Do You Cry?

[AdamCrock]

When Rose jumped from lifeboat back to Titanic though, it was incredibly stupid, and probably cost Jack life.

I think it's quite the opposite - she saved his life by jumping back because Jack was handcuffed to a pipe . If it wasn't for Rose jumping back Jack would surely die. His sacrifice later was his own choice, not Rose's doing. It kind'a makes me wonder though why they just didn't hug together on that plank

 

[MaryKB]

Even though I don't respect your opinions, I do respect you for saying exactly what you believe ... most of the other right wing people here are too afraid to do so.

Men are bigger and stronger, women get pregnant.

I feel your post is full of ignorance, but I need to call out this one as especially repugnant. Women are not baby factories.

 

[Farm Boy]

Aside from making sure he gets murk'd over the difference between gender and sex, does my being larger than the average American female imply reduction to grunt physical laborer, or male encompass concepts like husband, father, caretaker, fixer, comforter etc etc?

 

[MaryKB]

I'm sorry, I have no idea what point you're trying to make.

 

[red_elk]

From my experience... women indeed get pregnant sometimes. And men don't.

 

[Farm Boy]

I guess I would view the condition of being fertile and impregnable to be both exclusively female outside of science fiction, and non-reductive. Possessing that trait does not imply the absence of many different unrelated traits. If that makes better sense?

And men don't.

Thomas Beatie has a vocabulary point to make with you!

 

[MaryKB]

I guess I would view the condition of being fertile and impregnable to be both exclusively female outside of science fiction, and non-reductive. Possessing that trait does not imply the absence of many different unrelated traits. If that makes better sense?

That makes more sense, but he reduced women down to our primary characteristic of "getting pregnant." You do know that attitude's a big part of sexism, right?

 

[Narz]

I feel your post is full of ignorance, but I need to call out this one as especially repugnant. Women are not baby factories.

Wut?

May as well complain men are not just there to react stuff high on the shelf and help you w your bags.

You take nuetral statements of fact and attach outrage to it (in this case inserting the word "only"), not emotionally healthy.

 

[Narz]

That makes more sense, but he reduced women down to our primary characteristic of "getting pregnant." You do know that attitude's a big part of sexism, right?

What characteristics would y'all prefer to be reduced down to?

 

[Farm Boy]

That makes more sense, but he reduced women down to our primary characteristic of "getting pregnant." You do know that attitude's a big part of sexism, right?

I'm already chastising on vocabulary. He recognizes the existence of trans people, a recognition which by definition carves out the difference between "sex" and "gender." The usage gets muddy though. I am going to presume, seeing as he actively pointed it out in the case of trans men, he realizes that most trans women(any?) are not fertile in the specific way that a female can be. The possibility of becoming gravid, and the likelihood of being smaller in raw mass than males due to sexual dimorphism are indeed characteristically female traits. Given the goal of equal opportunity and development, they along with base differences in hormonal temperament(which actually can be treated these days), are some of the last remaining "hard" differences between males and females, right? I just have to read his consecutive posts as being sloppy with 2019 vocabulary(give the discussion at hand) instead of wildly internally inconsistent.

 

[Kyriakos]

 

[AdamCrock]

I don't know if it's just me but I do get what Mary is trying to say here. I think man should avoid reducing woman to their basic biological function . After all woman are just as good and able as man are and excel in jobs and roles that during the "dark ages" were thought to be man's only. For example woman make excellent soldiers and leaders.

 

[AdamCrock]

What characteristics would y'all prefer to be reduced down to?

I think Mary would appreciate not being reduced at all.

 

[Farm Boy]

Would I make a particularly eggscelent surrogate? Is that, given Mr. Thomas Beatie, intrinsically due to my stubbly fat manliness? Or does it have to do, largely, with my maleness?

 

[red_elk]

I guess the sentence "women get pregnant" <unlike men> was interpreted in the worst possible way,
as "women get pregnant" <and it's their primary function>

Thomas Beatie has a vocabulary point to make with you!

Cheating! Doesn't count.

 

[Farm Boy]

Totally not cheating at all, just uncommon. And that's the essence of the very relevant vocabulary point. You know, assuming transpeople aren't just "making it up" or whatever, which seems incredibly basic really. That one thing correlates with another thing 99% of the time does not speak for the other 1%. It does make the colloquial terms lazy, though.

 

[Synobun]

I'm already chastising on vocabulary. He recognizes the existence of trans people, a recognition which by definition carves out the difference between "sex" and "gender." The usage gets muddy though. I am going to presume, seeing as he actively pointed it out in the case of trans men, he realizes that most trans women(any?) are not fertile in the specific way that a female can be. The possibility of becoming gravid, and the likelihood of being smaller in raw mass than males due to sexual dimorphism are indeed characteristically female traits. Given the goal of equal opportunity and development, they along with base differences in hormonal temperament(which actually can be treated these days), are some of the last remaining "hard" differences between males and females, right? I just have to read his consecutive posts as being sloppy with 2019 vocabulary(give the discussion at hand) instead of wildly internally inconsistent.

IIRC Zardnaar is on record as saying he'll "let" transpeople "believe what they want." So he recognizes their existence in as much he recognizes the existence of bugs: a complete inconvenience he's reluctant to accept but would rather do without. Not sure that's a big win on his end, or a position that should be touted as a silver lining in a discussion about his "extreme left" resistances.

 

[Kyriakos]

IIRC Zardnaar is on record as saying he'll "let" transpeople "believe what they want." So he recognizes their existence in as much he recognizes the existence of bugs: a complete inconvenience he's reluctant to accept but would rather do without. Not sure that's a big win on his end, or a position that should be touted as a silver lining in a discussion about his "extreme left" resistances.

While I admire the courage of ts people, it isn't realistic to expect everyone to accept others or a group just due to arguments.
I'm sure we all know it is hard enough to be accepted even as a "majority" member. In fact does it even happen, in a finalized manner? No.

 

[Farm Boy]

Bugs can be inconvenient, but they're not the sort of thing one can do without. A great variety of them are quite lovely.

 

[red_elk]

Totally not cheating at all, just uncommon. And that's the essence of the very relevant vocabulary point. You know, assuming transpeople aren't just "making it up" or whatever, which seems incredibly basic really. That one thing correlates with another thing 99% of the time does not speak for the other 1%. It does make the colloquial terms lazy, though.

Exceptions confirm rules.