True dat! Mad props! Grok'd!
Egalitarianism vs Femnism
- Thread starter ElectricFetus
- Start date
True dat! Mad props! Grok'd!
I can only comment on the first sentence because i do not adhere to labels.
ElectricFetus stated: "Most people will agree with the idea that everyone should be treated equally, will agree that obsession or subjugation of anyone for reasons other than criminality (race,creed,gender) is wrong."
Comment: Actually, now that i think about it, subjugation is not what one thinks about when they contemplate equality. It can be a part of it, of course, but i just dont understand the two words chosen. Let us go with subjugation, we can overlook that, BUT what do you mean be obsession?
Hell...for that matter, disequality can be the complete opposite of obsession.
(Barnabas Notwithstanding)
It's not that I disagree with you; but the flip side is expecting men to pay a higher cost:benefit ratio. And from there we're down a rabbit hole. Go ask Alice.
Or maybe not.
Then again, it's not like every pregnancy in these United States is unplanned.
Yeah. Rabbit hole. And that ain't a vagina joke.
ElectricFetus said:
It's not that I disagree with you; but the flip side is expecting men to pay a higher cost:benefit ratio. And from there we're down a rabbit hole. Go ask Alice.
Or maybe not.
Then again, it's not like every pregnancy in these United States is unplanned.
Yeah. Rabbit hole. And that ain't a vagina joke.
That a minor cost really, in fact if we all pitch in just a little then people with far more devastating problems then "owning a uterus-vagina" can have a chance at a happy productive life. Especially rich people, some of whom could pitch in billions of dollars to benefit others with virtually no harm to their own happiness.
If I treated an out of shape young man, like he was an equal to a world class sprinter (in terms of running), this would meet the criteria of treating both as equals. But in the world of observational data this would be based on an irrational illusion since it defies observational data. We would need everyone pretending, while requiring you ignore your common sense. To deal with this problem of common sense, we may need to set up laws to make the observational data appear to better equate with the irrational illusion.
We will say men and women are equal, and then we make laws to adjust the observational data so the fantasy appears real. To me real equality is when no adjustment of reality is needed and common sense agrees with the claim.
We will say men and women are equal, and then we make laws to adjust the observational data so the fantasy appears real. To me real equality is when no adjustment of reality is needed and common sense agrees with the claim.
Right. And that's a fair way to do it.
No, most people have no trouble treating different people equally. Fat or skinny, black or white, woman or man - TREATING them the same is easy for most people. Of course that does not mean they are the same. It just means they are TREATED the same.
Men and women have the same rights. We treat them equally. They are not the same.
After much contemplation I've come up with a test to see if you truly believe in gender equality!
Its very simple, just take any scenario & ask your self "if Ћ genders were reversed, would this situation's moral value change?"
For example say you have a man & a women in an elevator, they don't know each other, other then that they have been talking with each other publicly for several hours, now Ћ man politely propositions that Ћ women comes back to his hotel room for coffee & further discussion, is there anything wrong with that? Now ask if all else was Ћ same but Ћ genders were reversed would it be just as wrong or right? If a women asked a man that question, in an elevator, would it be equally right or wrong? I think they are equally wrong, although their wrongness is on Ћ level of awkward situation, so not really wrong at all.
That scenario by Ћ way was Ћ famed "elevatorgate" incident that ripped Ћ Atheism+ movement from Atheism in 2011... yep, diffidence on opinion on if its acceptable or not for a man to politely proposition a women for coffee & private discussion at his hotel room caused a massive internet war.
Now if that scenario sounds to dam stupid for you, try anything else. Just reverse Ћ genders & see if it moral value changes for you. If Ћ moral value changes you do not truly believe in equality between Ћ genders, if it remain Ћ same you probably do truly believe in gender equality, its really that simple.
Let try some:
"A women slaps her husband for evidence that he cheated on her" = "A man slaps his wife for evidence that he cheated on her"?
I find them equally wrong: you should not hit other people, EVER... well I guess unless being attacked. I don't know about corporal punishment with children either.
“A women become a homemaker & focuses on raising Ћ kids” = “A man becomes a homemaker & focuses on raising Ћ kids”?
Hey that what they want.
“A women becomes a coal miner because she finds Ћ work surprisingly rewarding” = “A man becomes a coal miner because he finds Ћ work surprisingly rewarding”?
Again can't see Ћ problem, are you getting Ћ idea?
Its very simple, just take any scenario & ask your self "if Ћ genders were reversed, would this situation's moral value change?"
For example say you have a man & a women in an elevator, they don't know each other, other then that they have been talking with each other publicly for several hours, now Ћ man politely propositions that Ћ women comes back to his hotel room for coffee & further discussion, is there anything wrong with that? Now ask if all else was Ћ same but Ћ genders were reversed would it be just as wrong or right? If a women asked a man that question, in an elevator, would it be equally right or wrong? I think they are equally wrong, although their wrongness is on Ћ level of awkward situation, so not really wrong at all.
That scenario by Ћ way was Ћ famed "elevatorgate" incident that ripped Ћ Atheism+ movement from Atheism in 2011... yep, diffidence on opinion on if its acceptable or not for a man to politely proposition a women for coffee & private discussion at his hotel room caused a massive internet war.
Now if that scenario sounds to dam stupid for you, try anything else. Just reverse Ћ genders & see if it moral value changes for you. If Ћ moral value changes you do not truly believe in equality between Ћ genders, if it remain Ћ same you probably do truly believe in gender equality, its really that simple.
Let try some:
"A women slaps her husband for evidence that he cheated on her" = "A man slaps his wife for evidence that he cheated on her"?
I find them equally wrong: you should not hit other people, EVER... well I guess unless being attacked. I don't know about corporal punishment with children either.
“A women become a homemaker & focuses on raising Ћ kids” = “A man becomes a homemaker & focuses on raising Ћ kids”?
Hey that what they want.
“A women becomes a coal miner because she finds Ћ work surprisingly rewarding” = “A man becomes a coal miner because he finds Ћ work surprisingly rewarding”?
Again can't see Ћ problem, are you getting Ћ idea?
Last edited: