cloths in Africa, same as in Australia, same with New Guinea and the jungles of South America...there's people that drive Ferraris in Saudi and some that drive camels...it's nice in theory but it's not realistic at all...
And? That is cause of society. The ones driving ferraris are not better than the ones driving camels.

That can be changed. We should fight for that: to change the inequalities of society that are created by authoritarian societies.

Mister D
09-28-2013, 05:42 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the logic of equality is relentless.

KC
09-28-2013, 05:42 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the logic of equality is relentless.

Until you begin to distinguish between types of equality.

Mister D
09-28-2013, 05:44 PM
Until you begin to distinguish between types of equality.

How did that work out?

KC
09-28-2013, 05:59 PM
How did that work out?

It simply does not follow that because one believes in political equality for all people that all people are equal in other dimensions. Political equality only posits all people are free before the law, with the same protections, same rights, etc. This is why it's important to distinguish between different types of equality.

One might say for example that the United States is a highly unequal society. That is definitely true in some respects, partly true in other respects, but in others still it is completely wrong. We do after all share political equality.

Cthulhu
09-28-2013, 06:06 PM
If gender is a social construct, than why are they making physical changes to the individual? It makes no logical sense.

Thus, gender is not a social construct, but a physical construct. Slightly similar to gender roles - these are social constructed, but they are deeply rooted in biological ones. Men don't nurse babies for example - biologically it is unsound.

Those who argue otherwise? Deluded fools at best, venomous creatures at worst bent on the destruction and corruption of innocent lives.

Mister D
09-28-2013, 06:13 PM
It simply does not follow that because one believes in political equality for all people that all people are equal in other dimensions. Political equality only posits all people are free before the law, with the same protections, same rights, etc. This is why it's important to distinguish between different types of people.

One might say for example that the United States is a highly unequal society. That is definitely true in some respects, partly true in other respects, but in others still it is completely wrong. We do after all share political equality.

The United States really is a highly unequal society and many people (obviously) refuse to make the distinctions you make. At best, your view of equality sounds incomplete. At worst, it's perceived as self-serving and hypocritical. Equality is a dangerous idea but it will have to run its course, unfortunately.

KC
09-28-2013, 06:16 PM
If gender is a social construct, than why are they making physical changes to the individual? It makes no logical sense.

Thus, gender is not a social construct, but a physical construct. Slightly similar to gender roles - these are social constructed, but they are deeply rooted in biological ones. Men don't nurse babies for example - biologically it is unsound.

Those who argue otherwise? Deluded fools at best, venomous creatures at worst bent on the destruction and corruption of innocent lives.

Gender is more about mental and behavioral characteristics than biology. While it is the case that gender roles are socially constructed (since we can see some variation between societies), biology does influence gender to a certain extent. Anyone seeking an operation to change their gender is trying to reverse the effect of those biological traits.

KC
09-28-2013, 06:20 PM
The United States really is a highly unequal society and many people (obviously) refuse to make the distinctions you make. At best, your view of equality sounds incomplete. At worst, it's perceived as self-serving and hypocritical. Equality is a dangerous idea but it will have to run its course, unfortunately.

Nonsense. Full equality leads to inherent contradictions. That's why distinctions are necessary, and why some types of equality are embrace while others are not. For example, equality of outcome flies directly in the face of equality of opportunity. Their is no accommodating for the two so it is necessary to distinguish between categories.

kilgram
09-28-2013, 06:21 PM
The United States really is a highly unequal society and many people (obviously) refuse to make the distinctions you make. At best, your view of equality sounds incomplete. At worst, it's perceived as self-serving and hypocritical. Equality is a dangerous idea but it will have to run its course, unfortunately.
Why is equality a bad/dangerous idea?

Mister D
09-28-2013, 06:26 PM
Nonsense. Full equality leads to inherent contradictions. That's why distinctions are necessary, and why some types of equality are embrace while others are not. For example, equality of outcome flies directly in the face of equality of opportunity. Their is no accommodating for the two so it is necessary to distinguish between categories.

Nonsense? You're losing this battle to the progressives. Hopefully your cries of "nonsense!" turn the tide. Don't be surprised when they don't.


Mind you, I don't believe in equality. I'm not saying that progressives are right and you're wrong. I'm saying equality of any kind is an impossibility. We chose a dangerous path...

Mister D
09-28-2013, 06:26 PM
Why is equality a bad/dangerous idea?

What does it mean? How is it achieved?

KC
09-28-2013, 06:29 PM
Nonsense? You're losing this battle to the progressives. Hopefully your cries of "nonsense!" turn the tide. Don't be surprised when they don't.


Mind you, I don't believe in equality. I'm not saying that progressives are right and you're wrong. I'm saying equality of any kind is an impossibility. We chose a dangerous path...

Tsk tsk Mister D, I figured by now that you'd know that I'm an idealist, that although I believe in these ideas I realize society is totally fucked.

jillian
09-28-2013, 06:31 PM
Why is equality a bad/dangerous idea?

it isn't

Mister D
09-28-2013, 06:32 PM
Tsk tsk Mister D, I figured by now that you'd know that I'm an idealist, that although I believe in these ideas I realize society is totally fucked.

:smiley:

It is good to meet young people (granted, I'm in my 30s lol) who aren't progressives.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 06:49 PM
Until you begin to distinguish between types of equality.


...I want you to read this real slow, if we were all equal in reality, like you libs keep saying, there would be no need for equality laws because we'd all be equal...but we aren't, are we?...so what you and your kind do is masquerade behind a cloud of dishonesty by saying we are all equal and to prove this we will enact laws to make it so...and if you don't like it we will also makes laws to put you in jail for not believing our BS...comprendo?...

Mister D
09-28-2013, 06:52 PM
...I want you to read this real slow, if we were all equal in reality, like you libs keep saying, there would be no need for equality laws because we'd all be equal...but we aren't, are we?...so what you and your kind do is masquerade behind a cloud of dishonesty by saying we are all equal and to prove this we will enact laws to make it so...and if you don't like it we will also makes laws to put you in jail for not believing our BS...comprendo?...

KC is no progressive! :grin: You describe progressives, however, very well.

KC
09-28-2013, 06:52 PM
...I want you to read this real slow, if we were all equal in reality, like you libs keep saying, there would be no need for equality laws because we'd all be equal...but we aren't, are we?...so what you and your kind do is masquerade behind a cloud of dishonesty by saying we are all equal and to prove this we will enact laws to make it so...and if you don't like it we will also makes laws to put you in jail for not believing our BS...comprendo?...

Equality isn't the result of legislation, Kabuki Joe. Political equality is the result of social contract law such as the Constitution.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 06:52 PM
Gender is more about mental and behavioral characteristics than biology. While it is the case that gender roles are socially constructed (since we can see some variation between societies), biology does influence gender to a certain extent. Anyone seeking an operation to change their gender is trying to reverse the effect of those biological traits.


...yet again, gender and biological sex are mutually exclusive...you don't need to be a male to be a man hence Ellen Degeneres...

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 06:55 PM
nonsense. full equality leads to inherent contradictions. that's why distinctions are necessary, and why some types of equality are embrace while others are not. For example, equality of outcome flies directly in the face of equality of opportunity. Their is no accommodating for the two so it is necessary to distinguish between categories.


...wtf?!?!?...

KC
09-28-2013, 06:56 PM
...yet again, gender and biological sex are mutually exclusive...you don't need to be a male to be a man hence Ellen Degeneres...

The terms are mutually exclusive, but to deny that biological sex influences gender is to some degree wacko.

Codename Section
09-28-2013, 06:57 PM
This isn't really about equality, is it? I thought it is about whether or not gender is a social construct or a biological one. In the last five years scientists learned more about brain function than they have in the last hundred. We know which neurotransmitters produce what reactions. Women's brains have a different chemical reaction when looking at children than men's. It would stand to reason that transgender "women" would have the same reaction in the brain because "feelings" are what they say is what makes them believe they are the gender opposite their body.

Why not do an MRI and test it? Why leave it to behavioral psychologists to determine?

Mister D
09-28-2013, 06:57 PM
The terms are mutually exclusive, but to deny that biological sex influences gender is to some degree wacko.

Yes, it is wacko. jillian that's why you might not want to take a woman's studies course. That crapola abounds.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 06:58 PM
Equality isn't the result of legislation, Kabuki Joe. Political equality is the result of social contract law such as the Constitution.


...either you are clueless or dishonest because the only reason males and females are equal is because the government says so...sugar coat it all you want but equality in the US is forced through laws...

KC
09-28-2013, 07:03 PM
...either you are clueless or dishonest because the only reason males and females are equal is because the government says so...sugar coat it all you want but equality in the US is forced through laws...

I never made such an assertion.

Dr. Who
09-28-2013, 07:07 PM
...either you are clueless or dishonest because the only reason males and females are equal is because the government says so...sugar coat it all you want but equality in the US is forced through laws...
So it is your assertion that men are superior to women?

jillian
09-28-2013, 07:13 PM
...either you are clueless or dishonest because the only reason males and females are equal is because the government says so...sugar coat it all you want but equality in the US is forced through laws...

no. government keeps idiots from keeping women from competing in the workplace by making it illegal for said idiots to discriminate against us.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 07:15 PM
Equality isn't the result of legislation, Kabuki Joe. Political equality is the result of social contract law such as the Constitution.


...throw the laws out and see what happens...

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 07:17 PM
The terms are mutually exclusive, but to deny that biological sex influences gender is to some degree wacko.


...ok, then ellen should be wearing dresses and high heels...

Codename Section
09-28-2013, 07:20 PM
no. government keeps idiots from keeping women from competing in the workplace by making it illegal for said idiots to discriminate against us.

@Jillion Why would you want to work for an idiot? The government doesn't stop him from being an idiot. It just makes him hire you.

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 07:20 PM
So it is your assertion that men are superior to women?


...well, we can pee standing up without peeing down our leg...that's superior to the alternative...

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 07:22 PM
no. government keeps idiots from keeping women from competing in the workplace by making it illegal for said idiots to discriminate against us.


...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...you just proved my point!...

jillian
09-28-2013, 07:24 PM
...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...you just proved my point!...

really. interesting.

you had a point?

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 07:27 PM
really. interesting.

you had a point?

...read what you posted:

"no. government keeps idiots from keeping women from competing in the workplace by making it illegal for said idiots to discriminate against us."


...if we were equal then the government wouldn't need to step in, right?!?!?...

roadmaster
09-28-2013, 07:27 PM
...ok, then ellen should be wearing dresses and high heels...
You can hardly get me in one even today but would dress up when I wanted to. I am not a guy, never been. Didn't like dolls, dresses, playing house or anything. Like sports, guns, hunting, fishing, riding and was a farmers daughter. Got married, finished college, had some kids and career found out the best gift there is are children. I love babies it's when they get much older some give you grey hair. I like being a female always have just don't tell a young girl that they are a boy inside because I never was. Girls can like this too.:grin:

roadmaster
09-28-2013, 07:30 PM
I would like to say that we fought for sports in college in my days. Now you are going to tell me a man saying he is female can play on the girls college team! It's wrong and they shouldn't be in pageants either. We didn't fight to have this.

jillian
09-28-2013, 07:33 PM
...read what you posted:

"no. government keeps idiots from keeping women from competing in the workplace by making it illegal for said idiots to discriminate against us."

...if we were equal then the government wouldn't need to step in, right?!?!?...


no... that proved nothing except that you are said idiot. laws were needed to control the idiots who forced black people to go to separate schools, too...

same idiots...

Dr. Who
09-28-2013, 07:44 PM
...well, we can pee standing up without peeing down our leg...that's superior to the alternative... And women can bear children. Of the two I'd say the survival of the species depends on the latter. So what's your point?

jillian
09-28-2013, 07:46 PM
And women can bear children. Of the two I'd say the survival of the species depends on the latter. So what's your point?

don't make him feel badly Dr. Who peeing while standing is probably his only accomplishment.

roadmaster
09-28-2013, 07:51 PM
no... that proved nothing except that you are said idiot. laws were needed to control the idiots who forced black people to go to separate schools, too...

same idiots... You usually went to the school that was on your part of town. Who forced black children to separate?

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 07:54 PM
no... that proved nothing except that you are said idiot. laws were needed to control the idiots who forced black people to go to separate schools, too...

same idiots...


...so we aren't really equal?...

Kabuki Joe
09-28-2013, 07:55 PM
And women can bear children. Of the two I'd say the survival of the species depends on the latter. So what's your point?


...if females can give birth and male can't, are we equal?...

roadmaster
09-28-2013, 08:14 PM
...if females can give birth and male can't, are we equal?... I don't think my generation wanted to be equal. We wanted to put sports in college and look at it now. I didn't want to play on a boys team even though our High School team could beat the boys. I loved softball and they didn't have it in college then, but I could throw a mean curve in baseball and had a arm. There is a difference between us and feminist. We are still women, liked being a female, but wanted to be taken serious and liked guys, just not that way until I got older, like a little in 9th grade. :grin: We were not like these girls today.

Cthulhu
09-28-2013, 08:33 PM
Nonsense? You're losing this battle to the progressives. Hopefully your cries of "nonsense!" turn the tide. Don't be surprised when they don't.


Mind you, I don't believe in equality. I'm not saying that progressives are right and you're wrong. I'm saying equality of any kind is an impossibility. We chose a dangerous path...

Exactly, two creatures, so fundamentally different, cannot be made equal. At least not without the annihilation of one of them.

Cthulhu
09-28-2013, 08:36 PM
Yes, it is wacko. @jillian (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=719) that's why you might not want to take a woman's studies course. That crapola abounds.

I think I am going to take women's studies next semester, just to throw a wrench in the programming. The instructor will hate me, she will fail me. But a classroom of women's mind will not be poisoned without resistance.

Fair trade.

roadmaster
09-28-2013, 08:40 PM
Exactly, two creatures, so fundamentally different, cannot be made equal. At least not without the annihilation of one of them.Why yes, there is a nice difference if you stand them beside each other.:laugh:

Codename Section
09-28-2013, 08:50 PM
no... that proved nothing except that you are said idiot. laws were needed to control the idiots who forced black people to go to separate schools, too...

same idiots...

jillian

no offense but this is really ironic and not well thought out. Jim Crow laws were repealed. That "force" you were talking about was the government, backed up by the Supreme Court stating that separate but equal was equal.

The state governments made those laws, and the Supreme Court said they were Constitutional and gave them the power to enforce those laws.

Laws. Government. Those idiots, hun, they were the government.

This wasn't a mob of citizens on their own. You still want to tell me how great government is?

jillian
09-28-2013, 09:03 PM
@jillian (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=719)

no offense but this is really ironic and not well thought out. Jim Crow laws were repealed. That "force" you were talking about was the government, backed up by the Supreme Court stating that separate but equal was equal.

The state governments made those laws, and the Supreme Court said they were Constitutional and gave them the power to enforce those laws.

Laws. Government. Those idiots, hun, they were the government.

This wasn't a mob of citizens on their own. You still want to tell me how great government is?

i'm not offended Codename Section. You're ok with me. but the reality is that the force that ended jim crow was brown v bd of ed, what, 60 years later when better judges were on the bench? (think scalia being replaced by thurgood marshall) and it was government force that made governor wallace allow the first black students into the university of georgia.

THAT is what government is supposed to do.

just because laws change is no reason to hate government or say that life without is is somehow beneficial.

Codename Section
09-28-2013, 09:10 PM
i'm not offended @Codename Section (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=866). You're ok with me. but the reality is that the force that ended jim crow was brown v bd of ed, what, 60 years later when better judges were on the bench? (think scalia being replaced by thurgood marshall) and it was government force that made governor wallace allow the first black students into the university of georgia.

THAT is what government is supposed to do.

just because laws change is no reason to hate government or say that life without is is somehow beneficial.

The governments created the Jim Crow laws so another portion of the government had to end the laws, blah blah blah the central theme is
government.

You keep saying that's what government is supposed to do so I ask you which? Create immoral laws or repeal the immoral laws that government created.

How do you keep missing that government created the laws and used its monopoly on force to hurt people? Bad governments do bad things and you cannot keep them from going bad because money is in politics and won't go away.

Thomas Moore in Utopia said, that it was immoral to first create thieves and then punish them.

The government creates problems, allows us to react, the pushes their solution on them like saviors so we forget it created the problem in the first place.

sky dancer
09-28-2013, 09:23 PM
Why not?

Dr. Who
09-28-2013, 11:25 PM
...if females can give birth and male can't, are we equal?...
You might ask if A is a nuclear physicist and B is a biologist and C is a musician are they equal? While we do not all do everything equally well, we all are capable of doing something, even many things well, so ultimately all people have their own special talents that are unique to them. There are no talents that are intrinsically more important than others, so the answer is yes we are all equal. The species cannot exist without women, but it also cannot exist without men. Ultimately the most important thing is that opportunity is not restricted on the basis of narrow minded prejudicial views. People male or female or one race or another, cannot be placed within a narrow definition of their potential. To do so does an injustice to the people in question and society at large, for when we do this, we lose some of the best and brightest on the planet.

kilgram
09-29-2013, 04:54 AM
...if females can give birth and male can't, are we equal?...
Showing how you don't understand equality.

Libhater
09-29-2013, 05:38 AM
I don't know what this has to do with the subject here, but I have a deep respect for the feminist Tammy Bruce simply because she changed from being a liberal/leftist to being a Conservative talk show host. And get this, I still like her despite the fact that she is a lesbo licker. Everything always has and still does come down to one's affiliation with either the patriotic Capitalistic Conservatives or the anti American progressive liberals.

Kabuki Joe
09-29-2013, 08:04 AM
Showing how you don't understand equality.


...actually I don't think you understand equality...

Kabuki Joe
09-29-2013, 08:05 AM
Why yes, there is a nice difference if you stand them beside each other.:laugh:


...different means not equal...

Kabuki Joe
09-29-2013, 08:10 AM
You might ask if A is a nuclear physicist and B is a biologist and C is a musician are they equal? While we do not all do everything equally well, we all are capable of doing something, even many things well, so ultimately all people have their own special talents that are unique to them. There are no talents that are intrinsically more important than others, so the answer is yes we are all equal. The species cannot exist without women, but it also cannot exist without men. Ultimately the most important thing is that opportunity is not restricted on the basis of narrow minded prejudicial views. People male or female or one race or another, cannot be placed within a narrow definition of their potential. To do so does an injustice to the people in question and society at large, for when we do this, we lose some of the best and brightest on the planet.


...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...I don't know what to say...it's a simple yes or no question and you post you usual nonsense...just answer the question...

Dr. Who
09-29-2013, 04:09 PM
...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...I don't know what to say...it's a simple yes or no question and you post you usual nonsense...just answer the question...Your lack of civility speaks volumes. However I did answer the question.


You might ask if A is a nuclear physicist and B is a biologist and C is a musician are they equal? While we do not all do everything equally well, we all are capable of doing something, even many things well, so ultimately all people have their own special talents that are unique to them. There are no talents that are intrinsically more important than others, so the answer is yes we are all equal. The species cannot exist without women, but it also cannot exist without men. Ultimately the most important thing is that opportunity is not restricted on the basis of narrow minded prejudicial views. People male or female or one race or another, cannot be placed within a narrow definition of their potential. To do so does an injustice to the people in question and society at large, for when we do this, we lose some of the best and brightest on the planet.

Ravi
09-29-2013, 07:12 PM
I read bits and pieces of this thread, which seems to have an overall theme of making women feel bad about being women, and my main response is: WTF???

As to the "side" question. Who gives a fuck about someone else's lifestyle that doesn't affect you?

Mister D
09-29-2013, 07:16 PM
I read bits and pieces of this thread, which seems to have an overall theme of making women feel bad about being women, and my main response is: WTF???

As to the "side" question. Who gives a fuck about someone else's lifestyle that doesn't affect you?

It does?

What side question? What lifestyle?

Codename Section
09-29-2013, 07:17 PM
I read bits and pieces of this thread, which seems to have an overall theme of making women feel bad about being women, and my main response is: WTF???

As to the "side" question. Who gives a fuck about someone else's lifestyle that doesn't affect you?

Why does it make you feel bad about being a woman and what lifestyle are you referring to? Sit down and tell us about it.

Kabuki Joe
09-29-2013, 10:49 PM
Your lack of civility speaks volumes. However I did answer the question.


...indeed Dr Smith, indeed...

Dr. Who
09-29-2013, 10:59 PM
...indeed Dr Smith, indeed... How drôle. But we are not lost in space and I am not Dr. Smith, nice evasion however.

Kabuki Joe
09-29-2013, 11:18 PM
How drôle. But we are not lost in space and I am not Dr. Smith, nice evasion however.


...me evading?...I asked "if females can give birth and male can't, are we equal?" and you brought up A, B & C which have nothing to do with my question...you evaded the question...

Chloe
09-30-2013, 02:33 AM
...me evading?...I asked "if females can give birth and male can't, are we equal?" and you brought up A, B & C which have nothing to do with my question...you evaded the question...

Biologically we have different body parts and functions, I have parts that you don't have and you have parts that I don't have, but that's not really equality or inequality. Humans are equal because we are all the same species regardless of which sex we are, but we are not identical in our shapes, sizes, functions, and personalities. Me being able to give birth makes me biologically unique when compared to you but my uniqueness in that sense is useless without your body parts, so basically we balance each other out equally.

You have me on ignore so you won't see this but maybe somebody else will eventually quote me and you will be able to read it.

GrassrootsConservative
09-30-2013, 02:39 AM
Biologically we have different body parts and functions, I have parts that you don't have and you have parts that I don't have, but that's not really equality or inequality. Humans are equal because we are all the same species regardless of which sex we are, but we are not identical in our shapes, sizes, functions, and personalities. Me being able to give birth makes me biologically unique when compared to you but my uniqueness in that sense is useless without your body parts, so basically we balance each other out equally.

You have me on ignore so you won't see this but maybe somebody else will eventually quote me and you will be able to read it.
Kabuki Joe I feel you should at least read this post.

Alyosha
09-30-2013, 07:38 AM
Biologically we have different body parts and functions, I have parts that you don't have and you have parts that I don't have, but that's not really equality or inequality. Humans are equal because we are all the same species regardless of which sex we are, but we are not identical in our shapes, sizes, functions, and personalities. Me being able to give birth makes me biologically unique when compared to you but my uniqueness in that sense is useless without your body parts, so basically we balance each other out equally.

You have me on ignore so you won't see this but maybe somebody else will eventually quote me and you will be able to read it.

He fears intelligent females kicking his ass in a debate, thus in his mind proving the gender superiority of women. This is why you are on ignore.

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 09:27 AM
Biologically we have different body parts and functions, I have parts that you don't have and you have parts that I don't have, but that's not really equality or inequality. Humans are equal because we are all the same species regardless of which sex we are, but we are not identical in our shapes, sizes, functions, and personalities. Me being able to give birth makes me biologically unique when compared to you but my uniqueness in that sense is useless without your body parts, so basically we balance each other out equally.

You have me on ignore so you won't see this but maybe somebody else will eventually quote me and you will be able to read it.


...you are double talking, in one sentence to admit we are unequal and in the next you imply that by "theory" we are all humans so we are all equal...it's a nice thought but in reality that's all it is...I've said this before more then once, laws (equality laws in this case) are made to protect the week from the strong and if we are making equality laws then we aren't equal because they don't address everyone, just a certain few...it might not be nice but it's the truth, females need an "equalizer" to compete with males...and then we have "equalizers" for color...if the population in the US was truly equal then there'd be no need for the ACLU and affirmative action...

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 09:28 AM
He fears intelligent females kicking his ass in a debate, thus in his mind proving the gender superiority of women. This is why you are on ignore.


...yeah, that's the ticket... :)

sky dancer
09-30-2013, 09:38 AM
We are born into bodies that are either female or male but the mind of either gender is free.

Libhater
09-30-2013, 09:44 AM
Biologically we have different body parts and functions, I have parts that you don't have and you have parts that I don't have, but that's not really equality or inequality. Humans are equal because we are all the same species regardless of which sex we are, but we are not identical in our shapes, sizes, functions, and personalities. Me being able to give birth makes me biologically unique when compared to you but my uniqueness in that sense is useless without your body parts, so basically we balance each other out equally.

No one is 'equal', nor should we want people to be equal. We are all individuals who possess differing characteristics, and who have differing desires, intelligence and goals etc. Wouldn't this be a boring world if we were all equal? This equality or this equal rights nonsense is exactly what we Conservatives fight against every day, with the prime example being the leftists push to have big government equalize everything in our lives by determining what foods we can or can not eat, to what temperature we should set our thermostats at, to taking our right to own guns away, to what health care we must abide by, to redistributing the money of the rich to the poor to 'equalize' the wealth etc. If you equality nuts had it your way, I would be subjected to a life time of leftist policy that in the long run might, and I say might make me a clone of someone like a cigar--spare me that kind of a nightmare scenario. I do not want to live my life by anything resembling a leftist/Marxist/progressive system where 'equality' is its measure for a society. Leave us to enjoy our Constitutional freedoms and I'll leave you to stress equality in your little leftists enclaves.

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 10:00 AM
No one is 'equal', nor should we want people to be equal. We are all individuals who possess differing characteristics, and who have differing desires, intelligence and goals etc. Wouldn't this be a boring world if we were all equal? This equality or this equal rights nonsense is exactly what we Conservatives fight against every day, with the prime example being the leftists push to have big government equalize everything in our lives by determining what foods we can or can not eat, to what temperature we should set our thermostats at, to taking our right to own guns away, to what health care we must abide by, to redistributing the money of the rich to the poor to 'equalize' the wealth etc. If you equality nuts had it your way, I would be subjected to a life time of leftist policy that in the long run might, and I say might make me a clone of someone like a cigar--spare me that kind of a nightmare scenario. I do not want to live my life by anything resembling a leftist/Marxist/progressive system where 'equality' is its measure for a society. Leave us to enjoy our Constitutional freedoms and I'll leave you to stress equality in your little leftists enclaves.


...excellent post!!!...I mean isn't "diversity" accepting "inequality"?...again, excellent post...

Mister D
09-30-2013, 10:53 AM
We are born into bodies that are either female or male but the mind of either gender is free.

Some degree of determinism is inescapable but human beings are never completely determined.

Alyosha
09-30-2013, 11:08 AM
We are born into bodies that are either female or male but the mind of either gender is free.

What is gender?

Cthulhu
09-30-2013, 11:26 AM
We are born into bodies that are either female or male but the mind of either gender is free.
sky dancer

Clarify this please.

Chloe
09-30-2013, 01:33 PM
...you are double talking, in one sentence to admit we are unequal and in the next you imply that by "theory" we are all humans so we are all equal...it's a nice thought but in reality that's all it is...I've said this before more then once, laws (equality laws in this case) are made to protect the week from the strong and if we are making equality laws then we aren't equal because they don't address everyone, just a certain few...it might not be nice but it's the truth, females need an "equalizer" to compete with males...and then we have "equalizers" for color...if the population in the US was truly equal then there'd be no need for the ACLU and affirmative action...

I think you are confusing human equality with outcome equal. All human beings are equal in that there is nothing uniquely special about you or me that would make your life more worthy than mine, or vice versa. We are equal in that neither of us are inferior to the other. If you want to talk about social and economic equality then that's a whole other type of equality in my opinion. Social inequality that would lead to affirmative action and the ACLU and things like that comes from culture. People decide in their own minds if they are equal to another human being, but that doesn't make them correct. We are all born equally human, but what happens in our culture can redefine that fact in dangerous and oppressive ways in my opinion.

It would help it I knew what human equality means to you personally.

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 01:48 PM
I think you are confusing human equality with outcome equal. All human beings are equal in that there is nothing uniquely special about you or me that would make your life more worthy than mine, or vice versa. We are equal in that neither of us are inferior to the other. If you want to talk about social and economic equality then that's a whole other type of equality in my opinion. Social inequality that would lead to affirmative action and the ACLU and things like that comes from culture. People decide in their mown minds if they are equal to another human being, but that doesn't make them correct. We are all born equally human, but what happens in our culture can redefine that in dangerous and oppressive ways in my opinion.

It would help it I knew what human equality means to you personally.


...no, I'm not confusing anything...you are looking at it "idealistically" and I'm looking at it "realistically"...the bottom line is if you and I are equal, then I don't need to change the rules so I can compete with you...or vice-versa...I mentioned this on here once before but we had a FEDEX driver come in for a pick-up, she bent down to pick the box up and she couldn't...she looked around and saw the kid that works with me and asked him to pick it up and carry it to her truck...I watched this stunned...I'll give it to her that the box was heavy, about 100lbs, but she is in a position where she needs to pick up and deliver packages up to 150lbs (if I remember correctly)...every time I see this gal I'm disgusted because she has a job that she can't do...simply because of equality laws...if she was a guy that couldn't do the job then he'd get let go, but you can't do it to a gal...your ideal of equality is forced on us by law, so it's not realistic, it's idealistic...

Chloe
09-30-2013, 02:02 PM
...no, I'm not confusing anything...you are looking at it "idealistically" and I'm looking at it "realistically"...the bottom line is if you and I are equal, then I don't need to change the rules so I can compete with you...or vice-versa...I mentioned this on here once before but we had a FEDEX driver come in for a pick-up, she bent down to pick the box up and she couldn't...she looked around and saw the kid that works with me and asked him to pick it up and carry it to her truck...I watched this stunned...I'll give it to her that the box was heavy, about 100lbs, but she is in a position where she needs to pick up and deliver packages up to 150lbs (if I remember correctly)...every time I see this gal I'm disgusted because she has a job that she can't do...simply because of equality laws...if she was a guy that couldn't do the job then he'd get let go, but you can't do it to a gal...your ideal of equality is forced on us by law, so it's not realistic, it's idealistic...

ok, realistically there are people that see other people as being inferior and superior and then take steps to balance that to suit their vision, I understand that. Realistically I know that you could probably physically hurt me more than I could physically hurt you since girls are typically smaller with less muscle and strength than guys, I understand that. Realistically I know that there are people who get jobs, money, benefits, perks, prizes, relationships, and other things in unfair and unbalanced ways, I understand that. I can see how just those few example can be seen as being unequal, and they are unequal, but my basic point is that it all comes from a social order that we create in a society.

As for the FEDEX person i'm sorry I don't know what their rules are for being a delivery person either, but perhaps that company could find a better way to deliver heavy packages then to have the person carry them like that? Seems like it would probably cost that company a lot of money and employees when they get injured for being forced to lift such weights in order to keep their job. Seems like they need to progress a little in my opinion.

Ravi
09-30-2013, 02:04 PM
...no, I'm not confusing anything...you are looking at it "idealistically" and I'm looking at it "realistically"...the bottom line is if you and I are equal, then I don't need to change the rules so I can compete with you...or vice-versa...I mentioned this on here once before but we had a FEDEX driver come in for a pick-up, she bent down to pick the box up and she couldn't...she looked around and saw the kid that works with me and asked him to pick it up and carry it to her truck...I watched this stunned...I'll give it to her that the box was heavy, about 100lbs, but she is in a position where she needs to pick up and deliver packages up to 150lbs (if I remember correctly)...every time I see this gal I'm disgusted because she has a job that she can't do...simply because of equality laws...if she was a guy that couldn't do the job then he'd get let go, but you can't do it to a gal...your ideal of equality is forced on us by law, so it's not realistic, it's idealistic...


Packages The ability to lift heavy boxes, up to 70 pounds, and move boxes that weigh over 150 pounds with equipment should be feasible for a FedEx courier.

http://www.ehow.com/about_6708298_fedex-courier-job-description.html

Cthulhu
09-30-2013, 02:13 PM
http://www.ehow.com/about_6708298_fedex-courier-job-description.html

I think you missing the point. Point is that she was just not well suited for the job.

Having worked at UPS as a loader I can attest to the fact that women by and large shouldn't be working in the loading area - the manual labor is simply too much for the average female. Even the guys need help from time to time.

Whenever I was out of my trailer helping another, it was usually some girl that got buried in boxes and couldn't keep up. Some of the guys could eventually dig themselves out if it got a little slower, but every night, guys had to bail the girls out.

Men and women are different. In the eyes of the law we are different too.

Ravi
09-30-2013, 02:15 PM
I think you missing the point. Point is that she was just not well suited for the job.

Having worked at UPS as a loader I can attest to the fact that women by and large shouldn't be working in the loading area - the manual labor is simply too much for the average female. Even the guys need help from time to time.

Whenever I was out of my trailer helping another, it was usually some girl that got buried in boxes and couldn't keep up. Some of the guys could eventually dig themselves out if it got a little slower, but every night, guys had to bail the girls out.

Men and women are different. In the eyes of the law we are different too.
If the weight limit is 70 lbs and the box was 100 lbs....you do the math. We go out of our way to box up packages so the delivery people can load them. Sounds like Libhater should have called FedEx Freight.

Cthulhu
09-30-2013, 02:17 PM
If the weight limit is 70 lbs and the box was 100 lbs....you do the math. We go out of our way to box up packages so the delivery people can load them. Sounds like Libhater should have called FedEx Freight.

Hmmm...



Packages

The ability to lift heavy boxes, up to 70 pounds, and move boxes that weigh over 150 pounds with equipment should be feasible for a FedEx courier.

Why didn't she just use the equipment then?

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 04:54 PM
http://www.ehow.com/about_6708298_fedex-courier-job-description.html


...ok, so when she gets it to the back of her van on the hand truck she didn't have, who's supposed to lift it up 4ft into the back of the van?...or down 2-3ft from the loading dock?...ask ehow.com how this works...

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 05:00 PM
If the weight limit is 70 lbs and the box was 100 lbs....you do the math. We go out of our way to box up packages so the delivery people can load them. Sounds like Libhater should have called FedEx Freight.


...here's another thing you are talking about that you have no clue with...the weight limit with UPS is 125lbs and 150lbs with FEDEX...150lbs with FEDEX...150lbs with FEDEX...150lbs with FEDEX and 150lbs with FEDEX...FEDEX Freight is for shipments OVER 150lbs, not under...you really do more harm to women that I could ever do...if I can pass anything on to you, just shut up when you don't know what you're talking about...and quoting ehow.com makes you look even more stupid...

Dr. Who
09-30-2013, 05:10 PM
...me evading?...I asked "if females can give birth and male can't, are we equal?" and you brought up A, B & C which have nothing to do with my question...you evaded the question...
Did you miss the part of my answer where I said:
so the answer is yes we are all equal. The species cannot exist without women, but it also cannot exist without men. I even bolded it subsequently. How much more explicit an answer do you require?

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 05:16 PM
Did you miss the part of my answer where I said:
so the answer is yes we are all equal. The species cannot exist without women, but it also cannot exist without men. I even bolded it subsequently. How much more explicit an answer do you require?


Equal: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/equal


...nope, nothing in this that even remotely backs your definition...

Dr. Who
09-30-2013, 05:17 PM
...no, I'm not confusing anything...you are looking at it "idealistically" and I'm looking at it "realistically"...the bottom line is if you and I are equal, then I don't need to change the rules so I can compete with you...or vice-versa...I mentioned this on here once before but we had a FEDEX driver come in for a pick-up, she bent down to pick the box up and she couldn't...she looked around and saw the kid that works with me and asked him to pick it up and carry it to her truck...I watched this stunned...I'll give it to her that the box was heavy, about 100lbs, but she is in a position where she needs to pick up and deliver packages up to 150lbs (if I remember correctly)...every time I see this gal I'm disgusted because she has a job that she can't do...simply because of equality laws...if she was a guy that couldn't do the job then he'd get let go, but you can't do it to a gal...your ideal of equality is forced on us by law, so it's not realistic, it's idealistic...

She and anyone else who has to lift more than 50 lbs should be provided with one of these:

http://i01.geccdn.net/site/images/n-picgroup/2475.jpg

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 05:22 PM
She and anyone else who has to lift more than 50 lbs should be provided with one of these:

http://i01.geccdn.net/site/images/n-picgroup/2475.jpg


...well, you better get with FEDEX and make sure they have these handy...

Cthulhu
09-30-2013, 05:22 PM
She and anyone else who has to lift more than 50 lbs should be provided with one of these:

http://i01.geccdn.net/site/images/n-picgroup/2475.jpg

If you can't lift more than 70 pounds you have no business working in a loading dock.

Dr. Who
09-30-2013, 05:33 PM
...ok, so when she gets it to the back of her van on the hand truck she didn't have, who's supposed to lift it up 4ft into the back of the van?...or down 2-3ft from the loading dock?...ask ehow.com how this works...

Just watched a lady today, she might have been 5'2" and 110 lbs soaking wet loading and unloading a large truck. She had a motorized hand truck inside the truck box and a lift on the back. Smaller vans often have metal ramps so that someone can load the van using a dolly. Physics vs physicality.

Cthulhu
09-30-2013, 05:35 PM
Just watched a lady today, she might have been 5'2" and 110 lbs soaking wet loading and unloading a large truck. She had a motorized hand truck inside the truck box and a lift on the back. Smaller vans often have metal ramps so that someone can load the van using a dolly. Physics vs physicality.

While magical, and neat. Not everybody has those. There is no sense in burdening someone else to do your job - for your pay.

Dr. Who
09-30-2013, 05:38 PM
If you can't lift more than 70 pounds you have no business working in a loading dock.
The lady in question wasn't working a loading dock, only doing pick-up and delivery. Technically anything that heavy should have been freight and not regular courier. Loading dock personnel are chosen for their ability to lift. In the long run however, it is a bad idea, because muscles are often stronger than vertebrae and discs. The latter wear out prematurely from lifting heavy weight and then you have otherwise physically fit people with horrendous back problems before they are 50.

Dr. Who
09-30-2013, 05:42 PM
While magical, and neat. Not everybody has those. There is no sense in burdening someone else to do your job - for your pay.I think that technically she should have refused the pickup. The sender likely didn't give the dispatcher the correct weight, otherwise they would have sent a freight truck with the appropriate equipment to do the pickup. What if there was nowhere to park nearby. Even a big guy might have an issue carrying 150 lbs for a block or down five flights of stairs in a building without an elevator.

Chloe
09-30-2013, 05:43 PM
While magical, and neat. Not everybody has those. There is no sense in burdening someone else to do your job - for your pay.

If the company cares about their employees physical health so that they can continue to do their jobs I would hope that they would become the norm and not the exception. Asking someone for help is not burdening them if they willingly choose to help. It doesn't burden me when someone I don't know asks me to help them with something. Just the other day for example I went to a coffee shop near my house and an employee there was moving some things around and was having trouble carrying something and so he asked me if I would mind giving him a hand and I said sure. It wasn't a burden to me. I'm sure it's part of his job to stock things but sometimes people just need some help from other people. What's so bad about that? Why should they be judged for that? I've asked tall people to get things off of a shelf for me before, does that place a burden on them? Should I only shop for things within my reach? I know these aren't the same examples as the fedex lady but helping people is not a burden, even if you are helping them with their job for a brief moment in time.

Cthulhu
09-30-2013, 05:49 PM
If the company cares about their employees physical health so that they can continue to do their jobs I would hope that they would become the norm and not the exception. Asking someone for help is not burdening them if they willingly choose to help. It doesn't burden me when someone I don't know asks me to help them with something. Just the other day for example I went to a coffee shop near my house and an employee there was moving some things around and was having trouble carrying something and so he asked me if I would mind giving him a hand and I said sure. It wasn't a burden to me. I'm sure it's part of his job to stock things but sometimes people just need some help from other people. What's so bad about that? Why should they be judged for that? I've asked tall people to get things off of a shelf for me before, does that place a burden on them? Should I only shop for things within my reach? I know these aren't the same examples as the fedex lady but helping people is not a burden, even if you are helping them with their job for a brief moment in time.

Relying on charity to do that which you willingly signed up for is foolish.

That doesn't mean that charity should be frowned upon. It may have been no sweat to the young buck that helped her out - it probably wasn't. But this can over time become expected, and the recipient can become angry if they don't get what they have been used to getting. This sort of thinking is problematic in the long term.

Peter1469
09-30-2013, 05:52 PM
If the company cares about their employees physical health so that they can continue to do their jobs I would hope that they would become the norm and not the exception. Asking someone for help is not burdening them if they willingly choose to help. It doesn't burden me when someone I don't know asks me to help them with something. Just the other day for example I went to a coffee shop near my house and an employee there was moving some things around and was having trouble carrying something and so he asked me if I would mind giving him a hand and I said sure. It wasn't a burden to me. I'm sure it's part of his job to stock things but sometimes people just need some help from other people. What's so bad about that? Why should they be judged for that? I've asked tall people to get things off of a shelf for me before, does that place a burden on them? Should I only shop for things within my reach? I know these aren't the same examples as the fedex lady but helping people is not a burden, even if you are helping them with their job for a brief moment in time.
Admirable, but a lawsuit waiting to happen had you injured yourself.

Dr. Who
09-30-2013, 06:03 PM
Equal: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/equal


...nope, nothing in this that even remotely backs your definition...

People are not things, nor are they mathematical equations. Your ideas of equality appear to be very subjective and restricted to what you think is important, but every human being has many qualities. Is intelligence more important than compassion? Is being large and strong more important than being persistent? You want to compare the equality of apples and oranges, and that is simply subjective. I have a neighbor who has Down Syndrome. By your definition of equality she must necessarily be unequal, and yet she has the capacity to bring joy to everyone she encounters. She has no guile, she only has love for everyone she meets. So she has impaired intellectual function and certain physical disabilities, but in compensation for those "deficiencies" she has enough love and joy for 50 people.

Chloe
09-30-2013, 06:04 PM
Admirable, but a lawsuit waiting to happen had you injured yourself.

Really? I could have been sued or him?

Peter1469
09-30-2013, 06:09 PM
Really? I could have been sued or him?

Suing him would have been a waste of time. He likely has no money. The company has deep pockets.

Chloe
09-30-2013, 06:10 PM
Suing him would have been a waste of time. He likely has no money. The company has deep pockets.

Well I wouldn't have sued the company I volunteered to help him and I like that place. I was about to ask him if he needed help right before he asked me.

Peter1469
09-30-2013, 06:12 PM
Well I wouldn't have sued the company I volunteered to help him and I like that place. I was about to ask him if he needed help right before he asked me.

I imagine that you wouldn't sue. I am just saying that you could. Sorry, I am a lawyer, what do you want from me? :wink:

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 06:42 PM
I think that technically she should have refused the pickup. The sender likely didn't give the dispatcher the correct weight, otherwise they would have sent a freight truck with the appropriate equipment to do the pickup. What if there was nowhere to park nearby. Even a big guy might have an issue carrying 150 lbs for a block or down five flights of stairs in a building without an elevator.


...you have no clue what you are talking about, do you?...

Dr. Who
09-30-2013, 07:08 PM
...you have no clue what you are talking about, do you?...
Right KJ - I'm sure you'd have no problem carrying 150 lbs for a city block or up a five story walk up. Sorry but I've seen the courier trucks have to park a block away. They always have a dolly for a heavy pickup. The regular couriers don't pickup anything over 30 pounds and even at that they bring a dolly. Freight pickup and delivery is a different animal entirely. There are usually two guys deployed for the heavy stuff. Nobody wants workers comp claims.

Kabuki Joe
09-30-2013, 09:54 PM
Right KJ - I'm sure you'd have no problem carrying 150 lbs for a city block or up a five story walk up. Sorry but I've seen the courier trucks have to park a block away. They always have a dolly for a heavy pickup. The regular couriers don't pickup anything over 30 pounds and even at that they bring a dolly. Freight pickup and delivery is a different animal entirely. There are usually two guys deployed for the heavy stuff. Nobody wants workers comp claims.


...please, just stop, you should have quit before you said "dolly"...

Dr. Who
09-30-2013, 09:59 PM
...please, just stop, you should have quit before you said "dolly"...

A hand truck, also known as a two wheeler, stack truck, trolley, trolley truck, sack barrow, sack truck, dolly, or bag barrow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck
So what is your point? Not a term that you are acquainted with?

sky dancer
09-30-2013, 10:06 PM
@sky dancer (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=841)

Clarify this please.
Our minds are free. What's to clarify?

Kabuki Joe
10-01-2013, 10:24 AM
A hand truck, also known as a two wheeler, stack truck, trolley, trolley truck, sack barrow, sack truck, dolly, or bag barrow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_truck
So what is your point? Not a term that you are acquainted with?


...I speak from personal experience within the industry and you speak from quoting wiki...please stop...

Mister D
10-01-2013, 10:26 AM
Our minds are free. What's to clarify?

From what?

Ravi
10-01-2013, 10:28 AM
...I speak from personal experience within the industry and you speak from quoting wiki...please stop...
What industry doesn't call a dolly a dolly?

jillian
10-01-2013, 10:34 AM
What industry doesn't call a dolly a dolly?


i've always heard the term dolly used...

but he's caught up in his own mistake now...

Cthulhu
10-01-2013, 10:43 AM
What industry doesn't call a dolly a dolly?

Some call it a dolly, and some call it a hand truck. Really depends on how old you are. Most younger folks call them hand trucks, older guys call them dolly's. But that is just my experience with them.

Libhater
10-01-2013, 10:58 AM
Some call it a dolly, and some call it a hand truck. Really depends on how old you are. Most younger folks call them hand trucks, older guys call them dolly's. But that is just my experience with them.

I'm one of those old timers from that school calling them dollies. I always had a hard time calling Dolly Parton 'Dolly'. I just call her 'TITS' for short. She doesn't seem to mind. :smiley:

Mister D
10-01-2013, 11:00 AM
Always called them handtrucks.

Ravi
10-01-2013, 11:06 AM
Some call it a dolly, and some call it a hand truck. Really depends on how old you are. Most younger folks call them hand trucks, older guys call them dolly's. But that is just my experience with them.Better alert the google.

https://www.google.com/#changed_loc=1&q=dolly&tbm=shop

Cigar
10-01-2013, 11:09 AM
I'm one of those old timers from that school calling them dollies. I always had a hard time calling Dolly Parton 'Dolly'. I just call her 'TITS' for short. She doesn't seem to mind. :smiley:

She looks like an Alien from another planet now ... :laugh: watch your feet, those things are heavy.

Mister D
10-01-2013, 11:10 AM
Better alert the google.

https://www.google.com/#changed_loc=1&q=dolly&tbm=shop

Someone must have already lol

https://www.google.com/#q=handtruck&tbm=shop

Kabuki Joe
10-01-2013, 11:23 AM
What industry doesn't call a dolly a dolly?


...the only people that use "dolly" are people that don't work in the industry...for example the women in the office ask to use our dolly while the people on the mfg floor ask for the hand truck...it's like when someone tells me they have flat feet, no such thing...

Ravi
10-01-2013, 11:39 AM
...the only people that use "dolly" are people that don't work in the industry...for example the women in the office ask to use our dolly while the people on the mfg floor ask for the hand truck...it's like when someone tells me they have flat feet, no such thing...
Funny. We just got a delivery. I asked the guy what he called that thing (pointing to the dolly). He said it's a dolly. I didn't ask his age but he appeared to be in his mid-twenties, worked for FedEx, and spoke with a Spanish accent.

Kabuki Joe
10-01-2013, 12:06 PM
Funny. We just got a delivery. I asked the guy what he called that thing (pointing to the dolly). He said it's a dolly. I didn't ask his age but he appeared to be in his mid-twenties, worked for FedEx, and spoke with a Spanish accent.

...yes!...that is funny!...a guy with a Spanish accent working for FEDEX!...

Libhater
10-01-2013, 12:12 PM
...yes!...that is funny!...a guy with a Spanish accent working for FEDEX!...

What's even funnier would be if the latino guy is an illegal; good chance that he is. Just keeping it real, as always.

Cigar
10-01-2013, 12:13 PM
What's even funnier would be if the latino guy is an illegal; good chance that he is. Just keeping it real, as always.


Could be your Hero :laugh: your Bro

Ravi
10-01-2013, 12:18 PM
...yes!...that is funny!...a guy with a Spanish accent working for FEDEX!...
What's funny is that he is in the "industry" and knows what a dolly is....it's also funny that you didn't know what a dolly is.

Kabuki Joe
10-01-2013, 02:05 PM
What's funny is that he is in the "industry" and knows what a dolly is....it's also funny that you didn't know what a dolly is.


...as usual you make assumptions about what people say...I never said people in the industry don't know what a dolly is, I said they don't use the term dolly, they use the term hand truck...

Dr. Who
10-01-2013, 04:33 PM
...as usual you make assumptions about what people say...I never said people in the industry don't know what a dolly is, I said they don't use the term dolly, they use the term hand truck...

You speak for the entire industry? Could be that in different places, different terms are used. Where I live, everyone calls them dollies.

Kabuki Joe
10-01-2013, 05:10 PM
You speak for the entire industry? Could be that in different places, different terms are used. Where I live, everyone calls them dollies.


...sure they do...

Chloe
10-01-2013, 05:31 PM
Does it really matter what it's called? Seriously. Hand truck, dolly, cart, thingy, whatever...

Libhater
10-03-2013, 06:58 AM
If you swell people don't mind, I'll be making an attempt to steer this thread back to the OP. The question remains.....do you think 'femanazis' would support the concept of trans genders? I say perhaps they would if the person going through the surgery becomes a bastardized version of a woman once they slice the dick off of the willing nutcase. You see, femanazis hate all men, so I'm thinking they'll welcome any and all offshoots of an ungodly representation of a woman so as to build up their militant troop strength.

Ravi
10-03-2013, 08:14 AM
If you swell people don't mind, I'll be making an attempt to steer this thread back to the OP. The question remains.....do you think 'femanazis' would support the concept of trans genders? I say perhaps they would if the person going through the surgery becomes a bastardized version of a woman once they slice the dick off of the willing nutcase. You see, femanazis hate all men, so I'm thinking they'll welcome any and all offshoots of an ungodly representation of a woman so as to build up their militant troop strength.
^This sounds like a good platform for Republicans to run on.

Chloe
10-03-2013, 10:20 AM
If you swell people don't mind, I'll be making an attempt to steer this thread back to the OP. The question remains.....do you think 'femanazis' would support the concept of trans genders? I say perhaps they would if the person going through the surgery becomes a bastardized version of a woman once they slice the dick off of the willing nutcase. You see, femanazis hate all men, so I'm thinking they'll welcome any and all offshoots of an ungodly representation of a woman so as to build up their militant troop strength.

What exactly is your description of a feminist or feminazi? Would you consider me to be one or are you talking about the most radical fringe?

Libhater
10-03-2013, 12:23 PM
What exactly is your description of a feminist or feminazi? Would you consider me to be one or are you talking about the most radical fringe?

I'm talking about the radical militant (mostly lesbos) who have a deep hatred for men and for women who don't tote the same radical line/agenda. However, I haven't seen a femanazi that would be considered any less radical or less militant then any of those leaders of the NAG (National Association of Gals) gang that we unfortunately saw at the last Democratic National Convention. Here, take a looksee into this u-tube video to see if you qualify as a femanazi. Be sure to tell me of your findings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GUxEKoGlGY

sky dancer
10-04-2013, 09:03 AM
Rather than a "deep hatred for men", most lesbians simply don't need men to be intimate partners with. We still enjoy them as friends and fellow human beings on this planet.

Even the women who once called themselves "separatists" recognize we all need other on this earth and we are interdependent with others.

Some of the experiments back in the early 70's by lesbians to live soley without men were naïve. They were a stage that some women went through and most women that I know who were in communes no longer live that way.

The so-called feminazi are a myth started by Rush Limbaugh to foster misogyny toward women who aren't interested in sexual relations with men. That's it. It's just that some women don't need men sexually that seems to inflame some insecure gents.

Kabuki Joe
10-04-2013, 09:12 AM
Rather than a "deep hatred for men", most lesbians simply don't need men to be intimate partners with. We still enjoy them as friends and fellow human beings on this planet.

Even the women who once called themselves "separatists" recognize we all need other on this earth and we are interdependent with others.

Some of the experiments back in the early 70's by lesbians to live soley without men were naïve. They were a stage that some women went through and most women that I know who were in communes no longer live that way.


...I think it's more involved then that, it's everything that men do is also a target...lesbos (and gays) are some of the biggest supporters of anti animal abuse in the US, which is not a bad thing...the problem is interpretation...what you think is animal abuse I might not...and animal use (rodeo, hunting with dogs, chicken fighting, etc, etc, etc) is a huge problem with the "man haters" simply because it's what men do...

sky dancer
10-04-2013, 09:16 AM
...I think it's more involved then that, it's everything that men do is also a target...lesbos (and gays) are some of the biggest supporters of anti animal abuse in the US, which is not a bad thing...the problem is interpretation...what you think is animal abuse I might not...and animal use (rodeo, hunting with dogs, chicken fighting, etc, etc, etc) is a huge problem with the "man haters" simply because it's what men do...
Now you're linking lesbians (who often treat their pets as children) as animal abusers or supporters of animal abuse. That's ridiculous.

Very few women I know hate men, including the ones who've been sexual assault or domestic violence victims of them. The women I know with a real negative charge against men are women in unhealthy intimate relationships with men, NOT lesbians.

Kabuki Joe
10-04-2013, 09:17 AM
Now you're linking lesbians (who often treat their pets as children) as animal abusers or supporters of animal abuse. That's ridiculous.

Very few women I know hate men, including the ones who've been sexual assault or domestic violence victims of them. The women I know with a real negative charge against men are women in unhealthy intimate relationships with men, NOT lesbians.


...please reread what I wrote...

sky dancer
10-04-2013, 09:22 AM
...please reread what I wrote...

OK. BTW calling us "lesbos" is off the mark if you're trying to show support for lesbians. I wouldn't call you a "straight-O" if you're heterosexual, for example. Honestly, I can't read what your position is on lesbians. I get the feeling you think "man-hater" is an ok description of us.

That would be too bad if that's what you think.

Guns, chicken fighting and rodeos are not just "what ALL men do". Some men use guns, engage in chicken or dog fights and rodeos.

Women participate in rodeos and own guns, but I rarely hear of a woman that would participate in pit bull or cock fighting. In fact, I've NEVER heard of a woman participating in those. I suppose it's possible but pretty unusual.

Kabuki Joe
10-04-2013, 09:28 AM
OK. BTW calling us "lesbos" is off the mark if you're trying to show support for lesbians. Honestly, I can't read what your position is on lesbians. I get the feeling you think "man-hater" is an ok description of us.

That would be too bad if that's what you think.

...right now I'm cracking up because instead of you being concerned with the fact it appears you can't read, you are more concerned with terminology...appearance is everything...

sky dancer
10-04-2013, 09:31 AM
...right now I'm cracking up because instead of you being concerned with the fact it appears you can't read, you are more concerned with terminology...appearance is everything...

Words are important. Whether you choose to use respectful terms or not, I will ask you to address me courteously. If you're not willing to do that, I've got a busy life to get back to.

Kabuki Joe
10-04-2013, 09:48 AM
Words are important. Whether you choose to use respectful terms or not, I will ask you to address me courteously. If you're not willing to do that, I've got a busy life to get back to.


...I really don't care what you want because you didn't quote me right in the first place...just get back to your busy life then... :)

Mister D
10-04-2013, 10:29 AM
OK. BTW calling us "lesbos"

That explains a lot.

Libhater
10-04-2013, 10:56 AM
I'm talking about the radical militant (mostly lesbos) who have a deep hatred for men and for women who don't tote the same radical line/agenda. However, I haven't seen a femanazi that would be considered any less radical or less militant then any of those leaders of the NAG (National Association of Gals) gang that we unfortunately saw at the last Democratic National Convention. Here, take a looksee into this u-tube video to see if you qualify as a femanazi. Be sure to tell me of your findings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GUxEKoGlGY

Hello Chloe, don't tell me that it was you who wrote the script for the female figure in that video. That video certainly didn't include all of the negative aspects of a radical militant femanazi lesbo. Keep in mind that these un American types also condone abortions on demand that would make them anti life as well. There are so many 'man hating' quotes from some of the more prominent femanazi leaders that it would take me hours to list them here for your enjoyment.

Chloe
10-04-2013, 12:28 PM
Hello Chloe, don't tell me that it was you who wrote the script for the female figure in that video. That video certainly didn't include all of the negative aspects of a radical militant femanazi lesbo. Keep in mind that these un American types also condone abortions on demand that would make them anti life as well. There are so many 'man hating' quotes from some of the more prominent femanazi leaders that it would take me hours to list them here for your enjoyment.

I don't think there are that many women out there that would act like that towards a guy. You are talking about some pretty radical people at that point and I think that there is a big difference between wanting equal respect and opportunity and wanting to denounce and belittle men. I don't hate guys at all, and I don't hold a grudge on them because of how life used to be and all of that stuff for women. I'm happy that women are becoming more common in positions of power and equality, that's not a bad thing in my opinion and it should continue.

sky dancer
10-04-2013, 09:06 PM
...I really don't care what you want because you didn't quote me right in the first place...just get back to your busy life then... :)

Works for me, Joe. I'll add you to my ignore list.:laugh:

Kabuki Joe
10-04-2013, 09:07 PM
Works for me, Joe. I'll add you to my ignore list.:laugh:


...I approve this message!...

Libhater
10-04-2013, 10:01 PM
...I approve this message!...

What a surprise.......man hating lesbos are now ignoring real men. How did you get so lucky Joe?

sky dancer
10-04-2013, 10:22 PM
What a surprise.......man hating lesbos are now ignoring real men. How did you get so lucky Joe?

Consider yourself lucky. I just put you on ignore. This is the first post I've read of yours.

Peter1469
10-04-2013, 10:31 PM
What a surprise.......man hating lesbos are now ignoring real men. How did you get so lucky Joe?


Warning Stop the personal attacks.