Women's forum

Post Reply New Topic

Interesting that this is your response to when you were previously being defensive. Sorry, but these tactics don't work on me. I'm not lacking in logic. I already said that some men are predatory, as are some women.. and that isn't an excuse to ban all men from something, the same as you wouldn't ban an entire race from something because someone was attacked by a member of that race.

On another note, it also doesn't work to say that everyone who doesn't agree about the forums or has something against sexism is insecure or a misogynist. Some of these people who who have commented that they are against it, happen to be female, by the way.

As for what the benefit would be of men being able to read the women's forum... little to nothing, honestly. There would also be little benefit to men not being able to read it.. Just a false sense of security and the satisfaction that you got what you wanted. Private conversations are the best approach for those deeper things that you're concerned about someone predatory reading online. Which predatory males doesn't seem to even be the issue, but rather males, in general.. which I'm sorry... is sexist.

I think the big difference here is that some of you see binary gender, while some of us don't. I see a bunch of individual humans with their own life stories, interests, and opinions.

For most of my life, I've heard from people how the two genders don't understand each other. This way of thinking is very outdated.. And it seems that no one has stopped to think if they'd stop dividing the two groups up so much, that just maybe there would be a lot more understanding between the two. I'm of the opinion that the less segregation we have in this world, the better.. Maybe if we do away with it altogether, we'll all grow a new respect for one another.

Wow, I can't believe I have to explain this.

I thought you were talking about the OP, just consenting to posting. This was a moderator decision, it would be good feedback to set a new protocol.

legally speaking

WrongPlanet.net reserves full rights to information and content posted anywhere within the
wrongplanet.net domain by any of its visitors, members, and staff.

By posting to the forums, or any other sections of this site, you signify agreement that you
are giving WrongPlanet permission to use, modify, and reproduce your submission, in part or
in whole, in any way, shape, form, or method in which we decide to do so, at any point in
the present or future at our discretion.

Only if this violates other law would they require consent to move it.

However I still agree with your sentiment.

You're still missing the point. It's not an "excuse to ban all men from something." We don't need an excuse to want an all-women, women-only forum. It's a matter of preference. It's similar to having an all-girls school or women-only college.

People form all kinds of social groups and institutions that are restricted to one gender, race, or religion. You may not like or agree with those things, but so what. People still have the right to form such groups, so long as they don't discriminate in employment. And no "excuse" is necessary. You may not like it or agree with it, but so what.

Again, I have not missed the point. I am not lacking logic. I don't understand why you can't seem to state your side without belittling people.

I have lived on this planet for 34 years. I am well aware of segregation and women's groups and colleges. I am also aware that racial segregation used to be what people did, believing that was the right thing to do. I don't believe in stereotyping or segregating. I don't see how any good can possibly come from it. No good ever has seemed to come from it. If you want a world where people try to understand each other and get along.. then segregation is the wrong way to go. And it seems that more and more people are figuring that out, as these types of groups are becoming less and less popular.

And yes, you are right.. You do have the right to segregate. No one is stopping you.

The issue is whether or not you figure out a way to do that yourself, or if you get someone else to agree to do that for you... when it seems they haven't wanted to. The rules for the women's forum seem pretty fair and clear.. I agree with those rules. And, if by chance, the suggestion to only allow women in that forum goes your way... The only thing that I would do is state that I don't like it. That's it. That is hardly trying to interfere with your rights.

You all can make excuses for why this forum is the only thing that will get you work for you, but it isn't. You all do have other options. And if you decided to use those options, I would still find it sexist. And I would also still try to do absolutely nothing to stand in your way.

Having a forum for women is a very different thing from having public segregation of races. Racial segregation is about giving priority to one race and treating another race as if they are second class citizens. We're not trying to demote men to second class here.

I think it would be great if men could have their own forum here as well, where no women are allowed access.




Lmao, so there's pretty much no pleasing you. Thanks for letting us know.

I just said I was pleased with the way things are.

I would also see a men's only forum as a step in the wrong direction. And in reading through past similar topics, it seems that the women who want a women's only forum are in the minority.

Anything to do with what, and what discussion? This thread is about the women's forum in general, and we were talking about what is inappropriate there. Also, I hadn't yet been made aware I simply had better not post on that forum. How is it not relevant to mention the fact, involuntarily tested time and time again, that any admission that many more men than women are unable to get dates at all gets you immediately labelled as a misogynist, with all sorts of gratuitous additions and misrepresentations applied to your real words to create the illusion that you really are one?

Or are you saying that whether autistic men can or can't get dates is always irrelevant, everywhere, since you seem to imply you're anticipating every single possible discussion it could be brought up in? Is it to be made a universal taboo topic, never to be discussed again, just because those who don't suffer from it aren't interested in it? Do I get to dictate topics I'm not interested in are never to be talked about again, too? If not, who does, and why?



So it seems to be okay to talk about that topic, after all, as long as you deny that many more men than women can't get dates, with a fallacious argument about numbers that doesn't take into account the possibility that men who do get dates get more throughout their lives, on average, than women do, and, to boot, you insist on putting in my mouth the part I never said, which is blaming women for the inability of a good number of us to get dates or resenting them.

And, ironically, this was my point: even though I've really gone out of my way to acknowledge women's right to want nothing to do with the likes of me, I keep being misrepresented as saying the exact opposite, blaming women, resenting them and hating them, simply for not getting dates. Being unable to get dates automatically gets you branded a misogynist---if you're not resentful, you're made out to be and then harshly condemned for it.

Is it against the rules on WP for men to say that autistic women can get dates more easily? This is a serious question.

Or does that only apply to the women's forum?

Here, you need to convince alex, or whomever he's allowed to decide on his behalf, but, contrary to what I thought, this seems to be already accomplished.



It'd be interesting to have forums only for specific races, social classes, religions, cultural backgrounds or zodiac signs. The restriction would be just about as enforceable as the women-only one.



Interesting that you deny employers what you defend for everyone else. Noöne should need an "excuse" to hire whomever they want, and only those people they want. You may not like it or agree with it, but so what?

It's illegal to discriminate in employment for a good reason, because people need to work to survive. You don't need access to a women's forum in order to survive.

I have made proposal that is equatable. However:

1. This is private site we have no defacto right to post here at all, and post here under terms.
2. It is up to the owner what they do, they are our publishers, and they choose the content.
3. They also have rights over content under terms.
4. This is an ASD forums primarily so any additional topics or forum are a bonus.

Like I said before there is a valid argument in getting rid of the Women's forum altogether. I don't want it to go that down that route so that is why I made a proposal.

More dates with whom blow up dolls, men?

Please explain the maths, because even with frequency taken into account or people choosing voluntarily not to date, they are goign to have to date somebody.

How do you define "get dates"? Going out with a date with one person in this case the other sex?

In which case it still takes two.

So you are saying one woman is going out on dates with multiple men, and those men are only dating her once? is that what you are saying? That mean that other women aren't getting dates. She is competing with other women from a biological perspective.

Reverse that scenario. So what? It either becomes a relationship or it doesn't, which takes two. Leaving the rest of the population single.

There is a rough balance in the number of men and women. Indeed, a quick Google for US data tells me:

Of the 2010 Census population, 157.0 million were female (50.8 percent) while 151.8 million were male (49.2 percent). Between 2000 and 2010, the male population grew at a slightly faster rate (9.9 percent) than the female population (9.5 percent).

Assuming the impact of homosexuals, bisexuals, asexuals, polyamorous etc are either equal or negligable, and given monogamous heterosexuality is still the dominant paradigm:

If a monogamous heterosexual woman gets a date, so does a monogamous heterosexual man.

If a heterosexual man is not in a relationship, nor is a heterosexual woman.

These are facts at the most glaringly obvious level of tautology. Men do not outnumber women by 3:1 or 2:1 or 1.5:1. Indeed, in both the US and UK, women outnumber men. Certainly we can allow for local imbalances, but at the level of the individual it's unlikely to be so great as to make a difference.

So, what is going on that some of the men here deny basic, tautologous facts and insist that women have it 'easier' finding a relationship than men?

Maybe what they're really trying to say is that the women they know have it 'easier' finding relationships with other men.

The complaints seem to revolve around the facts that: (1) they have difficulty in finding relationships with women, (2) other men don't, (3) so they make sexist claims against women in general, and (4) they refuse to admit that they may not be as attractive as other men.

I could be wrong, of course; but that's how I see it.

Yeah. I could go with some men finding it easier to get into relationships than others. Same with some women finding it easier than others. That sort of thing seems obvious. It's the man v woman thing that's cockamamie, and that brings in the accusations of sexism.

I think what they're trying to get at is an idea that women are somehow less likely to 'settle' than men are. That's the only way I can make sense of it - that they think women are more likely to stick it out on their lonesome, whereas men are more likely to take up with anyone. Something like that, anyway.