• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Equal Accountability Equals Equality

A few things.

1. Men would likely still be given longer sentences even if gender wasn't considered.
2. While I am no fan of feminists they had nothing to do with the sentencing situation.
3. The wage gap is closing quickly caused both by women's wages increasing and men's wages decreasing. The fact is men are actually becoming poorer while women are becoming richer.
4. Women appear to be take jobs when men show decreased interest in the job. Meaning, that employment preference is likely still leaning towards men.

Anyway, feminists and patriarchy is bit absurd. Much of it is based on the premise that men should change and that their problems are created by this system that never existed in the US in the first place. I don't know if feminists ever looked up the definition of the term, but maybe they should.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with male culture or the idea men should be strong emotionally, nor do I see anything wrong with women acting like women or men handling military matters. Yes, there is issues that came up because of past views, and those issues need to be dealt with, but I find the overall premise to be correct. I hate feminists because they want to change men and a system I support.
 
Last edited:
ryobi said:
No thanks.

I don't want to be a feminist. I believe in equality.
Click to expand...

So then white people that fought for black civil rights, what were they? "Black?" Did they want 'more' for blacks or 'special consideration' or just equality?
 
Lursa said:
So then white people that fought for black civil rights, what were they? "Black?" Did they want 'more' for blacks or 'special consideration' or just equality?
Click to expand...

Did the civil rights act actually enforce equality?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Yes, I know that.
Funny how feminists only address issues where they're at a disadvantage.
Click to expand...

No, his list addressed many things that could be seen as advantages for women, like child custody and alimony.

Seems the issue is more balanced than you imply.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
.
Being for equality means actually addressing issues that don't affect you (or your group), but others.
Click to expand...

??? So then women cant fight for equality for themselves, some other group or demographic must? :confused:
 
Lursa said:
No, his list addressed many things that could be seen as advantages for women, like child custody and alimony.

Seems the issue is more balanced than you imply.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it to be balanced, largely by the actions of feminists.
The general narrative is "Women have problems, men are problems."

It's group that seems to want to be divisive.

If you say you're for equality, that means you need to address situations outside of those that affect you and your group.
Not just give lip service to it.
 
Btw, just going to say this outloud, but why does the men that call themselves MRA always bitch about feminists not fighting for their causes? Did anyone ever tell them that no one has an obligation to fight for their causes? If you believe in something then fight for it yourself and stop bitching about other people not doing the same.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
What I do believe is that women (generally) choose not to pursue these things, out of their own volition.
That does not equivocate to patriarchy or sexism, but pure choice.
Click to expand...

What it equates to is only about 2 generations where women had anything but resistance socially, culturally, even legally, to pursue so many other things. And such interests and drives and skills are often developed from childhood...from inclusion and involvement and acceptance and encouragement. For example, working on cars, woodworking, focusing on math and science, etc.
 
Lursa said:
What it equates to is only about 2 generations where women had anything but resistance socially, culturally, even legally, to pursue so many other things. And such interests and drives and skills are often developed from childhood...from inclusion and involvement and acceptance and encouragement. For example, working on cars, focusing on math and science, etc.
Click to expand...

The 1950's is not an example of all of history.
Sorry, that's your poor characterization of history.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't believe it to be balanced, largely by the actions of feminists.
The general narrative is "Women have problems, men are problems."

It's group that seems to want to be divisive.

If you say you're for equality, that means you need to address situations outside of those that affect you and your group.
Not just give lip service to it.
Click to expand...

The 'lip service' is dismissive and unfounded.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
The 1950's is not an example of all of history.
Sorry, that's your poor characterization of history.
Click to expand...

Er, if you read it properly, *all of history* comes before the 2 generations I singled out. :doh
 
Henrin said:
Btw, just going to say this outloud, but why does the men that call themselves MRA always bitch about feminists not fighting for their causes? Did anyone ever tell them that no one has an obligation to fight for their causes? If you believe in something then fight for it yourself and stop bitching about other people not doing the same.
Click to expand...

Sure no one has an obligation to fight for anyone's cause.
The problem is, you can't make the argument that feminism is about equality, then ignore other inequalities except your own.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Sure no one has an obligation to fight for anyone's cause.
The problem is, you can't make the argument that feminism is about equality, then ignore other inequalities except your own.
Click to expand...

Feminism is not an equality movement though. It's just a claim they make to give their cause some higher purpose.
 
Last edited:
ryobi said:
It's not that it's my first time on a forum. It's that I annihilated the opposition on other forums and they got tired of losing and picked up their ball and went home.
Click to expand...

This statement directly contradicts the claim in it, lol.

Er, facts not in evidence in posting yet. At all.
 
Henrin said:
Why would someone have an obligation to fight for your causes? If I decide that something needs to change then it is entirely on me to see that happen. If other people want to join my cause then great, but otherwise, it's my cause to fight for.
Click to expand...

If someone claims to be for egalitarianism, then does the opposite, you'd question them on it right?

Henrin said:
Anyway, feminism is not an equality movement.
Click to expand...

That's the point.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
That is *your* poor characterization of history.
Click to expand...

Well then, please point out some errors in that characterization. Before you start....will you be doing so pre-1950s or post-1950s?
 
Lursa said:
Well then, please point out some errors in that characterization. Before you start....will you be doing so pre-1950s or post-1950s?
Click to expand...

Which time frame and national/cultural group would you like to look at?
Rights and equality for most humans hasn't been a linear course, from slavery to freedom.

Women and men, in certain places and in certain groups have effectively been equal in poverty and unequal in richness.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Which time frame and national/cultural group would you like to look at?
Rights and equality for most humans hasn't been a linear course, from slavery to freedom.

Women and men, in certain places and in certain groups have effectively been equal in poverty and unequal in richness.
Click to expand...

Let's go with American.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Claiming you're for something, then not living up to it, is the issue.
Equality is a universal cause, only addressing it from a one gendered prospective, leaves it open to serious criticism.
Click to expand...

Since men are involved in the movement to create equal opportunities and recognition for women, I'm not sure who you feel is not being addressed.

And which women are not living up to gaining equal opportunities and recognition for women? Women have expanded their roles in our society a great deal, continue that trend in doing so, and even many women who choose to pursue more 'traditional' roles like stay-at-home mom support other women, their sisters, their daughters, etc in word and deed.

I dont see any hypocrisy or 'dropping the ball.' The movement continues to progress, much like the civil rights movement for blacks. I would not say that we have eliminated racism yet in America, unfortunately.
 
Lursa said:
Since men are involved in the movement to create equal opportunities and recognition for women, I'm not sure who you feel is not being addressed.

And which women are not living up to gaining equal opportunities and recognition for women? Women have expanded their roles in our society a great deal, continue that trend in doing so, and even many women who choose to pursue more 'traditional' roles like stay-at-home mom support other women, their sisters, their daughters, etc in word and deed.

I dont see any hypocrisy or 'dropping the ball.' The movement continues to progress, much like the civil rights movement for blacks. I would not say that we have eliminated racism yet in America, unfortunately.
Click to expand...

My argument is that women weren't on the back burner of history and it's actually insulting to insist as much.
It robs agency of women and the actual real important historical role they played in the world.
It also poorly characterizes the role that most men played, that being in equal poverty with women, not lording over them.

Comparing civil rights for Blacks to Women, is a bit of a stretch.
Blacks were slaves, White women, were largely not.

Is feminism about gender equality or is it about rights and privileges for women?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom