Feminism = Equality Between Sexes

[aelf]

Stop calling it manly, it isn't the point of the drafting discussion. War was my point, therefore I added it to the list to be considered when you think women are oh-so-surpressed when a person aren't paid for something that doesn't directly account as working for anyone. Sure, make up a system that pays a person for raising a child, but first socially allow a man to do it. And when ranting that women are surpressed, do first include their names on the drafting list.

So you don't think women are suppressed in tradition?

Anyway, this is an epic fail. I would never have entered this thread if I knew that I was going to be talking to some people who are not mature enough to think outside the box that they have been put in.

I did not say that women are suppressed because they aren't paid. On the contrary, I oppose the valuation of someone's or a group's worth based on how much they are paid, which a source of contention in this thread itself (i.e. that men get paid more in general). It's so damn funny that this point I'm trying to make is perpetually being beset by a bunch of probably teenage (or on a similar mental level) males who can't understand it at all. You're on a lower level and you just can't see the level on which I'm talking. Sad.

You're not getting to the point. I don't think men are heroes when fighting. I don't think war is manly. I don't think that the only heroes in war are men. I hate war. War is, in my eyes, punishment for the people. But I seriously don't understand why you think that being killed in a war should only apply to males while women are as manly ABLE to fight in a war as men, but then again, that's your point, please let the living ones cry on.

This is surreal. I think you're talking to an imaginary person. Or maybe it's just the previous diagnosis again. You're talking on a completely different and lower level.

Also, mothers are paid where I live. Perhaps not much (Which is why I said it), but they are.

Are you sure they are paid? A wage? I think you better think this through if you don't want to get laughed at.
Moderator Action: Debate the issues, not the people making them. Warned for trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Grisu]

Learn to humour [insert silly smiley here ]

I'm Swiss, we're not allowed to have humour

The Feminine Dream was my point that was relevant to the topic, if you do not know what that means then you can't prematurely judge the point.

If you enter a new concept into the discussion it would be common courtesy to at least provide a link to said concept.
The way you said it, it sounded that your assertion that men are not allowed to stay at home was somehow based on reality not some concept of 'the feminine dream'. It's not.

I don't see men staying at home and raising their kids save for those who are forced to (Being divorced or having their spouses dead etc.).

Then I suggest you should go out more. Or maybe Denmark is in relation to Switzerland what the US is in relation to you when it comes to conservatism, but I somehow doubt it.
There's more and more men who stay at home while the mother has a paying job. There are even more men who share the stay at home part with the mother while both partners work part-time.

 

[Angst]

So you don't think women are suppressed in tradition?

In tradition, yes, now, no.

I did not say that women are suppressed because they aren't paid. On the contrary, I oppose the valuation of someone's or a group's worth based on how much they are paid, which a source of contention in this thread itself (i.e. that men get paid more in general)

You don't read properly what I think, or else I'm having too many difficulties with the English once again... I don't value a person more by the amount that person is paid, when did I say that? I value both women and men equally. I, however, oppose the Feminists who think that society consider men worth more for a number of reasons earlier stated. Don't you get my point?

Are you sure they are paid? A wage?

No it isn't a wage, it's general support because they have children. Works for men too when they have children.

I'm Swiss, we're not allowed to have humour

Apparently you do.

If you enter a new concept into the discussion it would be common courtesy to at least provide a link to said concept.
The way you said it, it sounded that your assertion that men are not allowed to stay at home was somehow based on reality not some concept of 'the feminine dream'. It's not.

Actually it was my mistake, I think I have typed the idea before in this thread, but didn't name it properly. I'm sorry. The idea is that women live through their lives looking forward to being a mother and wife, therefore they don't feel very feminine when men would take care of their babies; therefore they don't allow it. And men don't allow it between each other.

Then I suggest you should go out more. Or maybe Denmark is in relation to Switzerland what the US is in relation to you when it comes to conservatism, but I somehow doubt it.
There's more and more men who stay at home while the mother has a paying job. There are even more men who share the stay at home part with the mother while both partners work part-time.

Perhaps. And perhaps we are more conservative on some accounts. I don't appreciate it though. Please enlighten me though (I'm just unsure/curious), I think I heard somewhere (And read) that Swiss women aren't allowed to vote? Is that true? It's another topic though, and should be discussed too far, merely being a question.

 

[Grisu]

Actually it was my mistake, I think I have typed the idea before in this thread, but didn't name it properly. I'm sorry. The idea is that women live through their lives looking forward to being a mother and wife, therefore they don't feel very feminine when men would take care of their babies; therefore they don't allow it. And men don't allow it between each other.

that's all well and good, but I've yet to see any evidence that this is the case in reality

Perhaps. And perhaps we are more conservative on some accounts. I don't appreciate it though. Please enlighten me though (I'm just unsure/curious), I think I heard somewhere (And read) that Swiss women aren't allowed to vote? Is that true? It's another topic though, and should be discussed too far, merely being a question.

yeah, if their chain is long enough to reach from the kitchen to the voting booth, they're allowed to vote
seriously though, voting rights for women were introduced very late (sadly) in Switzerland, it's true. They were introduced nationally only in 1971. So what you read must have been some 40 year old...

 

[aelf]

You don't read properly what I think, or else I'm having too many difficulties with the English once again... I don't value a person more by the amount that person is paid, when did I say that? I value both women and men equally. I, however, oppose the Feminists who think that society consider men worth more for a number of reasons earlier stated. Don't you get my point?

Did you see my original post? Was it addressed to you?

No it isn't a wage, it's general support because they have children. Works for men too when they have children.

Then they are not paid in the economic sense. It's a subsidy, not a wage.

 

[Angst]

Did you see my original post? Was it addressed to you?

You don't own the forum mate. I am allowed to reply to posts if I find them unaccurate, but apparently my bad English prevented me from understanding your point fully.

Then they are not paid in the economic sense. It's a subsidy, not a wage.

Ok, although I thought it as a counterargument to your "It's unfair for women not to get paid for raising kids" argument that apparently was never proposed by you. So it's fine.

that's all well and good, but I've yet to see any evidence that this is the case in reality

I've seen plenty, really; but sadly, they don't do examinations of that subject.

yeah, if their chain is long enough to reach from the kitchen to the voting booth, they're allowed to vote
seriously though, voting rights for women were introduced very late (sadly) in Switzerland, it's true. They were introduced nationally only in 1971. So what you read must have been some 40 year old...

Feminist amateur writer teacher with cigarette told me. Blame Danish education.

 

[aelf]

You don't own the forum mate. I am allowed to reply to posts if I find them unaccurate, but apparently my bad English prevented me from understanding your point fully.

What is inaccurate about the point again?

Usually, people reply when they have something pertinent to say. When it's actually not, it's quite normal for that to be pointed out.

Ok, although I thought it as a counterargument to your "It's unfair for women not to get paid for raising kids" argument that apparently was never proposed by you. So it's fine.

It's unfair that people don't recognise unpaid work, which extends beyond women.

 

[Angst]

What is inaccurate about the point again?

Usually, people reply when they have something pertinent to say. When it's actually not, it's quite normal for that to be pointed out.

It appeared as accurate, since I misunderstood you. Stop being an idiot.

It's unfair that people don't recognise unpaid work, which extends beyond women.

I understand it, actually, just didn't see your first point, like you didn't see mine.

 

[Mylon]

Huh? Since when was war ever my point? You manly dudes were the ones who brought that in.



Now you just waved your wand and words magically materialise.

Let's get this straight. Being a professional soldier is a paid-for job. Being a mother isn't. That's the difference. Being drafted has nothing to do with this, and when it was brought up I merely pointed out that in times of war men are not the only heroes, even if they are more likely to die.

If I may step in: Being drafted is not a profession. It's indentured servitude. Slavery. Slavery where bullets are screaming in looking to rearrange your innards. The fact you get paid for it is inconsequential. If you are drafted, you didn't ask to be there. The money is more of a mockery of the situation than proper compensation.

I brought this point up because it's an important case where men have more responsibility/obligations than women do, and in this case have it harder. This is more of a pro-masculinist issue than an anti-feminist issue. That is, rather than trying to put down women, I'm trying to highlight the plight of men and what they must endure.

As a previous poster said, if women really got paid less for the same work, then employers would only hire women because it would save money.

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

Well, the oppressions of hundreds, if not thousands of years cannot be undone in less than half a century.

If thousands of years of slavery can be overturned with a single executive order, other forms of oppression can do likewise. I don't buy your argument.

I don't even buy that they are better with social interaction. They are super-sensitive, concerned, and subtle(manipulative) about it that is for sure. This combined with strong emotionality results in explosive friendships between women that can be severely damaged by the stupidest little perceived slight. The friendship bonds of men are far more resilient and in general men tend to be FAR more understanding and accepting of each other. It the very social preoccupation you describe that causes them social problems. The male model of social interaction is clearly superior in most cases.

If you don't believe me, think about your conversations with them. There is a good chance that you have (recently) heard something along the lines of: "Tammy is such a jerk... I can't believe she went to that movie without me. That was OUR thing! I am just going to be really passive aggressive with her for the next two weeks and make her feel bad."

Perhaps I should say that they are more concerned with social interaction for its own sake.

 

[aelf]

If I may step in: Being drafted is not a profession. It's indentured servitude. Slavery. Slavery where bullets are screaming in looking to rearrange your innards. The fact you get paid for it is inconsequential. If you are drafted, you didn't ask to be there. The money is more of a mockery of the situation than proper compensation.

I brought this point up because it's an important case where men have more responsibility/obligations than women do, and in this case have it harder. This is more of a pro-masculinist issue than an anti-feminist issue. That is, rather than trying to put down women, I'm trying to highlight the plight of men and what they must endure.

As a previous poster said, if women really got paid less for the same work, then employers would only hire women because it would save money.

Oh, god, the misunderstanding. See what I mean?

This is so funny. And pointless.

 

[Veritass]

The junk about women making xx cents on the dollar is the most regurgitated bunch of vomit from feminism. That averages all women against all men, and we know there is a social bias to women picking jobs that give them more flexibility or less hours or more "fulfillment" while in general men pick jobs to be wage earners.

For a comprehensive review of this, see "Why Men Earn More", by William Farrell.

Farrell, no stranger to controversy through his close association with NOW and his books on gender issues, believes that women are socially programmed to accept occupations that are less risky, more flexible, and more fulfilling than those typically chosen by men. He offers 25 ways to increase pay by choosing jobs that pay more because they involve hard science or technology, are uncomfortable, hazardous, less fulfilling or have greater commercial value to employers. He finds that people who get higher pay work more hours, have more experience, take less time off, commute, relocate, travel, take on more work, get more training, and are simply more productive. He also describes some of the current trends for women in the workplace, and shows how some fields discriminate in favor of women. Annotation ©2004 Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

Farrell shows that, adjusted for other factors, women already make slightly more than men when they do the same job. The real factors are which jobs women select versus men, and how much of their lives they dedicate to them.