Are men and women equal?

[ebracer05]

I was in my international politics class yesterday and we're talking about human rights... my prof is a pretty liberal guy and it's obvious he's bought in to feminism to some point. He asked us, putting everything aside (which I don't think is possible), social conventions, religion, everything, is there an inherent equality between men and women.

I didn't answer the question because I didn't want to.

I'd like to know what you guys think.

I think men and women are equal in that they ought to have the same access to the same rights, liberties, and freedoms of men. I do not think they are equal insofar as they are naturally inclined to participate in different roles. That is why you don't see a huge number of stay at home dads and why there are very few female heads of state and CEO's. I don't think women should be forbidden from those fields, but I also don't think it's within the feminine nature to pursue or even in a lot of cases, be best suited for those fields. Just like it isn't in a man's masculine nature to stay at home and raise kids or work as a personal attendant.

That was the answer I would have given, but the day we turn in a paper worth half our grade and the day before the final... I don't think that's the time to start ruffling feathers. I think sometimes it's best to keep a low profile.

 

[synergy1]

"equality" is nothing more than a guise for a grab at power. Its a fictitious standard by which people compare themselves to in order to better their current situation. For example, people preech equality when the situation benefits themselves, but do not preech it whenever a real downside exists. The obvious one we are all familiar with are women who want equal rights, but only the ones that benefit them.

However, men do this as well. Think of playing a sport where a refs call goes for or against you. I have never heard a player/fan of a team where a bad call went their way talk about how the victory ( super bowl, stanley cup etc) were tarnished, but they ALWAYS talk about a bad call that went their way and cost them said trophy. Hockey nuts might consider Brett Hulls game 6 overtime winner with his foot in the crease as a classic example of this. Equality here is breached only when it goes against your wishes - in this case when the ref makes a bad call against your team. In the case of the 1999 cup finals, I sincerely doubt you will ever hear of a dallas star fan preech equality when it comes to that win..

More to the point of this post ; no, men and women are not equal. Men are better at some things, and women are better at some things. By forcing both sexes to be equal, you take away what nature gave us which is two complimentary sexes which is conducive to reproduction. Put another way, there is a reason that nature didn't make all humans male....imagine how much of a downer that would be.

 

[Atom Smasher]

Excellent post, Danger. Well stated and complete in very few words.

+1

 

[zekko]

One point of evidence constantly used by feminists is to point at the top and say "See how many men there are and no women? There is a glass ceiling!". At the same time, they ignore the glass floor that also exists. There are far more men in prison or who are homeless when compared to women.

Great point. You always hear about how there aren't enough women at the top but not about all the men on the bottom. I was thinking today about the legal system, what with all the recent talk about misandry and all. The United States imprisons a greater percentage of its population than any other country, so in that light it's the biggest police state in the world.

The whole legal system is set up as a weapon aimed mainly at men. Men are the enemy that need to be contained. Obviously a lot of this is because of the more aggressive nature of the male, but it's clear that men must toe the line a lot more than women do or they will find themselves in trouble. The law thinks nothing of throwing another man in jail.

At some point, feminism successfully shamed men for being men (breadwinners, risk-takers, etc,....) and shamed women for being women (running a house hold, child rearing, etc,....).

Another good point. You hear a lot about men being shamed, but it's true that women are shamed also. Women who adopt the traditional role are looked down upon in today's society, it really is too bad.

 

[ebracer05]

This is why I love this site.

My mind has been too cluttered with other things lately to really... I can't even think of the right phraseology here. But this is the point and it's been evident in almost every post I've made. My mind is too cluttered to think concisely and fully analyze anything beyond my studies.

I knew in my gut when he asked that question there was an issue even with the presumptions he was making by asking the question. He looked at me and this girl sitting next to me and pointed to her and said "cin eenyvwon teal me vwhy zee vwoooooman meeks zee siventy siven cints for zee dolear zee men meeks"

It's a philosophical class and so he was speaking of equality in terms of enlightenment philosophy, like that by virtue of our humanity we are naturally endowed with equality in opportunity to pursue whatever ends we want. In the sense of natural law, men and women are equal.

But that's not what this guy was talking about, and I don't think it's ever what people are talking about. How many people do you know who have a functional understanding of the ethical notion of natural law and natural rights, and the theories promulgated by figures such as Hobbes, Rousseau, Hume, Locke, Kant, and Montesquieu, to name a few? Very few people think about things in terms of such abstract philosophy.

Instead, this talk about equality is a mixture of a straw man argument and a non sequitur because it attempts to associate equality in real terms (ie, the natural abilities and tendencies Danger referenced) with a philosophical form of equality that probably doesn't even really exist outside of an idealization. It's also utter nonsense because as far as academics and even the average person is concerned, the only answer to the question of whether men and women are equal is YES.

But if that were really the answer, do the natural tendencies and roles we have as different sexes support that conclusion? Of course not!

And that is why the question has a built in non sequitur. Both the answers yes and no are wrong.

The problem is in the question, and as samspade said, the right question is "Are men and women different?" And the answer of course, is yes!

To try and remove or reduce these differences, as synergy pointed out, effectively destroys the variation between the two sexes that makes us unique and gives us our own niches.

So thank you all for the clarification.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Rather than give you an overwritten response, read this:

Positive Masculinity vs. Equalism

 

[Bible_Belt]

A good example to make that will not get you expelled is that of police radio dispatchers. They are almost always female. Do you know why? It's because female voices have a naturally higher pitch and are easier to hear clearly over a staticy radio. Ask the world's biggest liberal if we should keep giving those jobs to women because they are naturally better at the job than men, and you will get no disagreement whatsoever.

Then ask if, since being a firefighter can involve carry a heavy and unconscious victim out of a burning building to save their life, shouldn't we have at least the same physical standards for women who want to be firefighters as men have? Of course, no department does - they have to relax the standards tremendously to get any women on the department. Every liberal is in favor of those relaxed physical standards, under the guise of being fair and progressive. Under that rationale, it would only be fair to put some inaudible deep-voiced men into the dispatch jobs.

 

[Burroughs]

"The root of the AFC endemic lies in the fact that as recently as 50 years ago there has been a concerted effort to “de-masculinize” society, not only in mass media, but down to how we educate and condition our youth to assume masculine and feminine roles. What is being challenged is the predisposition of males in predominantly western culture to even consider what masculinity is. A rugged, stoic, heroic definition of masculinity is losing ground, but is that a good thing? The equalist certainly believes so. When men become feminized, are we leveling any playing fields or are we progessing towards androgeny and homogenization of gender?"

from Rollo's post.

Great wisdom as always....we are living in the age of faggotry. Women were elevated through the courts so that men would be chained to the state...remember addiction to puzzy is the greatest obstacle a man must overcome to achieve self mastery...most men never achieve this so puzzy can be used as a chain to bind men....women are so malleable and impressionable after all.

Androgeny is being promoted to both sexes as a means of control. Control sexuality and you can control an entire planet....masculine men are a danger...they fight back, they can organized...remove masculine men and replace them with skinny jeaned purse carrying faggots and you have a society that can be easily controlled and shaped to the will of an agenda.

 

[Poonani Maker]

I was in my international politics class yesterday and we're talking about human rights... my prof is a pretty liberal guy and it's obvious he's bought in to feminism to some point. He asked us, putting everything aside (which I don't think is possible), social conventions, religion, everything, is there an inherent equality between men and women.

I didn't answer the question because I didn't want to.

I'd like to know what you guys think.

I think men and women are equal in that they ought to have the same access to the same rights, liberties, and freedoms of men. I do not think they are equal insofar as they are naturally inclined to participate in different roles. That is why you don't see a huge number of stay at home dads and why there are very few female heads of state and CEO's. I don't think women should be forbidden from those fields, but I also don't think it's within the feminine nature to pursue or even in a lot of cases, be best suited for those fields. Just like it isn't in a man's masculine nature to stay at home and raise kids or work as a personal attendant.

That was the answer I would have given, but the day we turn in a paper worth half our grade and the day before the final... I don't think that's the time to start ruffling feathers. I think sometimes it's best to keep a low profile.

http://i.imgur.com/GhRWg.jpg

 

[Atom Smasher]

"The root of the AFC endemic lies in the fact that as recently as 50 years ago there has been a concerted effort to “de-masculinize” society, not only in mass media, but down to how we educate and condition our youth to assume masculine and feminine roles. What is being challenged is the predisposition of males in predominantly western culture to even consider what masculinity is. A rugged, stoic, heroic definition of masculinity is losing ground, but is that a good thing? The equalist certainly believes so. When men become feminized, are we leveling any playing fields or are we progessing towards androgeny and homogenization of gender?"

from Rollo's post.

Great wisdom as always....we are living in the age of faggotry. Women were elevated through the courts so that men would be chained to the state...remember addiction to puzzy is the greatest obstacle a man must overcome to achieve self mastery...most men never achieve this so puzzy can be used as a chain to bind men....women are so malleable and impressionable after all.

Androgeny is being promoted to both sexes as a means of control. Control sexuality and you can control an entire planet....masculine men are a danger...they fight back, they can organized...remove masculine men and replace them with skinny jeaned purse carrying faggots and you have a society that can be easily controlled and shaped to the will of an agenda.

Even with my great powers I can't override the rep limit and it seems I must spread a little love around before repping you again.

You're one of the most aware men on this forum and a very positive influence in helping young men to break out of the small sphere of awareness that was carefully contructed by their feminized education.

Keep up the great work, Burroughs.

 

[Atom Smasher]

http://i.imgur.com/GhRWg.jpg

Wow, is that really her? What a perfect illustration of the ravages of time on women. That should help us to de-pedestalize them! Now you know why at age 55 I only go out with women in their thirties and early forties.

 

[sodbuster]

Nature has not been kind. At the time of the movie, I'd have given my left nut to sleep with her.... now? It would take alot of whiskey

 

[sodbuster]

Back to the subject... a man who isn't super smart can become a plumber,carpenter, oil rig worker...or dozens of other high risk/hard work jobs that haven't become PC....and make great coin. The same level woman will be a receptionist or a hair dresser

 

[Scaramouche]

Dear Ebrace,
Yeah....We all know the story here...Word of advice from a fool,you want to get good grades,your response to his question will be..... of course they are not equal,at every stage in History Women have been victimised and oppressed!....Having taught in Universities,I can tell you Political correctness to the point of absurdity has far from run its course!

 

[Colossus]

That was the answer I would have given, but the day we turn in a paper worth half our grade and the day before the final... I don't think that's the time to start ruffling feathers. I think sometimes it's best to keep a low profile.

Sometimes it's best to think as you like but fly under the radar with aberrant views. It doesn't make your life any easier, and chances are you wont convince anyone entrenched in modern feminist dogma.

I think on a basic human rights level, we are equal. I dont think men OR women should have access to special rights and privileges that the other does not. However, we are not equal in terms of constitution or abilities. That's just nature, and it needs to recognized and respected. Half of the problems with inter-sex relations today come from women trying to fill roles they weren't "meant" to fill. They are living outside of their natural scope of purpose, simply to show that they CAN, and it isnt doing anyone any favors.

We get it, women. You can be CEOs, political leaders, firefighters, police, even soldiers; and wear your big girl pants and flip us the bird while we can legally do nothing but sit back and watch. But that doesn't mean you are better at these tasks, and it does not make you more attractive to most men.

Do we really want a world of androgyny??? I dont think women are capable of filling these roles for too long, because their childbearing drives get the better of them. Just step into the online dating world. Women are very homogenous as a lot. What is the ONE thing they all want more anything else in life, almost universally??? A family. Children. And they cant do that without a man. Yet, astonishingly, they still think traditional gender roles are antiquated and want to wear their big girl pants and just have us men fill in the gaps. Well, fvck you. Not in my life. If you wanna have kids and a family so damn bad, fine. But if I am going to be the seed-provider then you are going to be a natural woman and hold down the home and day-to-day childcare needs. You're better at it anyway. I am happy to work, provide, and protect. This is called a complementary arrangement. That means that one party is not more valuable than the other. We both pull our own weight!!! There is nothing sexist about that, so get off your fvcking big pvssy-wagon and start acting like natural women again if you really want to find fulfillment and be satisfied with a real man.

Colossus out.

 

[FairShake]

Depends on the man and woman.

I personally find unsuccessful people take pride in the success of others that share something in common with them kind of pathetic.

This place is way to Stormfront sometimes.

 

[( . )( . )]

Even with my great powers I can't override the rep limit and it seems I must spread a little love around before repping you again.

You're one of the most aware men on this forum and a very positive influence in helping young men to break out of the small sphere of awareness that was carefully contructed by their feminized education.

Keep up the great work, Burroughs.

+1

The man goes above and beyond the average "care factor" shared by most men and his cultural awareness is off the chain.