Equal Accountability Equals Equality

[Lursa]

So you're saying feminists don't vote??? So you're saying Sonia Sotomeyer is not a female supreme court justice??? So your saying juries are not composed of women, only men??? So you're saying there is no such thing as female attorny's and judges, only male attorney's and judges??? So you're saying there are no female journalistts, only male journalists???

Where's your evidence for these claims???

So, you're saying it's all men's fault???

That's not accountability.

If feminism is an equality movement, then why don't we hear feminists complaining about the sentencing gap at least as often as the wage gap. The sentencing gap is 63% and the wage gap is 22%, and 63 is greater than 22-right???

Didnt write or imply any of those things. I have no idea why you quoted my post for that, lol.

 

[Lursa]

If feminism is an equality movement then why don't we hear feminists complaining about the sentencing gap at least as often as the wage gap????? The sentencing gap is 63% and the wage gap is 22%, and 63 is greater than 22-right????

Why dont we see men complaining about it? Because they arent comparable....you'd think such an Internet Intellectual as yourself would understand that.

I love it, no one else considers it valid, so 'everybody else is wrong,' but he's 'right!' LOL

 

[Lursa]

I've annihilated the opposition on other forums and they got tired of losing and they picked up their ball and went home...

Again, absolutely zero evidence of this claim thus far.

It's only valid if you can prove your 'prowess.' So far...nada.

 

[Lursa]

Apparently you did, by your post below, women were effectively chattel.
Say's a lot about what you think of men.

Women had HUGE influence on society. They were not on 'some backburner.' That does not mean that they were treated equally. By nearly all definitions, they were treated as property, as I spelled out for you earlier.

Women weren't property nor were they slaves, they were family and partners.
Were they 100% equal, no and that wasn't and isn't fair or right, no matter where in the world or what time it exists/ed.

I said they were treated as property. There's a difference. Sure they were considered family and partners. And yet, their free will was always subject to their male relatives.

An assumption about physical abuse, again says a lot about what you think of men.
Assuming men are automatic abusers.
It was illegal to beat your spouse, in a great many places.

And it was not in many. Not only that, heads were turned all the time when men beat their wives or even killed them. To deny that is to deny reality. And laws often supported those things. Has nothing to do with opinions on men. It's fact.

Women could own property, it was part of English common law, under the doctrine of coverture. Of course, when she married, the property came into the relationship and was adjoined with her husbands. He was the "head of household" but to broadly assume he was the only one with say, is likely false.
That doesn't make it right, but it certainly doesn't make women "chattel" or unable to own property as you describe.

Yes they could own property but if their male relatives didnt agree with their use or distribution of that property, the male relatives could unilaterally control that property if they chose in almost all cases.

My issue is with feminists going "over the top" and blaming men as a group (and their sexism) for nearly every perceived wrong.

I cant help your faulty perception.

 

[Lursa]

Crickets...lol

I'll take your silence as concession of your defeat

:2razz:

You act like a child when ignored I see. Is it hard to face, in your perceived superiority on the Internet, that you are not a priority?

Awww.

 

[ryobi]

Why dont we see men complaining about it? Because they arent comparable....you'd think such an Internet Intellectual as yourself would understand that.

I love it, no one else considers it valid, so 'everybody else is wrong,' but he's 'right!' LOL

OK Lursa so you believe things are true if they're politically correct and most people believe them.

For example, there was a time when people believed the earth was the center of the universe and the sun revolved around the earth.

However Galileo figured out the earth wasn't the center of the universe and the earth actually revolved around the sun!

As someone who believes what's politically correct is true, you would continue believing what most people believed at the time and you'd disregard Galileo's evidence and believe the sun revolves around the earth, right????

Why aren't the sentencing gap and the wage gap comparable???

Please address the question below, thank you in advance for addressing this question!!!!

Feminists don't care about the sentencing gap because according to feminists it's men, mostly white men who are responsible for the sentencing gap. However Feminists also blame men, mostly white men for the wage gap, yet this doesn't stop feminists from complaining about the wage gap-right????


What makes the sentencing gap different from the wage gap, other than the sentencing gap is 63% and the wage gap is 22%???


Why in one instance is an inequality not a concern and in another case a percieved inequality is a concern when both are caused by men, mostly white men, according to feminists???

Talk about wanting your cake and eating it too.

Thanks in advance for addressing this question, Lursa!!!!

Have a nice day!!! :lol:

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Women had HUGE influence on society. They were not on 'some backburner.' That does not mean that they were treated equally. By nearly all definitions, they were treated as property, as I spelled out for you earlier.

I said they weren't treated equally, my problem here is description and nuance.
Where women treated as exact coequals through out most of history, largely no.

Where women treated as badly as is often described, no.
It's somewhere in between, but in general, definitely better than your average actual chattel slave.

I said they were treated as property. There's a difference. Sure they were considered family and partners. And yet, their free will was always subject to their male relatives.

I disagree, they were not treated universally as property.
I'd say at worst they were treated as property, but more often on the "worst" side, it was likely they were infantilized.
At best, as coequal regardless of the law.

Most often, it was somewhere in between.

And it was not in many. Not only that, heads were turned all the time when men beat their wives or even killed them. To deny that is to deny reality. And laws often supported those things. Has nothing to do with opinions on men. It's fact.

See the issue with this assumption is that we have no real historical data to go on.
It's just total assumption.
Do I think some women were beaten or killed, sure and do I think some people turned their heads from this, yep.

Do I think that this was common, no, not really.
Most of these people were tenant farmers, farmers and/or laborers.
Beating someone in your household, that is necessary for your household to survive is completely retarded.

Yes they could own property but if their male relatives didnt agree with their use or distribution of that property, the male relatives could unilaterally control that property if they chose in almost all cases.

Except that wasn't always true.
The link gives more information on this.

I cant help your faulty perception.

Perception is reality.
When women aren't reaching parity it's "men" or "the patriarchy" or "social conditioning."
When women are represented or over represented it's of their inherent ability and personal success.
There seems to be no nuance in this movement, it's blame when things are wrong, "own it" when things are right.

 

[ryobi]

Why dont we see men complaining about it? Because they arent comparable....you'd think such an Internet Intellectual as yourself would understand that.

I love it, no one else considers it valid, so 'everybody else is wrong,' but he's 'right!' LOL

OK Lursa so you believe things are true if they're politically correct and most people believe them.

For example, there was a time when people believed the earth was the center of the universe and the sun revolved around the earth.

However Galileo figured out the earth wasn't the center of the universe and the earth actually revolved around the sun!

As someone who believes what's politically correct is true, you would continue believing what most people believed at the time and you'd disregard Galileo's evidence and believe the sun revolves around the earth, right????

Why aren't the sentencing gap and the wage gap comparable???

Please address the question below, thank you in advance for addressing this question!!!!

Feminists don't care about the sentencing gap because according to feminists it's men, mostly white men who are responsible for the sentencing gap. However Feminists also blame men, mostly white men for the wage gap, yet this doesn't stop feminists from complaining about the wage gap-right????


What makes the sentencing gap different from the wage gap, other than the sentencing gap is 63% and the wage gap is 22%???


Why in one instance is an inequality not a concern and in another case a percieved inequality is a concern when both are caused by men, mostly white men, according to feminists???

Talk about wanting your cake and eating it too.

Thanks in advance for addressing this question, Lursa!!!!

Have a nice day!!! :lol:

Wow! Lursa is sure taking her time to answer this question right???

I bet Lursa is going to have a really great explanation why in one case Feminists don't care about an inequality and in another case feminists care a great deal about a percieved inequality when both those inequalities according to feminists are caused by men, mostly white men???

I can't wait!!!!!

 

[ryobi]

Wow!!! Lursa must be vacationing in a third world country with no access to the internet bcs it's been several days and she still hasn't addresses why in one case Feminists don't care about an inequality and in another case feminists care a great deal about a percieved inequality when in both those "inequalities" according to feminists are caused by men, mostly white men???

I hope her vacation is going well!!!!

:lol:

 

[SCitizen]

See the issue with this assumption is that we have no real historical data to go on.
It's just total assumption.
Do I think some women were beaten or killed, sure and do I think some people turned their heads from this, yep.

Do I think that this was common, no, not really.

Wife beating was not that common. It was illegal in Massachusetts since the XVIIth century. By 1850 it was illegal in most states.

Abuse of children -- mostly boys by parents -- mostly mothers was the norm. Until 1880s such abuse was legal in all states. Before the Child Abuse Act of 1974 severe child abuse remained common but not as much as in XVIIIth and XIXth centuries.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Wife beating was not that common. It was illegal in Massachusetts since the XVIIth century. By 1850 it was illegal in most states.

Abuse of children -- mostly boys by parents -- mostly mothers was the norm. Until 1880s such abuse was legal in all states. Before the Child Abuse Act of 1974 severe child abuse remained common but not as much as in XVIIIth and XIXth centuries.

Well, again, we don't have any stats pre 1900'sish.
So to say what was prevalent or common, is just unknown.
Useless there's a lot of other supporting evidence.

With all that said, pop culture assumes women were treated like punching bags.
There's just no support for that right now, that I've found.

 

[ryobi]

My computer has a virus so I can't post a link to the study because I'm on a tablet but I just got done studying the 2009 study for the United states department of labor that found that all but 5 percent of the 22 percent wage gap is explained by choice and there's no evidence to suggest the 5percent is the result of discrimination and I was looking for the confidence intervals used by the study and there margin of errors and I couldn't find any which was odd because every single study you read has 3 things a mean a standard deviation and confidence intervals

But the reason the study doesn't have confidence intervals is because the sample statistic and the population statistic are the same thing in the study. There sample is every single working adult in the United states which is there entire population lol

A study can't get better than that lol

 

[ryobi]

Firstly, you're looking at this a bit backwards.

It is not a panel of feminists who decide a woman gets a lighter sentence. It is mostly old white men -- the same people who decide most things -- who believe women are child-like and therefore shouldn't be held to the same intellectual standard.

First wave feminists actually attacked this very directly, deliberately breaking the law (non-destructively) and arguing with hesitant police that they ought to be arrested, as women are intelligent enough to understand their actions.

So if you want to actually do something meaningful about this, the people to aim it at is judges.

The false rape apologetics are nonsense. False rape accusations are actually extremely rare, and they are not any more common than false accusations of any other crime (violence, robbery, etc -- all have a small amount of false reporting). Only 8% of rape cases lack evidence, and only about 1% are deemed to be likely false (usually lack of evidence is due to a time lapse between the event and the report). If anything, rape is still underreported due to the (unfortunately valid) fear women have of being attacked for reporting. By their own admission, incarcerated rapists only get reported about once every four times they commit a rape.

Most women who have a regretful one-night-stand chalk it up as a simple mistake. There is no evidence otherwise, nor have I ever seen any in reality. This whole idea is just some kind of tantrum chauvinist men are having over the idea that they are not entitled to sex.

As far as the job stuff, no, there is a gap even for a given women doing the exact same profession as a given man. The reasons for this are complicated, and they don't entirely come down to employer discrimination (at least not solely based on sex and nothing else), but they do come down to social inequalities which disadvantage women in the workforce.

So, no. Try again.

- A feminist who spends at least half her time addressing the intellectual accountability related to rights.

This statement directly contradicts the claim in it, lol.

Er, facts not in evidence in posting yet. At all.

Again, absolutely zero evidence of this claim thus far.

It's only valid if you can prove your 'prowess.' So far...nada.

I told you I'd annhialate the opposition which I did in short succession, in under a couple weeks.

As feminists, you're members of a supremacist hate movement and you're sexists and racists.

Egalitarianism is the true equality movement.

 

[ryobi]

While I sympathize with MRAs to some extent, I find their whining complaints to basically be reverse feminism. Really, while the feminists have been more destructive (whether that's just due to being more successful or not I don't know), both groups support the same basic ideas, equality, egalitarianism, blah blah blah. Seeing feminists and MRAs argue is rather like watching two groups of children bicker.

Egalitarians aren't MRA's lol.

Egalitarians believe inequalities are wrong when those inequalities are the result of discrimination regardless of gender or race.

People who call egalitarians misogynists are either too stupid to get the egalitarian arguments and or they're sexist and racist.

In your case, I believe all three apply

Too stupid, sexist and racist

 

[ryobi]

Sexists and Racists are cowards I guess

 

[ryobi]

Firstly, you're looking at this a bit backwards.

It is not a panel of feminists who decide a woman gets a lighter sentence. It is mostly old white men -- the same people who decide most things -- who believe women are child-like and therefore shouldn't be held to the same intellectual standard.

First wave feminists actually attacked this very directly, deliberately breaking the law (non-destructively) and arguing with hesitant police that they ought to be arrested, as women are intelligent enough to understand their actions.

So if you want to actually do something meaningful about this, the people to aim it at is judges.

The false rape apologetics are nonsense. False rape accusations are actually extremely rare, and they are not any more common than false accusations of any other crime (violence, robbery, etc -- all have a small amount of false reporting). Only 8% of rape cases lack evidence, and only about 1% are deemed to be likely false (usually lack of evidence is due to a time lapse between the event and the report). If anything, rape is still underreported due to the (unfortunately valid) fear women have of being attacked for reporting. By their own admission, incarcerated rapists only get reported about once every four times they commit a rape.

Most women who have a regretful one-night-stand chalk it up as a simple mistake. There is no evidence otherwise, nor have I ever seen any in reality. This whole idea is just some kind of tantrum chauvinist men are having over the idea that they are not entitled to sex.

As far as the job stuff, no, there is a gap even for a given women doing the exact same profession as a given man. The reasons for this are complicated, and they don't entirely come down to employer discrimination (at least not solely based on sex and nothing else), but they do come down to social inequalities which disadvantage women in the workforce.

So, no. Try again.

- A feminist who spends at least half her time addressing the intellectual accountability related to rights.

Winning all the time is getting boring. I would of thought a "feminist who spends at least half her time addressing the intellectual accountability related to rights," would have been more of a challenge.

Meh, I annhialated you in under two weeks. I told you I'd annhialate you. I just didn't think it would be in less than 2 weeks lol.

I realize hardly any feminist beliefs are supported by evidence but isn't there one feminist who has the intellectual horsepower to hang with me longer than two weeks lol.