User Tag List

First 45859394959697105145 Last

Results 941 to 950 of 1614

  1. #941
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by serenesam View Post
    Have you ever gotten a job? You do understand they have to review your performance periodically right?

    In addition, I suspect in a job such as nursing, where it used to be predominantly women (even dating back decades ago), when man starts out, they might actually have to start out on entry-level (this is something I remember after doing a research interview project from high school in which I actually interviewed a “charge nurse” who was female) just like anybody else. Somewhere along the line, as the years progressed, men must have climbed the ladder quicker, for let’s assume it was the opposite, that men were the supervisors, how would they get there in the first place in a job where pretty much virtually all the supervisors were female? You don’t think that a charge nurse who was likely a female decades ago had a say in someone’s (man or woman) performance?
    I would also like to add that wasn't Human Resources also most likely women, at least back in the old days?

    https://mortenkamp.wordpress.com/201...y-women-in-hr/

  2. #942
    Senior Member Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    I have no doubt that many gender egalitarians who identify as feminists exist. But why so quiet?
    What do you mean quiet? They don't merely exist. The obvious majority of self-identified feminists are gender egalitarians.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    These "not true feminsts"? They are literally the interest groups representing american feminism in front of congress, in courts, in municipalities & campuses, they are ones making an impact. Let's say I accept your "no true scot-feminist would do that" argument, the nature of the discussion is that valid arguments to be made against them are deflected on the basis that other self proclaimed feminists aren't like them.
    Making an impact? You're saying that the most radical feminists are making this biggest impact? The world would look very different if they did. In the end, feminism, like any movement, is a dynamic collection of individuals with some variation in their ideas that, on a large scale, approximately form larger threads, which in turn, approximately form the movement in general. The general form is consistently defined by more moderate factions of people than the ones you are singling out. They are both more common (by far), and more influential within these movements, by my estimate. And I'm a sociologist, I've been in the middle of these academic settings, I would have seen it if it were the way you imagine it. Are you American? Maybe it's different in another country, I don't know.

    The complaints you raise have already long been discussed within feminism, for decades I'd say. And it says a lot that after this post you even bothered mentioning the idea of lesbian feminism. That is an almost completely irrelevant idea in terms of the number of people who subscribe to that idea or how much influence they have.

    Yes, there is such a thing as a no true Scotsman fallacy. But there is also a kind of straw man that involves attacking a position but resting all of it its most obscure and extreme expression, and that is probably what you are doing here. You know, in the American civil rights movement, there happened to be some pretty crazy people participating. Some of the members of the Nation of Islam come to mind. It wouldn't be reasonable to hinge the credibility of the civil rights movement on just those people, and it would be inaccurate to think that those people somehow informed the racism of those who opposed the civil rights movement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Even in the microscale, within this very thread, I've gotten to speak to both gender egalitarian feminists who you might recognize as "true feminists" and others who follow the dogmatic view who you might recognize as "not true feminists". Why are the first arguing with everyone else for getting associated with the later rather then argue with the later?
    I'm actually not saying any of those people aren't true feminists. From the looks of it, neither did EffemDoubleyou. What is being referred to here is relate influence and relation to interests. Again with the civil rights movement. There are certain grounds for counting as a participant in that movement. Being totally crazy does not disqualify someone from being a true participant of the civil rights movement. Undoubtedly some were. The question isn't whether they count at all, but how much they represent the whole movement and how fair it is to assess the movement in their image.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right
    Likes Ivy liked this post

  3. #943
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Yes actually, except Finland that kind of already had it going. Some had their own revolutions, for others it was part of the instability during the revolutions of the two world wars as an opportunity for it (For instance in France the feminist movement took part of the French liberation movement in fighting the German occupation - they've gained the vote when France got it's independence). The exception seems to be countries that were more recent to gain their democracy and didn't do a gender divide to start with.
    The only countries I can think of where women are truly oppressed are countries in the middle east.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    If more extreme and oppressive values are able to coexist with technology & capitalism, why wouldn't the more moderate American ones? If a Saudi man can drive back from an IT job using a modern car & GPS signal to his modern home where his wives aren't allowed to leave anywhere without him or show their own hair, kiss them and log online to order something from china while they cook for him using a self cleaning oven, What was there to stop american society from maintaining it's own traditional gender roles and taking the same route?
    I just explained to you that these countries are highly oppressive when it comes to religion and the state. Any man who preaches against their religion or the state gets thrown in jail or killed. American and European countries weren't nearly as oppressive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Both movements face the same lack of sustainability - nobody to transfer the ideology to in the next generation.
    MGTOW are far greater by the numbers and growing,I don't think feminists want men to opt out of society because they enjoy their slaves contributing all the high risk high manual labor jobs in society.

  4. #944
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    What do you mean quiet? They don't merely exist. The obvious majority of self-identified feminists are gender egalitarians.



  5. #945
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default


    Institutions of higher indoctrination.
    Likes serenesam, SpankyMcFly liked this post

  6. #946
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    MGTOW are far greater by the numbers and growing,I don't think feminists want men to opt out of society because they enjoy their slaves contributing all the high risk high manual labor jobs in society.
    Very fascinating:

    https://acynicallookatfeminism.wordp...gainist-mgtow/
    Google Trends
    Likes jixmixfix, SpankyMcFly liked this post

  7. #947
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    it says a lot that after this post you even bothered mentioning the idea of lesbian feminism. That is an almost completely irrelevant idea in terms of the number of people who subscribe to that idea or how much influence they have.

    The fact you didn't bother to notice the context of lesbian separatism as an equivalent of the MGTOW - and instead you took it as a poor excuse to discredit my understanding of mainstream feminism by thinking the very fact of it's mention in this thread must show I am forming my opinion of it by extreme fringe groups - says a hell of a lot about you. But I suppose no more then your previous assumption that a lack of education about feminism is a necessity for disagreeing with it.
    You've complained about "anti feminists" twisting the poor minds of their victims with lies until they no longer capable of listening to The Truth because they discredit feminists and perceive them as too crazy too listen too - Because god forbid it could be thought of as a response to what they actually say and you'd have to consider their arguments - and yet all you do is tumbling and failing while working so hard trying to convince yourself aren't worth listening too in the first place...
    Or perhaps convincing others? I suppose if such defenses are enough for you then convincing yourself doesn't require a lot in the way of reason or evidence. In that case, for those who already agree with you and aren't particularly perceptive to logical redflags and common cheap strategies to protect beliefs from criticism without having to address it's content, it would probably work. For anyone else, don't worry, luckily for you, the validity of your points doesn't depend on any realistic measure of your credibility, they can be discredited on their own lack of merits.

    In this case - Previously I've listed the biggest currently active american feminists organizations, if they are too fringe in your mind to represent mainstream feminism, then your gender egalitarians feminists have a bigger internal oppressor to worry about then the patriarchy.

    But keep on trying

  8. #948
    Senior Member Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    FLUFF

    In this case - Previously I've listed the biggest currently active american feminists organizations, if they are too fringe in your mind to represent mainstream feminism, then your gender egalitarians feminists have a bigger internal oppressor to worry about then the patriarchy.

    FLUFF
    That has more to do with your choice to mix together more and less radical things together carelessly (or intentionally?) without specifying what you're are really concerned with. Which probably refers to the bigger problem.

    I was thinking since my last post, and a different question has come to my mind. What is the point in engaging in a war of definitions?

    Let's say you are sincerely concerned with some radical ideas that you think are wrong or would be harmful. You have the impression that either they are representative of feminism, or that they are what feminism amounts to by definition. Either one works. If working from that position, a bunch of people who identify as feminists, associate with feminists, are educating on the subject of feminism, tell you that they don't think that's what feminism typically is in reality or what it has to be by definition, why not work with those people? I mean, if you actually think there are reasonable, non-radical, beneficial ideas toward giving women a position in society equal to men. Wouldn't you want to take advantage of those people inside, shall we say, who want the movement to be about things that you also think are reasonable?

    What do you expect? Do you think there's some kind of ploy? That reasonable, moderate people calling themselves feminists are actually planning a bait and switch after they rope you in somehow? I don't know what convinced you of the extremeness of feminism, and I certainly don't know what would convince you otherwise, because it's clear that nothing a feminist claims about him or her self persuades you at all. Because if spite of what you have claimed, you really don't care what a feminist says about feminism apparently. When you cite feminists on feminism, you are completely unilaterally deciding which ones to cite, without guidance from any other feminist, and you don't seem to acknowledge the opinions that differ from the ones you've selected.

    If I do things your way, I guess that would mean assuming that jixmixfix represents you, and everything he says is representative of your position.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #949
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    That has more to do with your choice to mix together more and less radical things together carelessly (or intentionally?) without specifying what you're are really concerned with. Which probably refers to the bigger problem.
    So having failed to demonstrate that I'm mixing together more and less redical versions of feminism carelessly - for reasons you would find under fluff (Behind the scary doors in your brain were the counter arguments go too) - attributing feminism to the largest feminist organizations is a result of me mixing together more and less radical versions of feminism. Great point. Or in your words - Fluff.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I was thinking since my last post, and a different question has come to my mind. What is the point in engaging in a war of definitions?
    There is none, which is exactly why I attribute feminism to those who claim to write, lobby legislation, campaign & organize in the name of feminism. I am not saying any branch of feminism isn't "real feminism", if you would have paid attention - and we both know you didn't - you would have noticed that's exactly what I was arguing against.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    working from that position, a bunch of people who identify as feminists, associate with feminists, are educating on the subject of feminism, tell you that they don't think that's what feminism typically is in reality or what it has to be by definition, why not work with those people? I mean, if you actually think there are reasonable, non-radical, beneficial ideas toward giving women a position in society equal to men. Wouldn't you want to take advantage of those people inside, shall we say, who want the movement to be about things that you also think are reasonable?
    You mean like I did here or like I did here? I am still waiting.

    Edit: While I am at it - right back at you: If your version of feminism is actually for equal rights and responsibilities in an open acknowledgment of the concerns and problems facing either genders, wouldn't a movement that attempted to do just that for men be an ally? Where is "feminists for CAFE" or "feminists supporting the Toronto men's center"? Google seems to be failing me...

    But credit is where credit's due: Thanks you for actually attempting to make an argument this time, I am honored, truly - I bet winning the lottery doesn't feel that good, relatively to this lottery winners are a dime a dozen.

  10. #950
    Senior Member Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,797

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    So having failed to demonstrate that I'm mixing together more and less redical versions of feminism carelessly - for reasons you would find under fluff (Behind the scary doors in your brain were the counter arguments go too) - attributing feminism to the largest feminist organizations is a result of me mixing together more and less radical versions of feminism. Great point. Or in your words - Fluff.
    You mostly didn't respond to my points, and rambled about me and my qualities as a debater. That's why I called it fluff. I left in the main thing worth responding to and responded to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    There is none, which is exactly why I attribute feminism to those who claim to write, lobby legislation, campaign & organize in the name of feminism. I am not saying any branch of feminism isn't "real feminism", if you would have paid attention - and we both know you didn't - you would have noticed that's exactly what I was arguing against.
    Not everybody even within feminism has exactly the same definition of feminism. And not everyone within feminism actually has equal influence in feminism. So, one can single out one given definition of feminism against another, and specifically take one that is considerably less influential if they want.

    And the two of us clearly don't have the same definition of feminism, and that is pretty much the center of the argument itself.

    So yes, there is a war over a definition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    You mean like I did here or like I did here? I am still waiting.
    Okay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    If these fringe feminists are the ones you actually disagree with, why aren't any of you good old equality feminists arguing with any of them instead of with Spanky?
    We do, all the time. It is a common thing in academia, and even around so-called feminist communities (think blogs) and those fringe feminists, true to their name, are often on the back foot.

    It isn't happening here, because none of those fringe feminists are even here posting. That might be because they are so rare.

    In the mean time, this thread actually does have multiple people (or had) who are making blatantly sexist remarks (though Spanky is not one of the). Would you rather we argue with people closer to, if not the same as, our position, who aren't even here, than people who are here, who are completely opposed to us?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Ofcourse, liberals and republicans argue and actively compete for power all the time - not just use each other as talking points (At least not exclusively). But what''s happening here would be the equivalent of american liberals avoided that completely and instead just complained about how the Iraqi are misrepresenting them and holding america responsible to the Bush administration's actions (And having the audacity to do so while the Bush administration was still in power).

    When it becomes realistic to point to the rethorics and conduct in political arguments as a role model for improvement over your own...
    That was supposed to be an example? I don't even understand how this is an example of what I asked of you. I saw this post, but it just seemed like some snarky mockery, and I hardly understood the point of that thing about Iraqis. I don't even know what kind of response you'd want to that.

    I guess I see a analogy there. There are a whole lot of things wrong with it on the basis of technicality that I guess I should just ignore. There's one thing wrong with it I cannot. The feminists you are complaining about, have never had a relationship to feminism in general, equivalent to the relationship George Bush had with the USA as the president.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    But credit is where credit's due: Thanks you for actually attempting to make an argument this time, I am honored, truly - I bet winning the lottery doesn't feel that good, relatively to this lottery winners are a dime a dozen.
    I really hate this kind of bravado. You truly aren't giving credit where credit is due. You under-estimate my sincerity and my intelligence, and it only makes this a more pitiful affair for both of us.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

Similar Threads

  1. A new INFJ *waves!*
    By moonlit_reveries in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 01:14 AM
  2. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 PM
  3. The Ocean Waves: a NF introduction
    By music_educe in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. *waving*
    By Sandy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 08:29 PM
  5. Hello :D *waves*
    By Indranizia in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:40 AM

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