Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Dude, I'm not going to argue with you.
That would only give your illusion of superiority a veneer of validity.
You can't. Typical of those who start with ad homs.
It's not an illusion....
It's about seeing things as they are lol.
You'll have to wait a minute; I'm still relishing the post before yours.
I think women are more educated in the US too.
Looks like men are less educated than women in Australia.
You don't care for who suffers most, only who complains loudest.
Now why doesn't that work for the father who wanted to get work as a typist?
I think I was quite clear that it was the morality that Christianity claims as its own.Saying that "morality was around before religion" doesn't actually say very much. What kind of "morality" was around before religion? I'm going to need more than the Shook article you used as a form of support to more fully get the gist of what you're attempting to communicate.
Ah, so you think that trans kids saying they are trans is them putting themselves in danger?Oh darn. I'm sure they thought they could fool you. Cause all those Bills forbade trans adults from doing anything at all. Reading the article again...... Oh wait. I was right after all. They aren't doing that. They are keeping the kids safe.
I think I was quite clear that it was the morality that Christianity claims as its own.
In my post 1212, I stated, "I do not think Christianity came up with these values. Rather, I think society came up with them, and when Christianity moved in, it took them, claimed it had invented them, and took credit for morality that had existed long before Christianity."
So please don't act as though I was unclear when I was actually very specific in what I was talking about.
Getting back to my original response to this thread...
I disagree. I do not think Christianity came up with these values. Rather, I think society came up with them, and when Christianity moved in, it took them, claimed it had invented them, and took credit for morality that had existed long before Christianity.
Well, I went back several posts and discovered that you were not only mistaken, but that mistake was a deeply cynical, self indulgent worldview, wrapped in a tortilla of mysoginism and male privilege, bereft of any hint of side dishes of logc, rationality or humanity. So, that leaves it with you making assertions you believe self evident, yet are unable to demonstrate in a rational and scientific fashion. Kind of leaves you out their in the wilderness howling with the wolves.That's just an extension of the previous point made about feminism's gains being granted by men. Go back a few posts to follow the progression. I'm not repeating the whole argument for you.
If George Orwell had not already laid the groundwork for the concept of doublespeak, your corruption of the word protection would require its introduction now.Protection. Not subjugated...protected. Sheltered. Cared for. Privileged.
Interesting. So, if men continue to declare their superiority, seek to exclude women from the upper echelons of society in general and the workplace in particular, insist on "protecting" the poor dears, and generally patronise them, then feminism will never achieve its aims. Wow! Such incisive logic. Thank you for making my point for me. The enforcement that exists and that is challenged by feminism is the insistence that women are second class citizens requiring male protection and they better dang well take that protection and like it. (And have the children, raise them, keep the house clean, produce meals on time, etc.)Edit- if my argument is that the entirety of feminism relies upon the will of men to defend and enforce it, literally the worst thing you can do is come riding in like a white knight...you're just making my point for me.
Sorry but no evidence shoes that. You can respect the hardship they are going through without harming them with medical intervention. The ones that are truly dysphoric. Not the other ones who are just struggling with growing up. There is no evidence that states if you don't medically transition them they will commit suicide at a higher rate.Ah, so you think that trans kids saying they are trans is them putting themselves in danger?
The evidence is overwhelming that not respecting trans kids leads to increased depression and suicide. Is that what you call "safe"?
You mean like the leftists idolatrous love of human power ie the force of government,? When will they realize it's a mistake?The sooner western Christians realize they're idolatrous love of human power, i.e the force of government, is a mistake, the better.
There is no doubt that women can't do some of mens work. Or they can't do it as well. There's no shame in admitting that. Men and women are different. That's a good thing. We don't want them exactly the same. My wife is a much better mother than me. I'm a much better dad than her. Now that doesn't mean all women can't do all the things men can do. That would be silly. Sure there are some women who can do what a man can. They are out there. But by and large they can't. And men can't give birth no matter what the trans have to say.You want some cheese with that whine? It's not about either one of us. It's about seeing things as they are. You say women can't do men's work. That's just stupid. I know different. It ain't a secret. You want to be treated with respect? Don't be ignorant.
Well, I went back several posts and discovered that you were not only mistaken,
wrapped in a tortilla of mysoginism and male privilege
Interesting. So, if men continue to declare their superiority,
seek to exclude women from the upper echelons of society in general and the workplace in particular,
Mhm. Oh wait....you didn't actually read anything I wrote did you?insist on "protecting" the poor dears, and generally patronise them, then feminism will never achieve its aims.
Wow! Such incisive logic. Thank you for making my point for me.
The enforcement that exists and that is challenged by feminism is the insistence that women are second class citizens requiring male protection and they better dang well take that protection and like it. (And have the children, raise them, keep the house clean, produce meals on time, etc.)
Sir Andy Murray, former world number 1 tennis player, winner of four grand slams and two Olympic Gold medals was being interviewed in 2018(?) after being knocked out of Wimbledon in the quarter finals by the American Sam Querry. He was asked by a reporter what significance he attached to Querry being the first American to reach the semi-finals of a major since 2009. Murray immediately corrected him "Male player", thereby politely reminding the reporter of the repeated appearance in finals and semi-finals by the Williams sisters throughout that interval. That's not the act of a White Knight, that's just a person reminding another person to respect the achievements and the capabilities of other people irrespective of their sex.
Now your comment above was not directed at me, but superficially might seem to be applicable to me, for the record.
I am not supporting or defending @Paidiske. For one, she doesn't need such support. Rather I am defending her arguments and I am doing that for purely selfish reasons:
- I think when the general aims of feminism are attained society will be a better place for my children and grandchildren (and everybody else, but as I said I'm primarily motivated by personal interests.)
- I think the patriarchal and patronising nonsense you espouse should be called out and doing so gives me a (small) measure of satisfaction.
The point being made was that there are too many assumptions being made in that story. One, that typing was the job for the woman and not engineering or mechanic and that the father would not be involved in bringing up the child.The fathers role and his contribution is minimal concerning giving birth,
Ten commandments? Anything in the bible that says 'thou shalt' or 'thou shalt not'?And what precisely is the "morality" that Christianity claims as its "own"?
It was a true example and in that example it happened to be typing.The point being made was that there are too many assumptions being made in that story. One, that typing was the job for the woman and not engineering or mechanic and that the father would not be involved in bringing up the child.
Look, if you want to argue that men are, on average, physically stronger than women, that's true enough (although no reason to pigeonhole anyone). But if you want to argue that men are better leaders, (where leadership is the effective use of a mix of skills, none of them particularly about physicality) then you'd better come with evidence.By and large men are the better leaders. That's not to there are no good women leaders.
At the time when women knew their place in the workplace. Brush up your Pittman and it's the typing pool for you, my girl. Please wear a dress and not too much makeup, thanks. And I take my tea black, no sugar.It was a true example and in that example it happened to be typing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?