@thrownaway24e89172's banner p

thrownaway24e89172

naïve paranoid outcast

3 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 09 17:41:34 UTC

				

User ID: 1081

thrownaway24e89172

naïve paranoid outcast

3 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 09 17:41:34 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1081

At some point you have to discriminate.

Why? We should just put everyone, including women, in a single open category and be done with it. Nicely solves all the problems.

Much of the motivation for abortion comes from women not wanting to be single mothers. You can respond to this in two ways:

There's at least one more possible response:

3. Bring back shotgun marriages. Make impregnation result in an automatic marriage and enforce much stricter rules for divorce in such marriages.

Then they belong in the Special Olympics with all the other carve-outs.

because the Taliban will give those men the power over women that the former society could or would not and every soldier or potential soldier knew it.

I think they probably cared less about power over women and more about power over their abusers. Ending the practice of bacha bazi was a prominent selling point for the Taliban the last two times it took power in Afghanistan. Maybe we should have considered not covering up such practices by our "allies", but ensuring first-world LGBT people aren't smeared as pedophiles is apparently more important than preventing child sexual abuse.

Why do you think women fail to realize that men are visually stimulated? We're told this constantly. We're told that if a man acts out, it's because of what a woman wore, how she looked. Sure, men shouldn't rape, but did you see what she was wearing?

Here it is, women's favorite motte and bailey. Yes, if a man rapes a woman he is responsible for it no matter what she is wearing. However, what you wear is signaling. Wearing clothing that draws attention to your sexual characteristics and then complaining when people give you sexual attention (eg, lewding, catcalling) is sexual harassment. On your end. You initiated it, you are responsible for it.

It just happens to be broadcast at the same time and place.

"Just happens"? No, that's on purpose to make it seem like less of a carve out to mitigate the shame of needing such a carve out.

Why do you consider pensions to be welfare rather than compensation?

Positive discipline activities give you a generous feeling of accomplishment and instant reward. "I worked out today!"

Do people really feel this way about exercise? To me it always feels like pointless effort for a reward that never comes. It's a hopeless fight to slow the pace of inevitable regression.

I think the biggest difference is male aggression toward women is usually physical while female aggression towards men is usually social, most notably attempted social ostracization. Women attack men's social bonds in ways that men don't attack women's, thus leading to this asymmetry.

I have spent my entire adult life, and even before that, with the knowledge that if I ever spoke my true political/social views I would instantly torpedo my entire career and social standing forever.

...

You stomped on us for 20+ fucking years, did you never think what would happen when we became the shoe? You deserve everything bad that is happening to you; you will deserve the much worse things that are still to come.

Do you think you deserved this treatment? The left's long march and resulting political/social power was itself a reaction to decades of similar suppression after all. Is your goal to doom us to cycles of repression?

No, I demand that they be explicitly recognized as a carve out for people who can't cut it otherwise instead of some kind of deserved response to perceived unfairness that some disadvantaged people are entitled to. I see the whole argument of whether or not to allow trans-women to participate as a red herring, as it ignores the fact that the choice of exactly which people who would badly lose in an open tournament instead get to stand up and pretend to be among "the best in the world" is arbitrary anyway. EDIT: If it is truly about "fair" competition, then there should be no problems facing off against trans-women or even men who perform at the same level. That there is a desire to exclude shows this is entirely about the resulting status.

Too bad. Vanishingly few would truly rather be a single mother--rather they expect the benefits men normally bring to relationships be provided by society so they don't have to suffer the compromises necessary to make a relationship work. Such selfish entitlement shouldn't be encouraged by society.

How so? Welfare is typically defined as "financial support given to people in need" whereas pensions are paid out to those who contribute (and/or their dependents) based on their contributions.

I think this is a rather localized phenomenon. I never see dogs* in stores where I live and, as a dog owner, the idea of wanting to take my dog with me to the store makes no sense. The only people I've met who do so seem to have picked the idea up living in the south western US (eg, CA, NV), either having grown up there or moved later in life, and people around here have no problem telling them to keep their dogs home.

*With the rare exception of seeing eye dogs and police dogs.

Organizations often have privileges beyond those granted to individual members. Why should we be able to grant such privileges to organizations but not set restrictions on them?

Yeah, one only needs to look at the National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality to see how this would play out.

If you don't want to accept the consequences, don't take the action.

How much of the "forced motherhood" narrative revolves around the idea that she didn't take the action--her male partner did and she was just a passive participant who now has to deal with the consequences?

I mostly agree with this and would say that both extremes here are bad, but I believe that in the West women are getting away with more than men in this case. For instance, women who wear shirts like this should be recognized as doing so to harass men and such harassment should be punished to a greater extent than it currently is.

Meanwhile, I could look over at the high school boys team and say, "They are going through the exact same training regimen as myself, I'm even practicing in the same lane as some of them, but their race times are still faster than mine. Sexual dimorphism is weird."

Sure. Now think of how boys who have physical development issues feel when they put in more effort than said girls, get less results because of their development issues, and are then told "tough luck, you lost the genetic lottery" while they see the girls who didn't work as hard as them celebrated. I have no problems with the existence of women's leagues. I only take issue with the lack of humility some people exhibit in demanding to be considered the equal of people who they have explicitly excluded from competing with them while sneering at those with other types of disadvantage.

If you're a stereotypical man who has outsourced the work of maintaining his social life to his wife for a decade

I love how we frame women controlling their partners' social lives as a burden while when men do it to their partners it is framed as abuse.

In my experience the much more frequent cause of single motherhood is not that the father is a net negative but that the mother is and society is so blinded by unwarranted sympathy for her that it refuses to do anything about it nor let the father, leaving the child to suffer while the mother's poor behavior is continually subsidized.

More seriously, The Schism had less commentary on all three assassination attempts combined, between Trump and Kavanaugh, in an entire year, than it spent debating whether Trump was fascist in a single week before the 2024 election. (answer: of course, it's just a matter of how fascist). Tesla arsons, Paul Kessler, new phone who dis?

That's the subreddit that came into existence because people here didn't downvote a post FCfromSSC ate a ban over hard enough about advocacy of violence. Maybe direct advocacy is not universal among Blue Tribers (though I'll point again to Ken White or my tumblr feed and its regular DenyDefendDepose fandom), and maybe it's not here (modulo whenever Impassionata makes their next alt), but they don't care enough to comment on it; does anyone think there's a Blue Tribe locale that's going to be any stronger?

I explicitly called out Impassionata's escalating advocacy and tolerance of violence on TheSchism and it was recognized as a quality contribution. There are still Blue Tribers who see the same pattern of escalations that @FCfromSSC does and who lament that too few of our "allies" seem to be taking de-escalation seriously and would rather risk violence in pursuit of power.

Even ignoring cultural differences in what is considered 'faggy' or 'gay-looking', you are mostly talking about men who happen to otherwise be extremely conventionally attractive (including personality traits like confidence and gregariousness). I don't think that generalizes well to the larger group.

Why not allow them to be discharged in bankruptcy, but require the schools to cosign the loans?

And at least in the entire US, underage boys are responsible for their children even when raped. What's your point? Forced fatherhood isn't seen as a problem in the slightest. "That sucks, but you're still responsible for the child." is the response we give men who are raped. Why should we treat motherhood differently?