What War on Women?

[FlexibleCottonSwabs]

PikachuBaller

SoullessSingularity

PikachuBaller

I feel like life is a lot like the Starcraft II balancing systems.
Everything is fairly balanced, but each race hates the others, and thinks everyone else is stronger than you.
In reality, everything is fine and people need to shut up and play better.

Excuse me, what the holy ******** are you talking about. Have you at all, AT ALL, examined the fact that so much of culture we may consider "sprung out of the aether" or not attributed to any discriminatory bias is in fact part of an in-place looking-down upon other races/cultures/etc? For example, take the idea that a woman must give up her last name upon marriage. In fact, if she does not, people will treat her differently and possibly look down upon her. It's because there was a great idealism for a woman to be naturally more subservient to her man and must be "owned" by her husband, Even now, crossing that line usually sparks reactionary suspicion and questioning. This is part of American culture and it is acceptable to be suspicious of a woman for not giving up her "maiden" name. In fact, the idea of a nuclear family sprouts from the pseudoscience idea that a woman is naturally unsuitable for the "man" workforce. That idea still holds today and you're sitting on your a** thinking "yeah I think we're all equal". ******** hell.

Pretty sure that's not even a thing anymore.
Almost all the women I know are choosing to hyphenate their names, or not change their name at all, and it's not looked on weirdly.

It is so much of a thing you don't even know.

[PikachuBaller]

SoullessSingularity

PikachuBaller

SoullessSingularity

PikachuBaller

I feel like life is a lot like the Starcraft II balancing systems.
Everything is fairly balanced, but each race hates the others, and thinks everyone else is stronger than you.
In reality, everything is fine and people need to shut up and play better.

Excuse me, what the holy ******** are you talking about. Have you at all, AT ALL, examined the fact that so much of culture we may consider "sprung out of the aether" or not attributed to any discriminatory bias is in fact part of an in-place looking-down upon other races/cultures/etc? For example, take the idea that a woman must give up her last name upon marriage. In fact, if she does not, people will treat her differently and possibly look down upon her. It's because there was a great idealism for a woman to be naturally more subservient to her man and must be "owned" by her husband, Even now, crossing that line usually sparks reactionary suspicion and questioning. This is part of American culture and it is acceptable to be suspicious of a woman for not giving up her "maiden" name. In fact, the idea of a nuclear family sprouts from the pseudoscience idea that a woman is naturally unsuitable for the "man" workforce. That idea still holds today and you're sitting on your a** thinking "yeah I think we're all equal". ******** hell.

Pretty sure that's not even a thing anymore.
Almost all the women I know are choosing to hyphenate their names, or not change their name at all, and it's not looked on weirdly.

It is so much of a thing you don't even know.

Tldr.
I don't even really care.
I want to be an obedient house wife.
I'm fine with the way things are, and I'd still be fine if s**t was more likethe fifties.

[Yoshpet]

There are a bunch of legitimate complaints on both sides and that's what the real gender war is. The fact that men and women are trying to use public policy to duke it out and take control of each other.

Instead of taking the side of men or taking the side of women, we should be slapping the people who perpetuate this mischief and shutting down sexism wherever we see it. It's been my experience that both outspoken Feminists and "Masculists/MRAs" are exceptionally narcissistic and refuse to see any of the problems the other side faces.

Compromise is the only solution.

[Tanaie]

Hrm. I don't like the name "war on women", this isn't to undermine the bad stuff that does happen to women, but I wouldn't call it a "war" per say.

What society has built is something extremely unfortunate.
Women are still extremely sexualized, and are pretty much told from a young age that being a women is in fact, inferior to being a man. It's not as blunt as that, but it's certainly something were raised to believe.

When I was young, I always wanted to be "one of the guys". I often made myself distant from girly things because I thought it was dumb, and wasn't as cool as "boy things".
Not only that, but even when I was growing up, I was still lead to believe that women were "catty, over emotional, whiny, and drama queens". In my entire life I still haven't met a girl that fully meets that description, but it was something that always floated around at the back of my head. I always thought of myself as somehow superior by being friends with guys.

It's only now, at 20 years old do I realize how horribly wrong, and even disgusting that is.
It certainly wasn't my parents who taught me this, but rather the media and society.

If a women dresses like a man, nobody really gives a damn.

But if a man dresses like a women, everybody flips s**t about it. It's seen as degrading. Which is strong proof on how our culture views women.

And yet, men don't have an easy time either.
Men are taught that if they are to be TRUE men, they must be powerful, emotionless, intelligent, in control, and even violent.
This super machoness hurts everyone, men and women.
If a man doesn't act this way, then he's seen as less then a man, a women.
And don't even get me started about how we treat male rape victims.
Why do we always sweep that under the rug? UGH.

I knew a kid in elementary school who was called "chicken legs" because he was very thin. Can you believe that? In elementary school? 11 year old boys can hardly be masculine, so why is this pressure so forced on boys? Even at that age?! It pisses me off.

This society we live in is so...Sad. Such a hyper sexual and violent place we live.

[Jessi Danger]

SoullessSingularity

PikachuBaller

I feel like life is a lot like the Starcraft II balancing systems.
Everything is fairly balanced, but each race hates the others, and thinks everyone else is stronger than you.
In reality, everything is fine and people need to shut up and play better.

Excuse me, what the holy ******** are you talking about. Have you at all, AT ALL, examined the fact that so much of culture we may consider "sprung out of the aether" or not attributed to any discriminatory bias is in fact part of an in-place looking-down upon other races/cultures/etc? For example, take the idea that a woman must give up her last name upon marriage. In fact, if she does not, people will treat her differently and possibly look down upon her. It's because there was a great idealism for a woman to be naturally more subservient to her man and must be "owned" by her husband, Even now, crossing that line usually sparks reactionary suspicion and questioning. This is part of American culture and it is acceptable to be suspicious of a woman for not giving up her "maiden" name. In fact, the idea of a nuclear family sprouts from the pseudoscience idea that a woman is naturally unsuitable for the "man" workforce. That idea still holds today and you're sitting on your a** thinking "yeah I think we're all equal". ******** hell.

That is a novel interpretation of an ancient custom.

Actually, Culture does at some point spring out of the aether. At some point humans did not have culture or society, yet it appeared. We are animals after all, at some point we developed these ideas where they did not exist prior.

The idea that a woman must give up her last name can be interpreted any way you wish. The idea may or may not involve subservience but it does involve the idea that she is leaving her old family for a new one. That is at the very least what ancient people said about the practice. And I happen to take them at their word.

Also the nuclear family is way new compared to the practice of taking your husbands name.

We are all equal under the eyes of the law.

[FlexibleCottonSwabs]

Jessi Danger

SoullessSingularity

PikachuBaller

I feel like life is a lot like the Starcraft II balancing systems.
Everything is fairly balanced, but each race hates the others, and thinks everyone else is stronger than you.
In reality, everything is fine and people need to shut up and play better.

Excuse me, what the holy ******** are you talking about. Have you at all, AT ALL, examined the fact that so much of culture we may consider "sprung out of the aether" or not attributed to any discriminatory bias is in fact part of an in-place looking-down upon other races/cultures/etc? For example, take the idea that a woman must give up her last name upon marriage. In fact, if she does not, people will treat her differently and possibly look down upon her. It's because there was a great idealism for a woman to be naturally more subservient to her man and must be "owned" by her husband, Even now, crossing that line usually sparks reactionary suspicion and questioning. This is part of American culture and it is acceptable to be suspicious of a woman for not giving up her "maiden" name. In fact, the idea of a nuclear family sprouts from the pseudoscience idea that a woman is naturally unsuitable for the "man" workforce. That idea still holds today and you're sitting on your a** thinking "yeah I think we're all equal". ******** hell.

That is a novel interpretation of an ancient custom.

Actually, Culture does at some point spring out of the aether. At some point humans did not have culture or society, yet it appeared. We are animals after all, at some point we developed these ideas where they did not exist prior.

The idea that a woman must give up her last name can be interpreted any way you wish. The idea may or may not involve subservience but it does involve the idea that she is leaving her old family for a new one. That is at the very least what ancient people said about the practice. And I happen to take them at their word.

Also the nuclear family is way new compared to the practice of taking your husbands name.

We are all equal under the eyes of the law.

Don't give me that "culture does at some point spring out of the aether" when we're talking about the culture today that supports treating women as more of a posession than anything else, not the first nations recorded in history.

Now, "interpreted in any way I wish" ignores the reality of the situation. It isn't an "interpretation". It was a ******** fact. It still is a ******** fact. No amount of nicey-wicey bullshit is gonna change what it is. "interpretation" my sweaty balls.

[deep damage]

The only war on women is that they are treated so promptly that they have nothing to complain about and that they make s**t up

[Lychee Bae]

What you see here right now ladies and gentle men is the conflict theory in action.

[Jessi Danger]

SoullessSingularity

Jessi Danger

SoullessSingularity

PikachuBaller

I feel like life is a lot like the Starcraft II balancing systems.
Everything is fairly balanced, but each race hates the others, and thinks everyone else is stronger than you.
In reality, everything is fine and people need to shut up and play better.

Excuse me, what the holy ******** are you talking about. Have you at all, AT ALL, examined the fact that so much of culture we may consider "sprung out of the aether" or not attributed to any discriminatory bias is in fact part of an in-place looking-down upon other races/cultures/etc? For example, take the idea that a woman must give up her last name upon marriage. In fact, if she does not, people will treat her differently and possibly look down upon her. It's because there was a great idealism for a woman to be naturally more subservient to her man and must be "owned" by her husband, Even now, crossing that line usually sparks reactionary suspicion and questioning. This is part of American culture and it is acceptable to be suspicious of a woman for not giving up her "maiden" name. In fact, the idea of a nuclear family sprouts from the pseudoscience idea that a woman is naturally unsuitable for the "man" workforce. That idea still holds today and you're sitting on your a** thinking "yeah I think we're all equal". ******** hell.

That is a novel interpretation of an ancient custom.

Actually, Culture does at some point spring out of the aether. At some point humans did not have culture or society, yet it appeared. We are animals after all, at some point we developed these ideas where they did not exist prior.

The idea that a woman must give up her last name can be interpreted any way you wish. The idea may or may not involve subservience but it does involve the idea that she is leaving her old family for a new one. That is at the very least what ancient people said about the practice. And I happen to take them at their word.

Also the nuclear family is way new compared to the practice of taking your husbands name.

We are all equal under the eyes of the law.

Don't give me that "culture does at some point spring out of the aether" when we're talking about the culture today that supports treating women as more of a posession than anything else, not the first nations recorded in history.

Now, "interpreted in any way I wish" ignores the reality of the situation. It isn't an "interpretation". It was a ******** fact. It still is a ******** fact. No amount of nicey-wicey bullshit is gonna change what it is. "interpretation" my sweaty balls.

The first nations recorded in history are so distant and ancient that we know so little about them, even less about the ones that left no writing about themselves.

Our culture treats women as possessions? That doesn't seem to be my understanding of it. Perhaps you wish to see it that way, thus you see it that way?

[Face Lost]

I think most of this comes from a subtle cultural attitude towards woman. As a woman, I think it would be easy to feel vulnerable, and see more things threatening or biased against your gender.

The other day, I was on a bus listening to this guy from my college talk to his friend on the phone. He said something like this;
"There aren't many girls here, it sucks. I was talking to one the other day who was kind of hot, and she told me she was married, so I got the hell out of there."

Now there were other women on the bus, and no one else was walking. Could you imagine? This s**t happens all the time. How can you be a woman and have any faith in men who try to talk to you knowing that this guy could have been talking to you and you wouldn't even know those thoughts were in his head about you? He finds out you have a boyfriend and you instantly become worthless to him.

Obviously, this isn't every guy, but if I were a woman, I wouldn't trust any man at face value. I think women aren't wrong to think there is a war on them. Have you seen the s**t that happens on the internet if a woman even talks about sexism?
Personally, I think men are afraid of women to a degree, specifically with rejection and the power with that they seldom use.

As a man who isn't sexist, it would be easy to say there is no sexism against women anymore, at least not to an alarming degree, and in ways, that's true, but in other ways, that's completely wrong.

[Knobist]

Face Lost

I think most of this comes from a subtle cultural attitude towards woman. As a woman, I think it would be easy to feel vulnerable, and see more things threatening or biased against your gender.

The other day, I was on a bus listening to this guy from my college talk to his friend on the phone. He said something like this;
"There aren't many girls here, it sucks. I was talking to one the other day who was kind of hot, and she told me she was married, so I got the hell out of there."

Now there were other women on the bus, and no one else was walking. Could you imagine? This s**t happens all the time. How can you be a woman and have any faith in men who try to talk to you knowing that this guy could have been talking to you and you wouldn't even know those thoughts were in his head about you? He finds out you have a boyfriend and you instantly become worthless to him.

Obviously, this isn't every guy, but if I were a woman, I wouldn't trust any man at face value. I think women aren't wrong to think there is a war on them. Have you seen the s**t that happens on the internet if a woman even talks about sexism?
Personally, I think men are afraid of women to a degree, specifically with rejection and the power with that they seldom use.

As a man who isn't sexist, it would be easy to say there is no sexism against women anymore, at least not to an alarming degree, and in ways, that's true, but in other ways, that's completely wrong.

I don't fear women, I just don't want to waste my time! There's loads of pretty girls out there. If i'm selecting one woman I think she should be worth the time. Time is money.

[Where Pretty Lies Perish]

Riviera de la Mancha

Like I said, if you take issues with this statute of limitations, then you take issue with all statutes of limitations. For example, if someone steals something from me, I make no claim against them, and the statute of limitations runs for the theft, I am indeed still the victim of the theft. Everyday they have that item, I am being victimized. The same analogy works for all crimes with statutes of limitation.

When someone steals from a person once, the crime is considered to have occurred at the time of the "transfer". With ongoing fraud, the victim (the alleged father, in this case), is still being actively stolen from. Every child support check is further stealing. When someone steals your car, yes, it affects you afterword, but no crime is being actively committed continually.

Quote:

... I don't know if you are new to this whole American republican party platform thing, but, in case you are, its the official party position to be against abortion. And when the stated flagship members of your party hold a position, it certainly looks alot stronger than guys raping other guys for their own reasons on their own choice.

Stronger in what way?

Quote:

... I don't know if you were also present for the birds and the bees talk, but that is a two-way street and hardly 'self-imposed'. On your supposed evidence of a war on men, those are all products of male-created gender roles for themselves.

It is both a two-way street and self-imposed. Something need not be done alone for the outcome to be self-imposed. Obviously, two people (or an artificial stand-in for two people) are needed for a pregnancy. But the women is either actively trying to get pregnant, or at least accepts the very real possibility of getting pregnant. Now, obviously rape isn't self-imposed, but that is a minority of cases in which a woman seeks maternity leave. Men's gender roles are no more male-created than women's gender roles are female-created.

[Where Pretty Lies Perish]

Tanaie

What society has built is something extremely unfortunate.
Women are still extremely sexualized, and are pretty much told from a young age that being a women is in fact, inferior to being a man. It's not as blunt as that, but it's certainly something were raised to believe.

No they aren't.

Quote:

It's only now, at 20 years old do I realize how horribly wrong, and even disgusting that is.
It certainly wasn't my parents who taught me this, but rather the media and society.

Baloney. Give me an example of pro-male bias in the media. And society is just a collection of people. To the extent that society taught you that, it is only because that is how people feel. Who are you to tell them they are wrong?

Quote:

If a women dresses like a man, nobody really gives a damn.

Not really true; she is usually called a dyke.

Quote:

But if a man dresses like a women, everybody flips s**t about it. It's seen as degrading. Which is strong proof on how our culture views women.

Women are so self-absorbed. A man dresses like a women and is shunned, but women, not the man, are still somehow the victim. The real reason man are shunned for dressing like women? It makes them look unmanly, and therefore physically weak. Physically weak men are less able to defend the group, which biologically is man's prime directive. To the extent that women who dress manly are less looked down upon, it is because dressing manly might be slightly less attractive, but it isn't an indication of failure to bear children.

Quote:

And yet, men don't have an easy time either.
Men are taught that if they are to be TRUE men, they must be powerful, emotionless, intelligent, in control, and even violent.
This super machoness hurts everyone, men and women.

It can be bad, but it can also be very good.

Quote:

If a man doesn't act this way, then he's seen as less then a man, a women.
And don't even get me started about how we treat male rape victims.
Why do we always sweep that under the rug? UGH.

I agree with you there.

Quote:

I knew a kid in elementary school who was called "chicken legs" because he was very thin. Can you believe that? In elementary school? 11 year old boys can hardly be masculine, so why is this pressure so forced on boys? Even at that age?! It pisses me off.

This society we live in is so...Sad. Such a hyper sexual and violent place we live.

It's biological, not cultural.

[Riviera de la Mancha]

Where Pretty Lies Perish

Riviera de la Mancha

Like I said, if you take issues with this statute of limitations, then you take issue with all statutes of limitations. For example, if someone steals something from me, I make no claim against them, and the statute of limitations runs for the theft, I am indeed still the victim of the theft. Everyday they have that item, I am being victimized. The same analogy works for all crimes with statutes of limitation.

When someone steals from a person once, the crime is considered to have occurred at the time of the "transfer". With ongoing fraud, the victim (the alleged father, in this case), is still being actively stolen from. Every child support check is further stealing. When someone steals your car, yes, it affects you afterword, but no crime is being actively committed continually.

Quote:

... I don't know if you are new to this whole American republican party platform thing, but, in case you are, its the official party position to be against abortion. And when the stated flagship members of your party hold a position, it certainly looks alot stronger than guys raping other guys for their own reasons on their own choice.

Stronger in what way?

Quote:

... I don't know if you were also present for the birds and the bees talk, but that is a two-way street and hardly 'self-imposed'. On your supposed evidence of a war on men, those are all products of male-created gender roles for themselves.

It is both a two-way street and self-imposed. Something need not be done alone for the outcome to be self-imposed. Obviously, two people (or an artificial stand-in for two people) are needed for a pregnancy. But the women is either actively trying to get pregnant, or at least accepts the very real possibility of getting pregnant. Now, obviously rape isn't self-imposed, but that is a minority of cases in which a woman seeks maternity leave. Men's gender roles are no more male-created than women's gender roles are female-created.

Not under your notion.

If paternity fraud continues with each payment made and did not stop the moment when the judge, under a falsehood, awarded the judgement, then theft continues each month, each day, each second, the thief continues to have possession of the item. For continued profits from stolen goods is a continuation of the theft itself. Once the judgement is rendered, if we buy your new argument, the theft has stopped, because, by law, its no longer theft. Its a court ordered payment system which the law recognizes as legitimate.

No matter how you slice it brah, the blade swings both ways. Either you have a problem in general with any and all statutes of limitations, or you don't. They are all premised on the same notion- at some point, you have to cut off liability. If the victim, in this case the wronged father, doesn't want to bring an action or contest it in any way, then that's his bag.

Much stronger in that it at least begins to take on the veneer of a organized and focused movement or war. When you have a group and noted leaders expose a position, in unison, or as a recognized platform, it looks alot more like an agenda than some dudes independently and without concert raping some guys in jail. That prison rape exists seems at this point to be your only 'evidence' or a war on men.

... Yeah brah, there's this thing called a dictionary. You might want to look at it.

It is a logical absurdity to say something is both a two way street and self-imposed. That's like alleging some shape is both a sphere and a square; it just logically can't happen. Pregnancy is, from sheer biology, a two-way process. Unless of course you are about to argue that the female species can asexually reproduce. Or take a Republican senator's position and argue that the female body has "ways of shutting that whole thing down" if a woman doesn't want to get pregnant. Either way, I can't wait for the show.

[Where Pretty Lies Perish]

Face Lost

Now there were other women on the bus, and no one else was walking. Could you imagine? This s**t happens all the time. How can you be a woman and have any faith in men who try to talk to you knowing that this guy could have been talking to you and you wouldn't even know those thoughts were in his head about you? He finds out you have a boyfriend and you instantly become worthless to him.

Are you ******** with me? The vast majority of guys will only go out of their way to talk to a girl in order to sleep with her. And, no, it's not because "men are pigs", it is because men are programmed to go out and seek mates. Why would he bother finding random girls to talk to and merely befriend? Biologically, that's a waste of time. Think about it . . . would you go out of your way to merely befriend a guy (if you are a girl; vice versa if you are a guy)? No. Sure, you may end up befriending one through some mutual interest, or close proximity, but you wouldn't go talk to a stranger in hopes of befriending them.

You become biologically worthless to him, yes. It's very simple. Men actively seek sex in a relationship, because women are the gatekeepers of it. Women seek compassion in relationships, because of its importance in raising a family. If the guy continued is friendship with the married woman, she would benefit from the relationship from his compassion, but he would receive no benefit in return. So what is in it for him?

Quote:

Obviously, this isn't every guy, but if I were a woman, I wouldn't trust any man at face value. I think women aren't wrong to think there is a war on them. Have you seen the s**t that happens on the internet if a woman even talks about sexism?

It's just about every guy. Yeah, everyone mocks her, am I right? That's because most of what qualifies as sexism now is ridiculous. Case in point, your story of the guy on the bus.

Quote:

Personally, I think men are afraid of women to a degree, specifically with rejection and the power with that they seldom use.

Exactly, this is why the guy on the bus had to hide his motives. If he would have said plainly that he was sexually interested in her, she would have (presumably) rejected him because she is married. In pretended to befriend her, he lowers greatly the risk of outright rejection.

Quote:

As a man who isn't sexist, it would be easy to say there is no sexism against women anymore, at least not to an alarming degree, and in ways, that's true, but in other ways, that's completely wrong.

???