Yes, I must agree that feminists are probably the worst example of women wanting equal rights but not responsiblity. Blood nubs.
(Yes its me Cwagy)
About the comment on who builds the houses. I have helped do that before too. I used to work high steel construction, granted that was a couple of years ago. I had a base of around 200 feet in the air, I was welding and plasma cutting. I think I could build my own house just fine, may take me a while, since I've never done it, but it doesn't mean I can't do it.
I however, can not have children on my own (physically speaking) thus I would need a guy for it. Same goes for men, rawr, woman power? Other then that, everyone of course makes prejudgements based on race/sex. That is simply how it works.
It gets even more techincal when you get down to looks as well. No one could have guessed I could have worked high steel construction, simply because I don't look like the "typical" person that would have. It was fun, for a little while I did it.
plasma cutting? do you like use a laser to hack and slash the steel? I'm not being sarcastic I just really don't know...
its like this
7+ 3 = 5+ 5
no both sides of the equation are diffrent but there both equal. and men and women should be equal in responisbillity and rights. but that doesn't mean they should be the same
my parents got divorced when I was young. and so my mom works and raised 4 kids all on her own and is an amazing women. so can my mom work? yes. but should she have to? I personally don't think so. I think that men should bring home the bacon. and women should cook it. and then they can do the dishes together (I'm a big believer that men need to do more domestic home chores then they usually do) and everyone is happy and full of good yummy bacon.
on my example of the eqaution tho... techincally the women's side of the equation should require a Phd in advanced mathmatics and quantum space mechanics to figure out.. and a 4th grader could probobly figure out the mens...
Plasma = very hot gas Plasma cutting = cutting with plasma
I would assume that it's the same thing as welding.
AvengerX, why should men bring home the bacon, and why should women cook it? I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be the opposite.
I say, let people do whatever they want, regardless of race or sex. It doesn't matter how many men stay at home with the kids or how many women run for political office, as long as there are no barriers to entry based upon race or sex.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 24 2005, 10:13 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 24 2005, 10:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Plasma = very hot gas Plasma cutting = cutting with plasma
I would assume that it's the same thing as welding.
AvengerX, why should men bring home the bacon, and why should women cook it? I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be the opposite.
I say, let people do whatever they want, regardless of race or sex. It doesn't matter how many men stay at home with the kids or how many women run for political office, as long as there are no barriers to entry based upon race or sex. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> you know what your right. there should be a 100% no diffrence. in fact, I vote that when WWIII roles around we send in all the women, while were at it. lets get rid of seperate locker-rooms, bathrooms and of segregated rooms. because men and women should be a 100% the same. and why stop there? who wants to build two prisons one for each gender when we could house them all together... lets do that.
there are reasons why things aren't that way. men and women are built diffrently, their brains are diffrent, their bodies are diffrent, so why shouldn't their roles be diffrent? I'd say that 90% of the time women are better at staying at home to raise their children then men are. statistics show that more men shake babies to death then women do. just an example.
case n' point
look at NS.... gorges/lerks/fade/oni/skulks are all very diffrent. and they all play diffrent roles in the team. how many games would aliens win if the fade's stayed in hive to build DCs and the gorges did hit and run attacks on Marine start? NOT VERY MANY!
Women and men ARE different. We should differentiate between them for many things. We should not differentiate between them for the majority of things, however.
Prisons and locker rooms should be separated by sex. However, men shouldn't always be the ones to go to work, and women shouldn't always be the ones to stay home and care for the children. In these fields, there isn't any good reason to force, or even encourage, people to stay in the traditional role for their gender.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> However, men shouldn't always be the ones to go to work, and women shouldn't always be the ones to stay home and care for the children. In these fields, there isn't any good reason to force, or even encourage, people to stay in the traditional role for their gender. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Sky+Feb 25 2005, 03:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Feb 25 2005, 03:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> However, men shouldn't always be the ones to go to work, and women shouldn't always be the ones to stay home and care for the children. In these fields, there isn't any good reason to force, or even encourage, people to stay in the traditional role for their gender. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Apart from being anecdotal evidence, this is an example of averages. Sure, men, on average, are worse than women at raising children. However, as individuals, men can be just as good at raising children as women are, therefore there shouldn't be any discrimination preventing them from raising children, while their wives go to work.
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 25 2005, 03:07 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 25 2005, 03:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Sky+Feb 25 2005, 03:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Feb 25 2005, 03:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> However, men shouldn't always be the ones to go to work, and women shouldn't always be the ones to stay home and care for the children. In these fields, there isn't any good reason to force, or even encourage, people to stay in the traditional role for their gender. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Apart from being anecdotal evidence, this is an example of averages. Sure, men, on average, are worse than women at raising children. However, as individuals, men can be just as good at raising children as women are, therefore there shouldn't be any discrimination preventing them from raising children, while their wives go to work. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Except of course that they only way to break the stereotype is to force the opposite to happen, all the time, or else people will revert to traditional ways. Mayhaps instead of trying to destroy these traditions, you should recognize why they ARE traditions. In the past, women were discriminated against, but nowadays there's (comparatively) nothing preventing women from working at this time; no employer is idiotic enough to risk a hundred lawyers sueing his **** off for discriminating against women because he doesn't want to hire a woman. And the ones that are pig-headed enough are made examples of.
Yet how can we account for the much greater number of stay home moms compared to stay home dads, even though the path has been largely cleared for women to enter the workplace? Because, if only one parent can work, it's always going to be the dad (if he can get an equal or better job) because the mom is always more attached to the children, and better able to raise them. This is on average, but since no one in this argument is giving any thought to the small groups of women that work while their husbands stay home I assume that averages are more important.
And what makes women better at raising children is 1) the physical attachment to the child, and 2) the fact that men are expected our society to be emotionally uptight. This expectation has been around for hundreds if not thousands of years; you're not going to change it in the span of a generation or two, in fact I doubt it can be changed at all, ever. So railing against how men shouldn't be "discriminated against" as single dads is really wasting your breath; it's a fundamental aspect of our society that isn't being shaken up any time soon. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Sky+Feb 26 2005, 01:14 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Feb 26 2005, 01:14 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 25 2005, 03:07 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 25 2005, 03:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Sky+Feb 25 2005, 03:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Feb 25 2005, 03:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> However, men shouldn't always be the ones to go to work, and women shouldn't always be the ones to stay home and care for the children. In these fields, there isn't any good reason to force, or even encourage, people to stay in the traditional role for their gender. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Apart from being anecdotal evidence, this is an example of averages. Sure, men, on average, are worse than women at raising children. However, as individuals, men can be just as good at raising children as women are, therefore there shouldn't be any discrimination preventing them from raising children, while their wives go to work. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Except of course that they only way to break the stereotype is to force the opposite to happen, all the time, or else people will revert to traditional ways. Mayhaps instead of trying to destroy these traditions, you should recognize why they ARE traditions. In the past, women were discriminated against, but nowadays there's (comparatively) nothing preventing women from working at this time; no employer is idiotic enough to risk a hundred lawyers sueing his **** off for discriminating against women because he doesn't want to hire a woman. And the ones that are pig-headed enough are made examples of.
Yet how can we account for the much greater number of stay home moms compared to stay home dads, even though the path has been largely cleared for women to enter the workplace? Because, if only one parent can work, it's always going to be the dad (if he can get an equal or better job) because the mom is always more attached to the children, and better able to raise them. This is on average, but since no one in this argument is giving any thought to the small groups of women that work while their husbands stay home I assume that averages are more important.
And what makes women better at raising children is 1) the physical attachment to the child, and 2) the fact that men are expected our society to be emotionally uptight. This expectation has been around for hundreds if not thousands of years; you're not going to change it in the span of a generation or two, in fact I doubt it can be changed at all, ever. So railing against how men shouldn't be "discriminated against" as single dads is really wasting your breath; it's a fundamental aspect of our society that isn't being shaken up any time soon. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> As long as there is no discrimination against stay at home dads and working moms and there is no pressure to conform to traditional roles, then I have no problems.
Now, saying Traditions = Good, is wrong, but that's OT.
Racism... Well, I've lived in Pittsburgh, Brooklyn, and now Pawling. In Pittsburgh it was strange because a lot of the white folks there seemed like they would fit into the hick stereotype, but of course they didn't because Pittsburgh is a city. There were lots of black people and no one really cared about race.
In Brooklyn it was completely open and though there would be a lot of joking about it, no one was really racist.
Here, where it's about 98% whitebread racism is more prevalent than I've ever experienced firsthand. I doubt anyone would actually do anything to harm a minority person, but in the secluded area where I live there is a lot of resentment people harbor just because they are ignorant. It's ridiculous, but after a while of trying I just kind of accepted that fact that there's no changing the people around me. As long as no one gets hurt it doesn't really matter, because on the other hand there a lot of normal people here as well who actually know about the world.
On sexism, well, I can't really comment on it because I haven't experienced it - ever. Both my parents have worked most of my life, though my father took care of me between jobs when I was younger. Neither stayed home. I've not witnessed it in day to day life, either. My personal belief is that due to the differences between males and females guys are better at certain things and girls are better at others, but as with any generalization there are numerous exceptions. I'm not really sure, but I don't think I have any subconscious sexism or racism in me.
alright I thought I'd pop in a question to spice things up. do you think that America is ready for a non-cockasian president? and/or a female president?
I personally think that if a good non-cockasian ran for president then people would vote for him if he was the man for the job. course probably only if he was running for the rebulicans. if a democrat canadate ran... people might think he's just a crazed liberal and get scared of change. but a good conservative? naw... I think race would play little to no role in a presidential election.
however I don't think the world is ready for a women president. too many men how power ego's and not even all the women would vote for a female president (for multiple reasons) so even if a women was the best canadate for the job I don't think this country would be ready to elect her.
<!--QuoteBegin-AvengerX+Feb 26 2005, 12:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (AvengerX @ Feb 26 2005, 12:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> alright I thought I'd pop in a question to spice things up. do you think that America is ready for a non-cockasian president? and/or a female president? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Er...what do you mean by "cockasian"? Do you mean Bill Clinton?
<!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 26 2005, 01:27 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 26 2005, 01:27 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Sky+Feb 26 2005, 01:14 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Feb 26 2005, 01:14 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 25 2005, 03:07 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 25 2005, 03:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Sky+Feb 25 2005, 03:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sky @ Feb 25 2005, 03:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-theclam+Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (theclam @ Feb 25 2005, 02:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> However, men shouldn't always be the ones to go to work, and women shouldn't always be the ones to stay home and care for the children. In these fields, there isn't any good reason to force, or even encourage, people to stay in the traditional role for their gender. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Apart from being anecdotal evidence, this is an example of averages. Sure, men, on average, are worse than women at raising children. However, as individuals, men can be just as good at raising children as women are, therefore there shouldn't be any discrimination preventing them from raising children, while their wives go to work. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Except of course that they only way to break the stereotype is to force the opposite to happen, all the time, or else people will revert to traditional ways. Mayhaps instead of trying to destroy these traditions, you should recognize why they ARE traditions. In the past, women were discriminated against, but nowadays there's (comparatively) nothing preventing women from working at this time; no employer is idiotic enough to risk a hundred lawyers sueing his **** off for discriminating against women because he doesn't want to hire a woman. And the ones that are pig-headed enough are made examples of.
Yet how can we account for the much greater number of stay home moms compared to stay home dads, even though the path has been largely cleared for women to enter the workplace? Because, if only one parent can work, it's always going to be the dad (if he can get an equal or better job) because the mom is always more attached to the children, and better able to raise them. This is on average, but since no one in this argument is giving any thought to the small groups of women that work while their husbands stay home I assume that averages are more important.
And what makes women better at raising children is 1) the physical attachment to the child, and 2) the fact that men are expected our society to be emotionally uptight. This expectation has been around for hundreds if not thousands of years; you're not going to change it in the span of a generation or two, in fact I doubt it can be changed at all, ever. So railing against how men shouldn't be "discriminated against" as single dads is really wasting your breath; it's a fundamental aspect of our society that isn't being shaken up any time soon. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> As long as there is no discrimination against stay at home dads and working moms and there is no pressure to conform to traditional roles, then I have no problems.
Now, saying Traditions = Good, is wrong, but that's OT. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I didn't say traditions = good, I said that the 1) The tradition is there for a reason, and 2) The tradition isn't being broken anytime soon.
<!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+Feb 26 2005, 12:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely @ Feb 26 2005, 12:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-AvengerX+Feb 26 2005, 12:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (AvengerX @ Feb 26 2005, 12:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> alright I thought I'd pop in a question to spice things up. do you think that America is ready for a non-cockasian president? and/or a female president? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Er...what do you mean by "cockasian"? Do you mean Bill Clinton? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I mean someone who isn't white
<!--QuoteBegin-Snidely+Feb 27 2005, 04:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Snidely @ Feb 27 2005, 04:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Dude, I think you mean a "caucasian". A "cockasian" is an oriental man with a big package. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> ok my bad on the spelling. sometimes I don't have a lot of time for checks when I post. so forgive me for my terrible spell job.
racism is not going down hill; losers keep it alive and well
anybody can be racist. nationalism is different. be careful not to use too narrow and literal definitions for words. for instance, someone can be nationalist and racist, and some people will confuse them for only being nationalist. they are still losers, and it is not because they are nationalist
it seems racist people are of stupid and inferior quality, im experience
<!--QuoteBegin-mr drug lord+Feb 28 2005, 07:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (mr drug lord @ Feb 28 2005, 07:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> racism is not going down hill; losers keep it alive and well
anybody can be racist. nationalism is different. be careful not to use too narrow and literal definitions for words. for instance, someone can be nationalist and racist, and some people will confuse them for only being nationalist. they are still losers, and it is not because they are nationalist
it seems racist people are of stupid and inferior quality, im experience <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> your making fun of their Prejudices.... and using stereotypes to do so... sounds kinda hypocritical.... but maybe thats just me
<!--QuoteBegin-AvengerX+Mar 1 2005, 12:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (AvengerX @ Mar 1 2005, 12:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-mr drug lord+Feb 28 2005, 07:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (mr drug lord @ Feb 28 2005, 07:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> racism is not going down hill; losers keep it alive and well
anybody can be racist. nationalism is different. be careful not to use too narrow and literal definitions for words. for instance, someone can be nationalist and racist, and some people will confuse them for only being nationalist. they are still losers, and it is not because they are nationalist
it seems racist people are of stupid and inferior quality, im experience <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> your making fun of their Prejudices.... and using stereotypes to do so... sounds kinda hypocritical.... but maybe thats just me <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Making fun of racists/sexists/nationalists isn't hypocritical. He didn't even reference a particular group (say, poor rural white Southeners) at all.
Are you arguing that racists/sexists/nationalists aren't losers? Are you arguing that racism and nationalism aren't tied together?
Racism is a thing of the "not so far" past. Sexism is a rapidly growing problem in modern society in my eyes! This, to me, is the beginning of complete hatered between women and men. I am a male, so this may sound sexist but........women are trying to embark, or discourage mans natural instint to provide and to protect. What I'm trying to say is they want to "have the cake and eat every last bit of it!!" This is just "my" opinion, based on what "I" have witnessed they last four decades. I hope it's not the way it is, or going to be!! Sexism is the "worst virus" that mankind would have to battle! Just like racism, many battles were fought. It is almost non-exist now. The war on racism has been won!!! I think so!? But sexism will be the most heartbreaking, confusing, demoralizing wars of man vs. mankind ever. God help us! I will attach a small file to show just what I mean. This have gone either way.
<!--QuoteBegin-pyplyner+Mar 1 2005, 09:32 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (pyplyner @ Mar 1 2005, 09:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Racism is a thing of the "not so far" past. Sexism is a rapidly growing problem in modern society in my eyes! This, to me, is the beginning of complete hatered between women and men. I am a male, so this may sound sexist but........women are trying to embark, or discourage mans natural instint to provide and to protect. What I'm trying to say is they want to "have the cake and eat every last bit of it!!" This is just "my" opinion, based on what "I" have witnessed they last four decades. I hope it's not the way it is, or going to be!! Sexism is the "worst virus" that mankind would have to battle! Just like racism, many battles were fought. It is almost non-exist now. The war on racism has been won!!! I think so!? But sexism will be the most heartbreaking, confusing, demoralizing wars of man vs. mankind ever. God help us! I will attach a small file to show just what I mean. This have gone either way. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't know what you're on (to), but what are you talking about? Sexism is not THAT serious of a problem. Maybe you just read too much about bulldyke feminists with plans to take over the world? Because they will never succeed.
<!--QuoteBegin-TommyVercetti+Mar 1 2005, 11:12 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TommyVercetti @ Mar 1 2005, 11:12 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-pyplyner+Mar 1 2005, 09:32 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (pyplyner @ Mar 1 2005, 09:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Racism is a thing of the "not so far" past. Sexism is a rapidly growing problem in modern society in my eyes! This, to me, is the beginning of complete hatered between women and men. I am a male, so this may sound sexist but........women are trying to embark, or discourage mans natural instint to provide and to protect. What I'm trying to say is they want to "have the cake and eat every last bit of it!!" This is just "my" opinion, based on what "I" have witnessed they last four decades. I hope it's not the way it is, or going to be!! Sexism is the "worst virus" that mankind would have to battle! Just like racism, many battles were fought. It is almost non-exist now. The war on racism has been won!!! I think so!? But sexism will be the most heartbreaking, confusing, demoralizing wars of man vs. mankind ever. God help us! I will attach a small file to show just what I mean. This have gone either way. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't know what you're on (to), but what are you talking about? Sexism is not THAT serious of a problem. Maybe you just read too much about bulldyke feminists with plans to take over the world? Because they will never succeed. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Both these posts made me laugh pretty hard.
pyplyner seems to hang around radical feminists.
TommyVercetti seems to hang around radical anti-feminists.
Comments
(Yes its me Cwagy)
About the comment on who builds the houses. I have helped do that before too. I used to work high steel construction, granted that was a couple of years ago. I had a base of around 200 feet in the air, I was welding and plasma cutting. I think I could build my own house just fine, may take me a while, since I've never done it, but it doesn't mean I can't do it.
I however, can not have children on my own (physically speaking) thus I would need a guy for it. Same goes for men, rawr, woman power? Other then that, everyone of course makes prejudgements based on race/sex. That is simply how it works.
It gets even more techincal when you get down to looks as well. No one could have guessed I could have worked high steel construction, simply because I don't look like the "typical" person that would have. It was fun, for a little while I did it.
its like this
7+ 3 = 5+ 5
no both sides of the equation are diffrent but there both equal. and men and women should be equal in responisbillity and rights. but that doesn't mean they should be the same
my parents got divorced when I was young. and so my mom works and raised 4 kids all on her own and is an amazing women. so can my mom work? yes. but should she have to? I personally don't think so. I think that men should bring home the bacon. and women should cook it. and then they can do the dishes together (I'm a big believer that men need to do more domestic home chores then they usually do) and everyone is happy and full of good yummy bacon.
on my example of the eqaution tho... techincally the women's side of the equation should require a Phd in advanced mathmatics and quantum space mechanics to figure out.. and a 4th grader could probobly figure out the mens...
Plasma cutting = cutting with plasma
I would assume that it's the same thing as welding.
AvengerX, why should men bring home the bacon, and why should women cook it? I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be the opposite.
I say, let people do whatever they want, regardless of race or sex. It doesn't matter how many men stay at home with the kids or how many women run for political office, as long as there are no barriers to entry based upon race or sex.
Plasma cutting = cutting with plasma
I would assume that it's the same thing as welding.
AvengerX, why should men bring home the bacon, and why should women cook it? I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be the opposite.
I say, let people do whatever they want, regardless of race or sex. It doesn't matter how many men stay at home with the kids or how many women run for political office, as long as there are no barriers to entry based upon race or sex. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
you know what your right. there should be a 100% no diffrence. in fact, I vote that when WWIII roles around we send in all the women, while were at it. lets get rid of seperate locker-rooms, bathrooms and of segregated rooms. because men and women should be a 100% the same. and why stop there? who wants to build two prisons one for each gender when we could house them all together... lets do that.
there are reasons why things aren't that way. men and women are built diffrently, their brains are diffrent, their bodies are diffrent, so why shouldn't their roles be diffrent? I'd say that 90% of the time women are better at staying at home to raise their children then men are. statistics show that more men shake babies to death then women do. just an example.
case n' point
look at NS.... gorges/lerks/fade/oni/skulks are all very diffrent. and they all play diffrent roles in the team. how many games would aliens win if the fade's stayed in hive to build DCs and the gorges did hit and run attacks on Marine start? NOT VERY MANY!
Women and men ARE different. We should differentiate between them for many things. We should not differentiate between them for the majority of things, however.
Prisons and locker rooms should be separated by sex.
However, men shouldn't always be the ones to go to work, and women shouldn't always be the ones to stay home and care for the children. In these fields, there isn't any good reason to force, or even encourage, people to stay in the traditional role for their gender.
Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Apart from being anecdotal evidence, this is an example of averages. Sure, men, on average, are worse than women at raising children. However, as individuals, men can be just as good at raising children as women are, therefore there shouldn't be any discrimination preventing them from raising children, while their wives go to work.
Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Apart from being anecdotal evidence, this is an example of averages. Sure, men, on average, are worse than women at raising children. However, as individuals, men can be just as good at raising children as women are, therefore there shouldn't be any discrimination preventing them from raising children, while their wives go to work. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except of course that they only way to break the stereotype is to force the opposite to happen, all the time, or else people will revert to traditional ways. Mayhaps instead of trying to destroy these traditions, you should recognize why they ARE traditions. In the past, women were discriminated against, but nowadays there's (comparatively) nothing preventing women from working at this time; no employer is idiotic enough to risk a hundred lawyers sueing his **** off for discriminating against women because he doesn't want to hire a woman. And the ones that are pig-headed enough are made examples of.
Yet how can we account for the much greater number of stay home moms compared to stay home dads, even though the path has been largely cleared for women to enter the workplace? Because, if only one parent can work, it's always going to be the dad (if he can get an equal or better job) because the mom is always more attached to the children, and better able to raise them. This is on average, but since no one in this argument is giving any thought to the small groups of women that work while their husbands stay home I assume that averages are more important.
And what makes women better at raising children is 1) the physical attachment to the child, and 2) the fact that men are expected our society to be emotionally uptight. This expectation has been around for hundreds if not thousands of years; you're not going to change it in the span of a generation or two, in fact I doubt it can be changed at all, ever. So railing against how men shouldn't be "discriminated against" as single dads is really wasting your breath; it's a fundamental aspect of our society that isn't being shaken up any time soon. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Apart from being anecdotal evidence, this is an example of averages. Sure, men, on average, are worse than women at raising children. However, as individuals, men can be just as good at raising children as women are, therefore there shouldn't be any discrimination preventing them from raising children, while their wives go to work. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except of course that they only way to break the stereotype is to force the opposite to happen, all the time, or else people will revert to traditional ways. Mayhaps instead of trying to destroy these traditions, you should recognize why they ARE traditions. In the past, women were discriminated against, but nowadays there's (comparatively) nothing preventing women from working at this time; no employer is idiotic enough to risk a hundred lawyers sueing his **** off for discriminating against women because he doesn't want to hire a woman. And the ones that are pig-headed enough are made examples of.
Yet how can we account for the much greater number of stay home moms compared to stay home dads, even though the path has been largely cleared for women to enter the workplace? Because, if only one parent can work, it's always going to be the dad (if he can get an equal or better job) because the mom is always more attached to the children, and better able to raise them. This is on average, but since no one in this argument is giving any thought to the small groups of women that work while their husbands stay home I assume that averages are more important.
And what makes women better at raising children is 1) the physical attachment to the child, and 2) the fact that men are expected our society to be emotionally uptight. This expectation has been around for hundreds if not thousands of years; you're not going to change it in the span of a generation or two, in fact I doubt it can be changed at all, ever. So railing against how men shouldn't be "discriminated against" as single dads is really wasting your breath; it's a fundamental aspect of our society that isn't being shaken up any time soon. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
As long as there is no discrimination against stay at home dads and working moms and there is no pressure to conform to traditional roles, then I have no problems.
Now, saying Traditions = Good, is wrong, but that's OT.
In Brooklyn it was completely open and though there would be a lot of joking about it, no one was really racist.
Here, where it's about 98% whitebread racism is more prevalent than I've ever experienced firsthand. I doubt anyone would actually do anything to harm a minority person, but in the secluded area where I live there is a lot of resentment people harbor just because they are ignorant. It's ridiculous, but after a while of trying I just kind of accepted that fact that there's no changing the people around me. As long as no one gets hurt it doesn't really matter, because on the other hand there a lot of normal people here as well who actually know about the world.
On sexism, well, I can't really comment on it because I haven't experienced it - ever. Both my parents have worked most of my life, though my father took care of me between jobs when I was younger. Neither stayed home. I've not witnessed it in day to day life, either. My personal belief is that due to the differences between males and females guys are better at certain things and girls are better at others, but as with any generalization there are numerous exceptions. I'm not really sure, but I don't think I have any subconscious sexism or racism in me.
I personally think that if a good non-cockasian ran for president then people would vote for him if he was the man for the job. course probably only if he was running for the rebulicans. if a democrat canadate ran... people might think he's just a crazed liberal and get scared of change. but a good conservative? naw... I think race would play little to no role in a presidential election.
however I don't think the world is ready for a women president. too many men how power ego's and not even all the women would vote for a female president (for multiple reasons) so even if a women was the best canadate for the job I don't think this country would be ready to elect her.
Er...what do you mean by "cockasian"? Do you mean Bill Clinton?
Actually, and this is just from what I've seen, women are much better at raising children then men. This stems from most men's unemotional nature (compared to women at least), especially when it comes to showing love and nurturing. Children need their mother more than their father, imo.
Of course, this is coming from someone living with his divorced mom, so my view may have a bit of a slant to it. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Apart from being anecdotal evidence, this is an example of averages. Sure, men, on average, are worse than women at raising children. However, as individuals, men can be just as good at raising children as women are, therefore there shouldn't be any discrimination preventing them from raising children, while their wives go to work. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Except of course that they only way to break the stereotype is to force the opposite to happen, all the time, or else people will revert to traditional ways. Mayhaps instead of trying to destroy these traditions, you should recognize why they ARE traditions. In the past, women were discriminated against, but nowadays there's (comparatively) nothing preventing women from working at this time; no employer is idiotic enough to risk a hundred lawyers sueing his **** off for discriminating against women because he doesn't want to hire a woman. And the ones that are pig-headed enough are made examples of.
Yet how can we account for the much greater number of stay home moms compared to stay home dads, even though the path has been largely cleared for women to enter the workplace? Because, if only one parent can work, it's always going to be the dad (if he can get an equal or better job) because the mom is always more attached to the children, and better able to raise them. This is on average, but since no one in this argument is giving any thought to the small groups of women that work while their husbands stay home I assume that averages are more important.
And what makes women better at raising children is 1) the physical attachment to the child, and 2) the fact that men are expected our society to be emotionally uptight. This expectation has been around for hundreds if not thousands of years; you're not going to change it in the span of a generation or two, in fact I doubt it can be changed at all, ever. So railing against how men shouldn't be "discriminated against" as single dads is really wasting your breath; it's a fundamental aspect of our society that isn't being shaken up any time soon. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As long as there is no discrimination against stay at home dads and working moms and there is no pressure to conform to traditional roles, then I have no problems.
Now, saying Traditions = Good, is wrong, but that's OT. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I didn't say traditions = good, I said that the
1) The tradition is there for a reason, and
2) The tradition isn't being broken anytime soon.
Er...what do you mean by "cockasian"? Do you mean Bill Clinton? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I mean someone who isn't white
ok my bad on the spelling. sometimes I don't have a lot of time for checks when I post. so forgive me for my terrible spell job.
but anyways, back on topic
anybody can be racist. nationalism is different. be careful not to use too narrow and literal definitions for words. for instance, someone can be nationalist and racist, and some people will confuse them for only being nationalist. they are still losers, and it is not because they are nationalist
it seems racist people are of stupid and inferior quality, im experience
anybody can be racist. nationalism is different. be careful not to use too narrow and literal definitions for words. for instance, someone can be nationalist and racist, and some people will confuse them for only being nationalist. they are still losers, and it is not because they are nationalist
it seems racist people are of stupid and inferior quality, im experience <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
your making fun of their Prejudices.... and using stereotypes to do so... sounds kinda hypocritical.... but maybe thats just me
anybody can be racist. nationalism is different. be careful not to use too narrow and literal definitions for words. for instance, someone can be nationalist and racist, and some people will confuse them for only being nationalist. they are still losers, and it is not because they are nationalist
it seems racist people are of stupid and inferior quality, im experience <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
your making fun of their Prejudices.... and using stereotypes to do so... sounds kinda hypocritical.... but maybe thats just me <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Making fun of racists/sexists/nationalists isn't hypocritical. He didn't even reference a particular group (say, poor rural white Southeners) at all.
Are you arguing that racists/sexists/nationalists aren't losers? Are you arguing that racism and nationalism aren't tied together?
I don't know what you're on (to), but what are you talking about? Sexism is not THAT serious of a problem. Maybe you just read too much about bulldyke feminists with plans to take over the world? Because they will never succeed.
I don't know what you're on (to), but what are you talking about? Sexism is not THAT serious of a problem. Maybe you just read too much about bulldyke feminists with plans to take over the world? Because they will never succeed. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Both these posts made me laugh pretty hard.
pyplyner seems to hang around radical feminists.
TommyVercetti seems to hang around radical anti-feminists.