thestalkinghead

i just watched the stream (not live) and the bit where sean went to the toilet and we hear reloading was intense, i can't believe he didn't just kill him straight away, but good job with the extinguisher and axe

no, it's just reality that people have to do dangerous work, and the patriarchy has made it so that only men do this dangerous work, i want equality, and that means both men and women have to have equal share of both the good and the bad parts of society

i really have no idea what you are saying, are you saying I personally should do every dangerous job on the planet or that just men should do them, or are you saying that if nobody did dangerous work the world would just be fine, because people just do them because they want to?

i am optimistic of the future and think there will be a time where robots do all the dangerous jobs and humans are free to pursue happiness, but that isn't the reality we live in now, someone has to do the dangerous jobs and if women wont do them, men will have to, and that acceptance of imbalance if it concerns men is why i don't fully agree with feminism

but would you fight for more women to do the dangerous jobs? because it's fine protesting that women are less likely to be managers or other high level positions (very cozy) , but unless women are pushed/encouraged to do the more dangerous (and higher paid) jobs it will still be men who have to do them, and would you fight for men to get more secretarial/administration jobs? because otherwise women will still dominate those areas

there are quite a few different types of pension, ones you pay into yourself (you could call a private pension) there are pensions your job pays into (different rates and pensions for different companies) but there is also a state pension that everybody gets (different amounts for date born and how many years worked) from the government, and you are entitled to claim them all once you reach retirement age (which is increasing all the time and the gap between men and women is decreasing) but is just seems insane that women can retire earlier even though they live longer, and at the same time men are expected to do the dangerous backbreaking jobs (which probably reduced their lifespan), and women to do the safer more civilised jobs (which they could more easily do at an older age) edit: yeah i know (not 100% guaranteed though) but not entirely getting rid of it, and they are increasing it all the time, I'm not sure if i could ever retire

well it's not totally relevant because it is about pay gaps not pensions, but i can't tell how the gaps are worked out, it seems to be worked out in a way that just shows that because there are more male workers in a field they get overall paid more and vice versa, because it is pretty obvious that if a field is dominated by one gender that gender will be paid more on average (because there would be more higher paid roles for that gender), it doesn't actually show that two workers male/female working the exact same job have different pay, I'm not saying that doesn't happen, but statistics can be showed in many different ways that give misleading information

i have made it clear that i support women but i support men also, and that i don't want to silence women, so that argument was not about anything i had said or anything i believe, and is actually a nonsense argument meant to silence me. anyway, here is another part of equality that feminism wouldn't tackle, because women have the privilege in this case http://youtu.be/3S7v4fuguHI

i read the whole thing i just responded to that one piece, just like the many times people have done that to me, and you want to defend you position more than listen to what i have to say, you didn't try at all. you just can't imagine how somebody could think that achieving equality is something that would take solving the issues of both men and women, not just solving the issues of women, or how someone can support specific parts of a movement but not be behind the thing as a whole, you need to learn some empathy and understanding instead of assuming that if someone doesn't totally agree with you they are totally against you

well, we seem to agree on something

if that is the case then how many feminist are also part of the men's rights movement? thinking of that, i could actually get behind the feminist and men's rights collaborative movement (or whatever such a thing would be called) that isn't the same, it would be the same for a movement to fight cancer in women not men, to fight AIDS in women not men, to fight poverty for women not men etc. equality among the sexes are not two separate things they are part of each other

well i may support many of the goals of that movement, but i wouldn't call myself a Britishpovertyist (or whatever it was called) on the principle that it was unfair to focus a worldwide movement on just british people

if it were a worldwide movement and not a charity, i and i assume many other people would be asking, why not all poor people?

"The actual point is, there's a conflict right now between those who want to support women and those who want to silence them. But declining to be one of the former, you are ceding to the latter by default." no you don't have to be one or the other let me put it this way, if i were to start a movement to end world poverty, but only help blonde haired blue eyed people, you may agree with my goal of ending world poverty, but not support that i am only doing it for certain people, this doesn't mean that you would rather have poverty, it just means you disagree with the way the movement is only helping some people

so even though i have made my position clear, the automatic assumption from saying i'm not part of the feminist movement means i'm a "mysoginerd" yeah i really want to be a feminist now, you are all clearly not ignorant bigots

well, i think you are overconfident of your own intelligence, and ignorant of your ignorance. but yeah, no hard feelings

well, maybe i misunderstood, but if i was around when MLK was i would have asked him what he thought about POC being racist towards white people, and if he said it was of no concern of his or the movement i would have had issues with that, I'm not trying to put words in his mouth though, I don't know what his stance on that was edit: i wouldn't say that ignoring mens issues was a half baked reason edit2: thinking about it, didn't MLK want equal justice for all American citizens? so i assume he would be against discriminating against white people, so if there were disadvantages to being white he would want to help those disadvantaged white people

if the civil right movement was only for black people, and asian people weren't any concern of it because they have the privilege of being assumed that they are good at mathematics then it would be like the modern/third wave feminism movement, are you seriously comparing modern feminism to the civil rights movement because they aren't alike, maybe you could compare the suffragettes to the civil rights movement but not modern/third wave feminism also the results and impact of feminism will be different for each country, i am talking about england, i get the impression that in america feminism hasn't had as much impact in certain areas as it has in england @I Saw Dasein 271,000 more women in university isn't marginal (out of a total of 1,697,000 984,000 women and 713,000 equals 16% more women or 58% women 42% men) and i agree there are many factors for this but they come under the umbrella of education

I'm not saying there is an conspiracy to make men less educated or that women don't work hard for their education, however it used to be the case that men outperformed women academically so feminists campaigned to changed the education system to make it more "equal" but that has clearly resulted in a biased towards women, which i think is probably unintentional, but i don't see any feminist campaigns to make the academic setting better for men and i don't think there ever would be. as you said there are numerous reasons for this gap, but i don't think the feminist movement would be willing to put in the time or the effort to make men perform better academically and have better career prospects because they concentrate on the needs of women, I'm not saying that i would want some mens group to go about changing it so that in 20 years time the education system is better suited to men, i would want a group that is dedicated to helping men and women equally to make it so that men and women both perform equally, you might say that that is feminisms goal, but i think a biased movement (towards either gender) no matter what the intentions, will always have biased results. Edit: i really didn't anticipate your response, and didn't feel like i was saying that women don't work hard or there was some nefarious plot, and that is the sort of thing i mean when i say i don't think i can communicate that well with text, if that were part of a conversation i may have read you were taking it that way or you may have inserted that question into the conversation.

i will find out about reading it i am happy to debate about it and i think i have learned a lot so hopefully there will be more understanding on both sides i have no issues with women in the military and i don't assume they underperform i just don't think the requirements for women should be made easier. sure sports prizes aren't salaries, but the funds come from sponsorship and tv/news coverage, so if there are less games in womens tennis it contributes less towards the funding. anyway, for specific issues in feminism that i agree with i would be behind it, I'm not anti-feminist and i don't think they/you should shut up and go away or anything, and i'm not trying to derail or troll, i like to debate and discuss things so i can better understand peoples perspective, but i think i will try and leave that out for now and lurk and learn

that last part is something feminism doesn't apply to women, women don't realise the privileges they have, as i said i don't want this to be a privilege or suffering competition because the just goes nowhere, but there are so many advantages to being the protected part of the patriarchy, but they just don't have names because there aren't such things as male studies or masculinity intellectual books, but basically men are expected to do all the dirty back breaking jobs while women get all the clean more civilised jobs, i do recognise that the jobs at the top being predominantly male is a problem and i am not saying it isn't (even though that is only really an middle/upper class problem), it's that equality is now in a position that unequal requirements are not just helping women but hurting men. @Brannigan the university link is about women getting better grades but obviously that is a problem that should be fixed, and it shows that feminist policies aren't equal, they are actually damaging male education and career prospects, and that the balance has now (at least in england) swung past equal and is now unfair for men. the army link isn't just about the biological difference, the military isn't a sport among peers, the requirements are there because it is about life or death, if anybody can't carry a wounded soldier to safety because they aren't strong enough they shouldn't be allowed in the army, if they can't aim their gun straight because their arms are tired after carrying it for miles with no rest they shouldn't be allowed in the army, if they can't carry jerry cans full of fuel or full ammo boxes they shouldn't be allowed in the army, nobody should get a free pass based in their biology, should there be a new category for scrawny men? and obviously i have a problem with different branches or schools of thought, but that wasn't the point of the links, i was trying to provide links just so people can't just claim i am making it up the tennis link is about equal pay for equal work, and how playing less tennis is not equal work.

well the problem is that when there is something good it will be claimed that it is all of feminism but when there is something bad it will be claimed that it is just a part of the umbrella of feminism not all of feminism. but a few examples of campaining that has resulted in an unfair bised for women are: campaingnes to get more women in the military, but not that they should have to have have the exact same tests to qualify for it (a link that doesn't show everything but what a quick search showed up) http://www.army.mod.uk/join/20153.aspx and with child custody, the system may claim equality, but men only get primary custody of the child if the woman has drug or mental issues, the defualt if for women to get custody https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fathers%27_rights_movement#Family_court_system http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/about-f4j/fact-sheet/ or that in tennis women now get equal prize money but they still don't have to play as many matches or use the same heavier equipment http://www.scotsman.com/sport/tennis/andy-murray-let-women-play-five-sets-for-equal-pay-1-3074466 or just basically things that campaign for better treatment of women but just leave men of the campaign ( https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creating-a-fairer-and-more-equal-society no nention of supporting and protecting the rights of men here and notice the advisory group: Advisory groups:Women's Business Council ) feminists would want a minimum percentage of women in male dominated workplaces but wouldn't campaign for a minimum percentage of men as well obviously i haven't gone into detail with this, but if you are going to fight for equality it shouldn't only be a fight for equal treatment of women, it needs to be about men also edit: it's things like this that show that the campaign for more equality for women is working, but it also shows that men have been left out http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/9484597/White-males-now-classed-as-a-minority-group-at-university.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3179265/The-future-is-female-job-figures-show.html

yeah sure some things may sound like they contradict each other, but they wouldn't if i were able to properly express my beliefs, i think it is a problem associated with individual ethics, because i can't rely on many people over time writing about a set belief system and say read/watch/listen to this, this person has done a good job of explaining what <insert belief> is, but i think stopping racism of all kinds would benefit all the people on earth, i think stopping all sexism would benefit everybody on earth, i think stopping all kinds of poverty would help everybody on earth, i believe curing cancer, AIDS, malaria etc would benefit everybody on earth and when i say everybody on earth i do also include myself (some ways more directly than others) maybe it isn't clear perhaps because i just can't communicate through texts as well as i want to (i think an actual face to face conversation would be easier to explain it) but i do think a lot of what feminism does is good, but i don't think you can achieve equality by focusing on just women, a simplified view of the patriarchy is that is was there to protect women and children in a harsh living environment, obviously over protectiveness is oppressive, especially now that in the western world we don't live in a harsh environment, so we no longer need a patriarchy. however i think it is naive to think that men have only benefited from the patriarchal system and that women have only suffered in it, i don't want this to start a conversation about who has suffered most or who has the most privilege, but i think the best approach would be to simultaneously focus on the problems of both men and women and also focus on how they can both compromise on their privileges, sure there are feminists under the umbrella of feminism that would take that approach, but unless that is the majority view i couldn't totally get behind the movement.

well you hear wrong. principles plural of prin·ci·ple (Noun) Noun A fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning. A rule or belief governing one's personal behavior. i have my own principles, obviously a lot of what i believe is similar to other people and that doesn't make me any less of an individual. feminism is only around to help women, i wouldn't call myself something that is only around to benefit one subset of people, i support everybodys rights equally

you shouldn't describe yourself as a feminist you really give them a bad name