My experience with game

[red_elk]

I mostly agree, the reasons why people may dislike other people can be their "innate" or "acquired" traits. The latter is more understandable and sometimes justified.
Your dim view of Israel is likely not based on their tradition, language or other culture-specific traits though. It's just politics, which is only tangentially related to culture.
Likewise, people in US military had negative views on Russians most probably not because they disagreed with Tolstoy's scientific determinism or because they disliked art of Kandinsky. Rather because they and Russians were trained to kill each other.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I would be willing to bet a fair amount that neither you nor Valka could throw a standard dictionary twenty paces, on target or otherwise. The only hits would be verbal jabs.

I'm not sure exactly how far 20 paces is. How heavy is a "standard" dictionary? Maybe if I tied it so it didn't open mid throw. Rather than a duel we could have some weird shotput/discus hybrid contest, literally seeing how far we can take the language.

I never did gain competency at that spin to win technique the discus throwers use though.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

When you say "misandry", you're using a word where you're trying to say it's an equivalent to misogyny, and when you do that you're being misogynist. You can criticize actions of freedom fighters, you can call them terrorists, but you can't say they're imposing martial law.

Misandry and misogyny *are* equivalent terms. They each represent a side of sexism.

What you are asserting is that one is greater than the other in scale, which is likely true. Claiming a word "doesn't exist" because you believe one to be larger in scale confuses the argument. If you mean the latter, it's more useful to say the latter.

So now you're telling me what I'm allowed to feel? Don't you see what you're doing?

Any of us can feel whatever we want, but it's not relevant to the argument from a debate perspective regardless.

And no, I'm not incorrect. You're doing a classic thing where you're dictating meanings of words to be something you prefer, because you're uncomfortable addressing what sexism really is

It seems that your position is the one doing this, as you're manipulating a dictionary-accepted word which people on the street would recognize to claim it doesn't exist.

which is male control over women

More reality please.

Conscription is an example of sexism .. against women.

Women voluntarily signing up is allowed and has been allowed for a long time. They are given lower physical standards requirements for that too (sexism against men). There is no credible basis that women have a disadvantage in this regard. Citing Mulan is la-la land stuff, in reality this process strictly favors women.

Conscription and the draft (which USA uses) only select men and that's strictly negative against men if you want to talk in equality terms. It's the most militarily effective setup, but it's not good for men.

Movies and feelings don't matter. What matters is what happens in reality. In reality, there are multiple systems that systematically discriminate against men, have already been mentioned in this thread, and have been ignored by the "counter-arguments" to this point. Some of them are life-changing or life-ruining. If you want to make a case women have it worse, fine. You'd do well to use more real evidence for that, but there's nothing wrong with making that point.

Claiming there isn't systemic discrimination against men in some significant fields is out of touch with reality and is a position that should reasonably held in disdain, similar to claims that women don't see discrimination.

(and the point that conscription is discrimination against women...well... it probably is. As much as against men. Being denied something is clearly discrimination. Being forced to do something against your will and maybe die due to that too)

Conscription is not and can't be discrimination against women, unless women are conscripted more than men. As far as I'm aware this has never been done for military purposes in history. You might make a case that voluntary service discriminates against women, but that'd be an uphill argument.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Conscription is not and can't be discrimination against women, unless women are conscripted more than men.

Exception:

Consider a society in which "only being an officer provides the experience necessary to lead" is a widely held standard. The officer ranks consist of promoted conscripts and those who enter the officer corps directly by choice, but with an all male conscript force the military does effectively become a 'boys club' and that will extend through the officer corps whether it is specifically ruled as such or not. If the only path to leadership roles is a path made basically inaccessible to women then that is discriminatory against them, even though the conscription itself seems to favor them.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I understand the difference you are talking about, I just don't think it's that crucial. If someone hates people of specific nationality, it's usually not because of place they live in, but because of their ethnic and cultural background. Which is very difficult to change, just as gender. Like if someone hates the Jews, he doesn't make difference between Jews living in Canada, America or Israel. In this sense, antisemitism is similar to misogyny/misandry.

Since public antisemitism/Holocaust denial is a crime in Canada, that would mean that misogyny/misandry would also be classed as hate crimes and expressing them publicly would be considered hate speech.

We'd need to build more court houses.

Well, if they think so, they are wrong and their position is sexist.

 

[riddleofsteel]

There's a vast amount of disturbing nonsense in this thread. The last time I took a peek through, the only person who was talking any sense was a moderator and he got labeled as right-wing just for stating his opinion.

I'm not sure if misandry and discrimination against men are basically the same thing, but I think the only reason anybody thinks misandry doesn't exist is because it's a viewpoint that gets actively suppressed by sexists in favor of women. I'm only going to give my personal opinion here, for what precious little it's worth. I have no political stance at all, I find the very idea abhorrent. My primary kryptonite is unfairness. If I see or hear something blatantly unfair, I tend to go into 'blood mist' mental mode. I've never harmed another person in my life, male or female. Yet somehow society demands that I wear the millstone of guilt for all the bad things done by men I'll never meet, either now or centuries ago. I've been excluded from events simply because I'm a man. One particular event was mostly women who knew me since I was a child, but the idea of 'male energy', whatever the hell that is, made them uncomfortable. Heads would roll if a group of men did that to a woman. Of the women I have known in my life, either directly or just by acquaintance, I have observed that a significant majority of them don't want equality. They want supremacy. I guess that makes sense, it's a very human flaw to exhibit. But it undermines many arguments in their favor.

I've been asked to leave public places by groups of women who apparently feel threatened by male ears while talking. I've lived and worked in a college town my whole life. I've been propositioned, cursed at, ridiculed when I refused advances from women. Some of the filthiest mouths and the nastiest, most disgusting behavior I've ever seen was exhibited by teen and college aged girls. I was raised by people who adhered to the idea that boys were inherently bad unless you beat the bad behavior out of them, and girls were naturally innocent and good. I've heard women talking and saying that a man should have his penis cut off or be castrated, simply for doing something they don't agree with. Hell, I've seen statements like that made in public comment threads in news articles. That a man should be castrated because somehow his existence offends someone. Why is discrimination made out to look like such a one way street?

 

[Lexicus]

I have no political stance at all,

Yes you do, you're a far-right anti-feminist

Moderator Action: I'll just quote myself:

Moderator Action: If anyone cannot participate in this discussion without attacking other users be it directly or indirectly they need to stop participating now (or I will help out with that).

Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Synobun]

One particular event was mostly women who knew me since I was a child, but the idea of 'male energy', whatever the hell that is, made them uncomfortable. Heads would roll if a group of men did that to a woman.

While I am largely of the same mind that demographic-only spaces are generally kinda meh, I think in this it's important to keep in mind that we're only two generations removed from that being the standard: women being excluded from male-only spaces. It's difficult for women and men to share authority if the standard for centuries was for women to stay in their corner while men had the power.

I just see that as growing pains. Equality isn't here yet, and it can help women feel empowered if they have a space that's only theirs. I think we can only start seeing it as an issue if we get a couple generations deep and the segregation continues. Simply flipping the terms of engagement isn't much of a solution, but I can see how temporarily doing that can be helpful in forcing a more rapid societal shift in how women are perceived.

 

[inthesomeday]

Yes you do, you're a far-right anti-feminist

Supporting the status quo is never “political”, Lexicus.

 

[riddleofsteel]

While I am largely of the same mind that demographic-only spaces are generally kinda meh, I think in this it's important to keep in mind that we're only two generations removed from that being the standard: women being excluded from male-only spaces. It's difficult for women and men to share authority if the standard for centuries was for women to stay in their corner while men had the power.

I just see that as growing pains. Equality isn't here yet, and it can help women feel empowered if they have a space that's only theirs. I think we can only start seeing it as an issue if we get a couple generations deep and the segregation continues. Simply flipping the terms of engagement isn't much of a solution, but I can see how temporarily doing that can be helpful in forcing a more rapid societal shift in how women are perceived.

You make good points here, and I accept that you're probably right.

Yes you do, you're a far-right anti-feminist

Is this some kind of joke? I've never voted or endorsed a political party or politician. If you're just trying to say you think you can lump me in with your enemies, you're just trolling. I gave my opinion and my life experiences, which likely poked holes in your deeply held beliefs, but you didn't refute me.

 

[Lexicus]

Is this some kind of joke? I've never voted or endorsed a political party or politician. If you're just trying to say you think you can lump me in with your enemies, you're just trolling. I gave my opinion and my life experiences, which likely poked holes in your deeply held beliefs, but you didn't refute me.

Why are you so resistant to having your views characterized accurately? You obviously do not have "no political stance." Your post expressed a number of "political stances" which can be described as "anti-feminist" and "far right."

 

[ulyssesSgrant]

Conscription is not and can't be discrimination against women, unless women are conscripted more than men. As far as I'm aware this has never been done for military purposes in history. You might make a case that voluntary service discriminates against women, but that'd be an uphill argument.

Conscription seems harmful to both men and women. Men are forced into life threatening situations against their will, women deemed unworthy or unable to carry out the difficult job. I don't see why it has to be one or the other.

 

[riddleofsteel]

Why are you so resistant to having your views characterized accurately? You obviously do not have "no political stance." Your post expressed a number of "political stances" which can be described as "anti-feminist" and "far right."

Now I know you're looking for a target. I legitimately didn't know if that was sarcasm, I wasn't 'so resistant' to anything. You can characterize all you like, there's nothing accurate about it. You're merely giving your interpretation of my experience, which I deny unequivocally. I also never once said that I was against women in any way, shape or fashion. You're trying to squeeze other people into a mold that suits you, and you really shouldn't.

 

[MaryKB]

Some of the filthiest mouths and the nastiest, most disgusting behavior I've ever seen was exhibited by teen and college aged girls.

I feel your comment here really is what explains everything, and if you're willing to listen then you can grow. I understand how you feel threatened, but frankly you don't seem to have any clue what's going on for women's issues, and your opinions are formed from your limited personal experience, and what you're expressing is a definitive part of what's called "male privilege." You're a man, and you experience our world through a man's eyes, and you're treated differently than women are.

You say you feel the worst behavior you've ever seen is from young women .. which means you're not at all familiar with what men do to women, like domestic slavery, abuse, rape, murder, and so many other things that men have been doing to women for centuries, and still do. You don't understand how women aren't equal today, how we're still held back by sexism and misogyny, and that's why my points are difficult for you to understand.

My suggestion is to stop thinking only of your issues, and listen to people who are suffering from oppression you're benefiting from. You don't even have to realize what you're doing, or actively be assaulting anyone to be supporting sexist systems. But especially when you're denying women as a group are far worse off then men, you're harming us and you're actively contributing.

It's why men need to stop talking and listen.

 

[ulyssesSgrant]

I don't see this ending well.

 

[Lexicus]

Now I know you're looking for a target. I legitimately didn't know if that was sarcasm, I wasn't 'so resistant' to anything. You can characterize all you like, there's nothing accurate about it. You're merely giving your interpretation of my experience, which I deny unequivocally. I also never once said that I was against women in any way, shape or fashion. You're trying to squeeze other people into a mold that suits you, and you really shouldn't.

I am trying to help you attain some self-awareness. Until you do that your personal experiences will not be of much use to anyone, as they will function as rationalizations for your unknown-to-yourself political views.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Now I know you're looking for a target. I legitimately didn't know if that was sarcasm, I wasn't 'so resistant' to anything. You can characterize all you like, there's nothing accurate about it. You're merely giving your interpretation of my experience, which I deny unequivocally. I also never once said that I was against women in any way, shape or fashion. You're trying to squeeze other people into a mold that suits you, and you really shouldn't.

Actually, he's giving his interpretation of what you posted, not your experience, and by and large his interpretation appears correct.

 

[Synobun]

Neglecting to vote doesn't really absolve you of having political positions. Unless you live as a hermit in the woods, you hold political beliefs that relate to or oppose your peers.

 

[riddleofsteel]

I don't see this ending well.

Wow, you aren't kidding. I thought I was just offering some limited evidence that women can be sexist and men can be discriminated against. I did that, and nothing anybody says can change that. Now I've got Mary putting words in my mouth that I didn't say and making a further case for sexist women. Lexicus, thanks but I don't need your help attaining self awareness. My gut told me to stay out of this cesspool thread but I had a bad enough day to ignore my good judgement. That's it for me in Colosseum, folks.

 

[Senethro]

One particular event was mostly women who knew me since I was a child, but the idea of 'male energy', whatever the hell that is, made them uncomfortable. Heads would roll if a group of men did that to a woman. Of the women I have known in my life, either directly or just by acquaintance, I have observed that a significant majority of them don't want equality. They want supremacy. I guess that makes sense, it's a very human flaw to exhibit. But it undermines many arguments in their favor.

Anyone remember those guys saying BLM were anti-white racists? Its all projection of their own toxic beliefs onto their opponents. Feminists are not secret female supremacists.

I've never been quite sure how "real" the belief that their opponents are as bad as them is. Is it a genuine fear that is causing a defensive reaction, or is it a just a stance that they know is a lie so they can justify actions they intend to take?