29 Dec 2013, 1:48 pm
29 Dec 2013, 1:57 pm
29 Dec 2013, 4:24 pm
29 Dec 2013, 6:05 pm
29 Dec 2013, 6:19 pm
29 Dec 2013, 8:33 pm
Feralucce wrote:
Arrant: I stand by my statement... I believe you are being purposely obtuse... end of discussion
And, Mr. Trigonometry, I stand by mine.
Last edited by ArrantPariah on 29 Dec 2013, 8:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
29 Dec 2013, 8:34 pm
29 Dec 2013, 8:52 pm
ArrantPariah wrote:
Feralucce wrote:
Arrant: I stand by my statement... I believe you are being purposely obtuse... end of discussion
And, Mr. Trigonometry, I stand by mine.
1) obtuse in a non-mathematical definition is "not quick or alert in perception, feeling, or intellect; not sensitive or observant; dull."
2) In mathematics, it is geometry, not trig
3) If you are going to insult me, do it right.
4) If you REALLY believe what you are saying about this stuff... Never mind... I cannot finish this thought without being insulting...
But I have to tell you... most people do not want or need a pat on the head... to most, nts and Aspies alike... that is condescending...
Your feeling that everyone crave a pat on the head means that you believe that everyone needs to have someone invade their personal space and touch them... Very few peopel crave that kind of contact...
Let's talk about the christian god... you asked "How would churchgoers who venerate Yahweh be minimizing him by glorifying him?" Different setting... according to the book, the deity ASKED for that behavior... "Benevolent Sexism" does not ask, it just does, presuming that your treatment of them is what they want, need or should receive, REGARDLESS of their wishes...
Ironically enough... They fall into the same category as benevolent sexists... they are providing the behavior that THEY feel he wants... regardless of his wishes... with every denomination handling it differently, all worshiping the SAME deity... And none of them getting it right... or at best... ONE group getting it right...
but the example is flawed in that the deity is not going to give you direct feedback... hence the schisms of faith... and women will...
My point remains... benevolent sexism is advocating this behavior... without asking the women what they REALLY want... Veneration only serves to set one aside... and while a small percentage of women want that, most do not... most polls and interviews show that women want to be a partner, not have someone worship them... so intent aside... the benevolent sexist is presuming that they know what the woman needs and wants better than she does and is imposing his will and behavior upon her... which is the very thing that feminism is opposed to.
You are basically arguing that a guilded cage is better than a wrought iron one or a locked basement... it is still a prison of expectation imposed by the will of another... Which is exactly what gender roles are...
Why do girls play with dolls instead of erector sets? because they are girl toys? Why? because baby dolls trained them to take care of siblings and eventually their own children in past ages... Why can't girls play with erector sets, build robots, be video game designers, assistant directors, ceos? There is no reason... except that society states that they should be girls...
Period...
Hell, with some of the tools of the modern geneticist, it is possible to remove the genetic material from an egg and fertilize another woman's egg and make a baby... So... LITERALLY, the differences between male and female are moot... especially in that case... which one is the mother? which is the father? Next time, does the other one carry the baby?
All of these things are only in existence because of our society... The following link shows different versions of gender roles throughout the world... Aside from the physical... it is meaningless... Gender is what you make of it...
LINK
29 Dec 2013, 9:49 pm
30 Dec 2013, 4:25 am
ArrantPariah wrote:
LKL wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
LKL wrote:
https://medium.com/get-bullish/5088b50ec7d
what actual feminists think about benevolent sexism, as opposed to the straw-feminists that are always accused of wanting things both ways.
what actual feminists think about benevolent sexism, as opposed to the straw-feminists that are always accused of wanting things both ways.
Having reread this, I think that actual feminists focus an awful lot of effort on being offended.
*snort*
you have know idea how much BS the average woman just puts up with from day to day, because it just isn't worth getting upset over every single f***ing time it happens.
Well, what happened to you today, then?
Maybe she baited somebody into an argument today, and then tried to "play the victim".
30 Dec 2013, 5:53 am
Venger wrote:
Maybe she baited somebody into an argument today, and then tried to "play the victim".
Maybe someone automatically assumed she tried to play the victim because she's a woman.
30 Dec 2013, 7:30 am
Shau wrote:
Venger wrote:
Maybe she baited somebody into an argument today, and then tried to "play the victim".
Maybe someone automatically assumed she tried to play the victim because she's a woman.
Maybe someone observed a few of her posts on here, and came to the conclusion that she possibly has some sort of "victim complex".
30 Dec 2013, 9:47 am
Venger wrote:
Shau wrote:
Venger wrote:
Maybe she baited somebody into an argument today, and then tried to "play the victim".
Maybe someone automatically assumed she tried to play the victim because she's a woman.
Maybe someone observed a few of her posts on here, and came to the conclusion that she possibly has some sort of "victim complex".
That might be the case... but even so, it does not negate the very real point she was making.
30 Dec 2013, 10:11 am
Feralucce wrote:
Venger wrote:
Shau wrote:
Venger wrote:
Maybe she baited somebody into an argument today, and then tried to "play the victim".
Maybe someone automatically assumed she tried to play the victim because she's a woman.
Maybe someone observed a few of her posts on here, and came to the conclusion that she possibly has some sort of "victim complex".
That might be the case... but even so, it does not negate the very real point she was making.
Aha! So she does have a victim complex.
Last edited by ArrantPariah on 30 Dec 2013, 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
30 Dec 2013, 10:35 am
Feralucce wrote:
ArrantPariah wrote:
Feralucce wrote:
Arrant: I stand by my statement... I believe you are being purposely obtuse... end of discussion
And, Mr. Trigonometry, I stand by mine.
1) obtuse in a non-mathematical definition is "not quick or alert in perception, feeling, or intellect; not sensitive or observant; dull."
2) In mathematics, it is geometry, not trig
3) If you are going to insult me, do it right.
4) If you REALLY believe what you are saying about this stuff... Never mind... I cannot finish this thought without being insulting...
Okay: Mr. Geometry, then.
Feralucce wrote:
But I have to tell you... most people do not want or need a pat on the head... to most, nts and Aspies alike... that is condescending...
Your feeling that everyone crave a pat on the head means that you believe that everyone needs to have someone invade their personal space and touch them... Very few peopel crave that kind of contact...
Your feeling that everyone crave a pat on the head means that you believe that everyone needs to have someone invade their personal space and touch them... Very few peopel crave that kind of contact...
A metaphorical pat on the head, then. Some token or expression of appreciation. No touching, and no tactile/kinesthetic stimulation.
Feralucce wrote:
Let's talk about the christian god... you asked "How would churchgoers who venerate Yahweh be minimizing him by glorifying him?" Different setting... according to the book, the deity ASKED for that behavior... "Benevolent Sexism" does not ask, it just does, presuming that your treatment of them is what they want, need or should receive, REGARDLESS of their wishes...
Ironically enough... They fall into the same category as benevolent sexists... they are providing the behavior that THEY feel he wants... regardless of his wishes... with every denomination handling it differently, all worshiping the SAME deity... And none of them getting it right... or at best... ONE group getting it right...
but the example is flawed in that the deity is not going to give you direct feedback... hence the schisms of faith... and women will...
Ironically enough... They fall into the same category as benevolent sexists... they are providing the behavior that THEY feel he wants... regardless of his wishes... with every denomination handling it differently, all worshiping the SAME deity... And none of them getting it right... or at best... ONE group getting it right...
but the example is flawed in that the deity is not going to give you direct feedback... hence the schisms of faith... and women will...
Well, the deity did get in a big huff and flood the whole planet once.
Feralucce wrote:
My point remains... benevolent sexism is advocating this behavior... without asking the women what they REALLY want... Veneration only serves to set one aside... and while a small percentage of women want that, most do not... most polls and interviews show that women want to be a partner, not have someone worship them... so intent aside... the benevolent sexist is presuming that they know what the woman needs and wants better than she does and is imposing his will and behavior upon her... which is the very thing that feminism is opposed to.
Women are indeed mysterious creatures. It is impossible to fathom what that "mystical, nice-smelling collective" really wants sometimes.
Feralucce wrote:
You are basically arguing that a guilded cage is better than a wrought iron one or a locked basement... it is still a prison of expectation imposed by the will of another... Which is exactly what gender roles are...
Interesting metaphor. So, display nothing that could be construed as chivalry to a lady, or you are confining her to a cage?
Feralucce wrote:
Why do girls play with dolls instead of erector sets? because they are girl toys? Why? because baby dolls trained them to take care of siblings and eventually their own children in past ages... Why can't girls play with erector sets, build robots, be video game designers, assistant directors, ceos? There is no reason... except that society states that they should be girls...
Well, girls can play with erector sets, build robots, be video game designers, assistant directors, and ceos. You're making a big sexist leap there. Girls play with dolls because they like to play with dolls.
Feralucce wrote:
Hell, with some of the tools of the modern geneticist, it is possible to remove the genetic material from an egg and fertilize another woman's egg and make a baby... So... LITERALLY, the differences between male and female are moot... especially in that case... which one is the mother? which is the father? Next time, does the other one carry the baby?
No need for men any more, then. Our spermatozoa are obsolete.
30 Dec 2013, 10:55 am
