User Tag List

First 111920212223 Last

Results 201 to 210 of 279

  1. #201
    Senior Member Viridian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    MBTI
    IsFJ
    Posts
    3,088

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raine_lynn View Post
    Or reddit, that place is a cesspool.
    On a side note:

    Tentative typing: ISFJ 6w5 or 9w1 (Sp/S[?]).

  2. #202
    defying your expectations SoraMayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sx
    Posts
    346

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Viridian View Post
    On a side note:

    (image)
    That is the awkward story of my awkward life.
    4w5-1w2-5w4 -- RLUAI -- Chaotic Good/Neutral

    Johari -- Nohari

    Ask me about my crippling social dysfunction!

  3. #203
    Certified Sausage Smoker Elfboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    9,635

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    I bet men are jealous they don't have boobs they can touch all day.
    ENFP: We put the Fi in Fire
    ENFP
    5w4>1w9>2w1 Sx/Sp
    SEE-Fi
    Papa Bear
    Motivation: Dark Worker
    Alignment: Chaotic Neutral
    Chibi Seme
    MTG Color: black/red
    Male Archtype: King/Lover
    Sunburst!
    "You are a gay version of Gambit" Speed Gavroche
    "I wish that I could be affected by any hate, but I can't, cuz I just get affected by the bank" Chamillionaire

  4. #204
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    I think that if you wonder about things like "what is the most feminist things to do", there's something seriously wrong about you.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  5. #205
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raine_lynn View Post
    Okay, so you studied nutrition. I concede the fact that breastmilk is healthier for a child, but there are several cases where it isn't safe to breastfeed, such as
    the infant being diagnosed with galactosemia, a genetic metabolic disorder, or mothers who have HIV or active tuberculosis, or are taking prescribed cancer chemotherapy agents or undergoing radiation therapies. Not even to mention the fact that up to 15% of mothers can't even produce.
    Besides that, nutrition in most of the western world is vastly different than that in tribal societies, which I would be willing to say has an effect on both production of milk, and the need for more constant feedings due to a lack of nutrients in a standard feeding.
    This is true, in very few cases it is not safe. I'm obviously talking about the vast majority of cases, but it is a good point to bring up. You might be right about different levels of production in different societies; but I was taught that most women who think they can't produce actually can and they just don't know how to properly feed. Like I say, there is a lot we don't know. And this doesn't negate the fact that it is the healthiest thing for the child in almost all cases, and women who want to stay home should be able to without conceding to a future life of low income should they find themselves single.

    Quote Originally Posted by raine_lynn View Post
    Also, men can give birth, and have ovaries, and have XX chromosomes. Gender is a social construct, sex is biological, and they're different things. Most people tend to have their gender identity correlate with their biological sex, but that's no reason to normalize it (which only serves to dehumanize trans people).
    Good point, and I would say if they were biologically female either leave them out of the draft or let them choose which position they will fight in like any other woman. Again, this doesn't apply to most of the population.

    Quote Originally Posted by raine_lynn View Post
    Men also help create life. Really, more succinct is the fact that men as well as women are already alive, which to me is more powerful and moving than just the ability to create life (but that's just my anti-war sentiment). Would you be okay with letting barren women be drafted into combat roles? How about women that just don't want children? The only reason that men do most of the killing is the same reason that men are mostly being killed: oppressive gender roles that force men into overly aggressive societal standards, and say that women should stay home and nurture.
    No, I would not be ok with barren women being drafted, or women who don't want children. And I also don't think it is entirely environmental factors that influence (most) men to be more violent than (most) women. All available evidence points to this always being the case. Although, in some Native American cultures it was said that women had to be kept out of battle unless it was absolutely necessary because they were more vicious- like come after my family and I'll slice your head off kind of thing. But once again it was mostly men fighting over territory and stuff and mostly women just minding their own business.

    The fact is that it is much simpler this way. Women who are pregnant or who already have young children obviously shouldn't be drafted. If a child has two parents and no other living relatives it should not have both its parents drafted. It would be difficult to control for these things. Also there is a lot of work to be done in a war situation which is not child care related, and someone has to be around to do it who is not elderly or infirm. You can't draft everyone.

    Yes, men help create life, but they don't actually do it. Sentiment about killing women being sacrilegious has historically been this way because biologically speaking if you are trying to increase the population you need many more females than males, so for the purpose of survival of the species/tribe women are more "valuable" than men. We are definitely not in this situation anymore, indeed the opposite. But you are entitled to your opinion and I to mine.

  6. #206
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    I can see how the tone of my post and the generalizations I made could have been construed as suggesting ignorance, but please do not assume I am. I probably have as much education on the subject as you do, and certainly more than someone who has not studied nutrition in a college course. I went 3/4 of the way through a nutrition minor. I have also read about what they call continuous breastfeeding, or feeding on demand, as well as attachment parenting. From a nutritional perspective breastfeeding is vitally important to health and well-being, and studies on tribal societies and some undeveloped countries where women practice this have observed babies feeding as often as every 10 minutes. This could vary from baby to baby if done on demand, since every baby is different. If women went as far as to raise their baby in a tribal fashion, it would be very different from what we are used to, and would require holding the baby in some way almost all the time. Of course not every women wants to go this far. I am simply saying, a woman should be free to raise her children how she chooses according to what she thinks her baby needs. I would like to say I know what everyone should do, but that would be arrogant, and saying every woman should stay home would be sexist, wouldn't it? The point about waiting to have children is that a lot of women don't know about these old parenting styles and think formula is just as healthy as breast milk (it is not), and I think it would be good to research these things and be prepared to sacrifice a career if necessary before you have children.
    I know nothing about your background, and evaluated your comments on their own merits. Now you seem to be making assumptions about my background and education. Regardless, I agree that breastfeeding is best for the majority of babies and mothers, at least for the first 6 months, and preferably longer. (See books like The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding for a discussion of the downsides of (over)frequent nursing.) The answer is not (only) to make it possible for women to stay home to do this, but also to make it possible to continue breastfeeding while pursuing a career. Both laws and employer policies have become much more supportive of breastfeeding in recent years, and I know several women in my own organization who have taken advantage of it.

    Similarly, men should no more be locked into a mandatory breadwinner/provider/protector role with all the stresses that brings, any more than women should be locked into (or expected to perform) the bulk of raising children at home. Both women and men should be free to choose how to raise their children and organize their family life.

    Tribal cultures had their own balance of gender roles that often had a firmer basis in the realities and necessities of everyday life. In taking the best practices of these cultures, we need not remain limited by restrictions that have no basis or value added in contemporary society. We may want the baby, but it's time to throw the bathwater out.

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Sure, putting women who are drafted in non-combat roles would be acceptable. And women who join voluntarily should be anywhere they want. Would you say sacrificing children is a necessary part of war? I think women are as valuable as children because they create life. So killing a woman is sacrilegious
    in my opinion. If you disagree that's your prerogative. I don't like killing anyone, but men do most of the killing, and so should comprise most of the people killed.
    Sacrificing children is an inevitable part of war, since even noncombatants get caught in the crossfire, or in today's asymmetric conflicts, become direct targets themselves. If we see such losses as entirely unacceptable, then we better not get involved in armed conflict at all. Among humans, males may do most of the killing, but in the wild there is no fiercer fighter than a mother defending her young. Unfortunately most modern conflicts have lacked that moral imperative.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  7. #207
    defying your expectations SoraMayhem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sx
    Posts
    346

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    ...And this doesn't negate the fact that it is the healthiest thing for the child in almost all cases, and women who want to stay home should be able to without conceding to a future life of low income should they find themselves single.
    I agree that women who want to stay home should be able to, and that it's horrible that due to our social and economic structure there are women who have to work outside the home even though they'd rather not. But that's a function of capitalism, and I'm fiercely anti-capitalist. But women who do want to work outside the home should have the right to do so, and not be judged as mothers for that fact.

    No, I would not be ok with barren women being drafted, or women who don't want children.
    This is cognitive dissonance. Why do you think this? They can't/won't preform the biological act of birthing or child rearing, which was your reasoning for why women shouldn't be drafted. (Once again though, I don't believe in conscription.)

    All available evidence points to this always being the case. Although, in some Native American cultures it was said that women had to be kept out of battle unless it was absolutely necessary because they were more vicious.
    Women Soldiers: The Historical Record. It's more common than you think.

    Yes, men help create life, but they don't actually do it. Sentiment about killing women being sacrilegious has historically been this way because biologically speaking if you are trying to increase the population you need many more females than males, so for the purpose of survival of the species/tribe women are more "valuable" than men. We are definitely not in this situation anymore, indeed the opposite. But you are entitled to your opinion and I to mine.
    Yes, but your opinion is prescriptive. I'm not interested in disallowing anyone to do anything, or coercing people into doing anything. Shouldn't humanity evolve? Not in a biological sense, but intellectually? The world is changing rapidly. Biologically speaking, yes, biological females have more stake in childbirth than anyone else involved, but like you said yourself, scarcity isn't a threat anymore. We can toss aside the baser mammalian impulses now and focus our efforts on the world we actually live in.
    4w5-1w2-5w4 -- RLUAI -- Chaotic Good/Neutral

    Johari -- Nohari

    Ask me about my crippling social dysfunction!

  8. #208
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raine_lynn View Post
    I agree that women who want to stay home should be able to, and that it's horrible that due to our social and economic structure there are women who have to work outside the home even though they'd rather not. But that's a function of capitalism, and I'm fiercely anti-capitalist. But women who do want to work outside the home should have the right to do so, and not be judged as mothers for that fact.
    Yes, and this was my original point. I only judge women who work outside the home to the extent that they sometimes don't think about nontraditional parenting advice and just shove formula down their babies' throats without thinking because it's convenient. Some people are kind of selfish. But probably not the majority. I'm not here to be judgmental. And the point about capitalism was really my main point, if you re-read my post.

    Quote Originally Posted by raine_lynn View Post
    This is cognitive dissonance. Why do you think this? They can't/won't preform the biological act of birthing or child rearing, which was your reasoning for why women shouldn't be drafted. (Once again though, I don't believe in conscription.)
    This is not my point- having children is not the reason women shouldn't be drafted, the fact that they have the capability makes them more worthy of preserving their lives. Again in my opinion. If you think everyone's lives should be sacrificed equally that's a valid assertion, which I don't happen to agree with.

    Quote Originally Posted by raine_lynn View Post
    Women Soldiers: The Historical Record. It's more common than you think.


    Quote Originally Posted by raine_lynn View Post
    Yes, but your opinion is prescriptive. I'm not interested in disallowing anyone to do anything, or coercing people into doing anything. Shouldn't humanity evolve? Not in a biological sense, but intellectually? The world is changing rapidly. Biologically speaking, yes, biological females have more stake in childbirth than anyone else involved, but like you said yourself, scarcity isn't a threat anymore. We can toss aside the baser mammalian impulses now and focus our efforts on the world we actually live in.
    No I'm not interested in disallowing anyone to do anything either. Saying women shouldn't be drafted is not the same as saying they shouldn't be in the military. I am completely in favor of women joining voluntarily.

  9. #209
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I know nothing about your background, and evaluated your comments on their own merits. Now you seem to be making assumptions about my background and education. Regardless, I agree that breastfeeding is best for the majority of babies and mothers, at least for the first 6 months, and preferably longer. (See books like The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding for a discussion of the downsides of (over)frequent nursing.) The answer is not (only) to make it possible for women to stay home to do this, but also to make it possible to continue breastfeeding while pursuing a career. Both laws and employer policies have become much more supportive of breastfeeding in recent years, and I know several women in my own organization who have taken advantage of it.
    No, I was not trying to make assumptions about your background; I just wanted to give myself a little credibility against the seeming assumption of ignorance. I'm sure you are also educated on the subjects, for all I know more so than I am.

    I totally agree a compromise in which women can work and still care for their children is the best solution. I was kind of thinking in black and white and assuming these allowances don't exist. As I said in my previous post, I am really blaming capitalism and not women who want to work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Similarly, men should no more be locked into a mandatory breadwinner/provider/protector role with all the stresses that brings, any more than women should be locked into (or expected to perform) the bulk of raising children at home. Both women and men should be free to choose how to raise their children and organize their family life.
    Yes, I agree with this. I believe in responsibility, and I think a lot of parents are selfish and irresponsible. How parents take responsibility for raising their children in a healthy way is their choice. They just need to do it and not pretend children are another nice accessory. There are many possibilities. But we can't just reject gender/sex based roles entirely, because they exist for a reason. It's just up to the individuals involved if they want to adhere to associated behaviors, and to what extent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Tribal cultures had their own balance of gender roles that often had a firmer basis in the realities and necessities of everyday life. In taking the best practices of these cultures, we need not remain limited by restrictions that have no basis or value added in contemporary society. We may want the baby, but it's time to throw the bathwater out.
    I agree that we shouldn't have fixed stereotypical notions of what is "man" behavior and what is "woman" behavior. But we have unique strengths and weakness and associated behaviors for a reason, and often, for a lot of people, they work well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Sacrificing children is an inevitable part of war, since even noncombatants get caught in the crossfire, or in today's asymmetric conflicts, become direct targets themselves. If we see such losses as entirely unacceptable, then we better not get involved in armed conflict at all. Among humans, males may do most of the killing, but in the wild there is no fiercer fighter than a mother defending her young. Unfortunately most modern conflicts have lacked that moral imperative.
    Yes, which is why I am generally anti-war.

  10. #210
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    You are injecting a lot into my posts which isn't there, and ignoring/missing a lot of the main points. But I kind of expect this to happen whenever I say something controversial.

Similar Threads

  1. What is more important protest or voluntary work?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-21-2017, 01:36 PM
  2. What's more important? Duty, Honor or Love?
    By highlander in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: 01-02-2017, 04:01 AM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-19-2016, 06:55 AM
  4. Who Is More the Buffoon: Obama or Bush II?
    By Mal12345 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-01-2014, 12:42 PM
  5. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 08-01-2011, 07:53 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO