• 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!

Is there a "War on Women" in the United States?

Is there a War on Women?


  • Total voters
    118
Does anyone reading this thread believe that women are ruthlessly and brutally oppressed? And that men enjoy a quality of life that far surpasses that experienced by women? Do men have many more opportunities?

Anyone? At all?

I can see you guys reading this ****, so what say you?

i wouldn't say brutal but wage parity is a well known issue. in terms of quality of life beyond the work place i know that women are more often the victims of certain kinds of assault but i dont know of any data for day to day life
 
i wouldn't say brutal but wage parity is a well known issue. in terms of quality of life beyond the work place i know that women are more often the victims of certain kinds of assault but i dont know of any data for day to day life
Right. Wages/salaries. It's not so much a 'well known' issue, so much as 'well known' podium.

Fact is, women generally seek employment in the service sector (which is overwhelmingly female dominated), where salaries are lower than those in the private sector. Men also work longer hours, take less leave, less sick days and traditionally dominate the higher-risk occupations. Of course, these factors are usually omitted form the overall picture. Instead, we focus upon the 20% less result.

As per crime statistics, shall we honestly apply them to the majority of women, who never suffer such crimes in their lives?

Overall, do you believe women are ruthlessly and brutally oppressed in society, by ruthless and brutal men? You sound as though you'd like to avoid giving a straight yes or no answer to this. I believe that's because we both know what the answer is, don't we? Only, unlike yourself, I don't mind the anger it's likely to incur from the feminist quarter.

I go so far as to say that only a man's opinion matters to me, regarding gender issues. I already know what the feminists think, and the majority of women who aren't feminists, will meekly stand by and allow feminists to speak for them.
 
Actually, I'm the guy that's been arguing that such issues aren't subjective?
Is that a statement or a question? You were just saying "You could ask a feminist how she's a victim. Socially? Legally? Economically? Where precisely is this 'war' waged? And how?", so you are making the argument that there are no objective examples of rights being curtailed.

NoC_T said:
And what legislation? Aren't the democrats in power?
Barely in the Senate, but it goes beyond the fed level.

So far this year, according to the Guttmacher Institute:
In the first three months of 2012, legislators in 45 of the 46 legislatures that have convened this year introduced 944 provisions related to reproductive health and rights. Half of these provisions would restrict abortion access. So far, 75 abortion restrictions have been approved by at least one legislative chamber, and nine have been enacted. This is below the record-breaking pace of 2011, when 127 abortion restrictions had been approved by at least one body in the first quarter of the year, but still higher than usual for an election year. In 2010, for example, only 46 such restrictions had passed at least one house during the first quarter, while in 2008, only 34 had passed one chamber by that point.

NoC_T said:
Do you think men have more rights than women?
More...hmm...I think that since women are not chattel, that they have a right to control their own bodies.
 
Last edited:
Right. Wages/salaries. It's not so much a 'well known' issue, so much as 'well known' podium.

Fact is, women generally seek employment in the service sector (which is overwhelmingly female dominated), where salaries are lower than those in the private sector. Men also work longer hours, take less leave, less sick days and traditionally dominate the higher-risk occupations. Of course, these factors are usually omitted form the overall picture. Instead, we focus upon the 20% less result.
I just pointed out that the Wisconsin repealed their equal pay act, requiring equal pay for equal work. The GOP blocked the Ledbetter legislation under Bush, it finally made it through in 2009. These are not examples of equal pay for different work.

As per crime statistics, shall we honestly apply them to the majority of women, who never suffer such crimes in their lives?

Overall, do you believe women are ruthlessly and brutally oppressed in society, by ruthless and brutal men? You sound as though you'd like to avoid giving a straight yes or no answer to this. I believe that's because we both know what the answer is, don't we? Only, unlike yourself, I don't mind the anger it's likely to incur from the feminist quarter.

I go so far as to say that only a man's opinion matters to me, regarding gender issues. I already know what the feminists think, and the majority of women who aren't feminists, will meekly stand by and allow feminists to speak for them.
The US has the highest level of rape of the major industrial states, most case go unreported.
 
Is that a statement or a question? You were just saying "You could ask a feminist how she's a victim. Socially? Legally? Economically? Where precisely is this 'war' waged? And how?", so you are making the argument that there are no objective examples of rights being curtailed.
Those were questions. I'm making the argument that women aren't victims. If you believe I'm wrong, by all means, prove it.

Barely in the Senate, but it goes beyond the fed level.

So far this year, according to the Guttmacher Institute:

More...hmm...I think that since women are not chattel, that they have a right to control their own bodies.
And hey, look. Abortion is legal.

Go figure huh?
 
There must be a war, or there can be no 'victims'.
I quoted this post because it was so succinct. I'll try to be the same in one sentence, but it will need some expatiation. If you don't follow the rules you're in trouble. The rules are supported by culture and were created long ago. They were rational solutions to problems and desires when societies were essentially tribes and rules were needed to survive. The rules just had to work well enough, they had to 'solve' the problem of the functional differences between males and females; but, they needn't be more uniform than that. Things have changed, many rules are functionally unnecessary now; but, they are necessary to keep certain people in power. The rules in America are not exactly uniform, but close. In my opinion black evangelical rules are slightly different from white evangelical rules, Jew and Christian more different. This is not a war, it's the way culture changes in the modern world, but it might be useful to call it war politically.

An observation we've noted: In East Michigan, e.g. the city of Holland, we observe behavior between young women and men that would be aligned with San Diego CA in the 50's. I have to note that the out of wedlock birth rate in Holland MI is one of the highest in the country, so the rules aren't controlling behavior much.
 
Last edited:
Right. Wages/salaries. It's not so much a 'well known' issue, so much as 'well known' podium.

Fact is, women generally seek employment in the service sector (which is overwhelmingly female dominated), where salaries are lower than those in the private sector. Men also work longer hours, take less leave, less sick days and traditionally dominate the higher-risk occupations. Of course, these factors are usually omitted form the overall picture. Instead, we focus upon the 20% less result.

As per crime statistics, shall we honestly apply them to the majority of women, who never suffer such crimes in their lives?

Overall, do you believe women are ruthlessly and brutally oppressed in society, by ruthless and brutal men? You sound as though you'd like to avoid giving a straight yes or no answer to this. I believe that's because we both know what the answer is, don't we? Only, unlike yourself, I don't mind the anger it's likely to incur from the feminist quarter.

I go so far as to say that only a man's opinion matters to me, regarding gender issues. I already know what the feminists think, and the majority of women who aren't feminists, will meekly stand by and allow feminists to speak for them.

i don't think its ruthless and brutal or any other loaded word, but i do believe that women are at a disadvantage. i don't think its deliberate to any large degree.

moreover i find your framing to be somewhat oyt of the scope in which i regard this issue, thus my answer does not fit neatly into a yes or no answer as the some of the adjectives you use don't really apoly.

so the straight answer to your question is no, given the way you asked it but i do believe there are issues.
 
I just pointed out that the Wisconsin repealed their equal pay act, requiring equal pay for equal work. The GOP blocked the Ledbetter legislation under Bush, it finally made it through in 2009. These are not examples of equal pay for different work.
And does any of that address the factors I cited as being contributory to the overall disparity? No.

The US has the highest level of rape of the major industrial states, most case go unreported.
Now prove that most women are raped. And that most men are rapists. Because if you can't do that, the rape card is moot, and you're looking to portray women as defenceless victims. Men also are raped. As are children. Will you 'fight' for those too?

In the meantime, you could always research the statistics for domestic child beating, with the same assiduity you demonstrate for rape. I assure you, it paints not quite the picture of women as holy vessels of sacrosanct purity.
 
Those were questions. I'm making the argument that women aren't victims. If you believe I'm wrong, by all means, prove it.
I have been, you apparently missed all of my previous posts to Zyp.


And hey, look. Abortion is legal.
Sure it is..somewhat. The point is that the access is being curtailed, new requirements are being put in place causing shutdowns, funding is being cut to the clinics that provide abortion services via their own funding causing reduced access and closures, contraception coverage is being reduced through legislative actions....it is happening at an increasing rate.

Go figure huh?
I don't think my bringing any of this to your attention will make a bit of difference, you seemed to have shut most of it out.
 
i don't think its ruthless and brutal or any other loaded word, but i do believe that women are at a disadvantage. i don't think its deliberate to any large degree.

moreover i find your framing to be somewhat oyt of the scope in which i regard this issue, thus my answer does not fit neatly into a yes or no answer as the some of the adjectives you use don't really apoly.

so the straight answer to your question is no, given the way you asked it but i do believe there are issues.
Trust me, dude. For feminists, it is is precisely this simple. It only becomes somehow 'more complex' when men debate it. As far as feminists are concerned, women are victims. That's it. For them, there is nothing simpler.

What disadvantages do you identify for women?
 
I have been, you apparently missed all of my previous posts to Zyp.
I did.

Sure it is..somewhat. The point is that the access is being curtailed, new requirements are being put in place causing shutdowns, funding is being cut to the clinics that provide abortion services via their own funding causing reduced access and closures, contraception coverage is being reduced through legislative actions....it is happening at an increasing rate.

I don't think my bringing any of this to your attention will make a bit of difference, you seemed to have shut most of it out.
Either that, or you're making the case that gender inequality is a matter solely of abortion. I'm pro-choice, btw.
 
And does any of that address the factors I cited as being contributory to the overall disparity? No.
Yes, it counters your denial that there is not a disparity in pay for equal work. You framed all the difference in pay as being a result of different work, different hours worked.


Now prove that most women are raped.
Most? Is that what it would take to get you to accept that it occurs at a significant level?


And that most men are rapists.
Again, this isn't like a majority vote situation, we are talking about crime statistics.

Because if you can't do that, the rape card is moot, and you're looking to portray women as defenceless victims. Men also are raped. As are children. Will you 'fight' for those too?
Um, in the US, 92% of rape victims ARE women. The occurrence is very high compared to other industrial states. Again, you don't want to accept the level at all.

In the meantime, you could always research the statistics for domestic child beating, with the same assiduity you demonstrate for rape. I assure you, it paints not quite the picture of women as holy vessels of sacrosanct purity.
WTF? Is that what you think I am trying to prove?

Wow, you are exposing an interesting side.
 
Well, then if you care to look at it it is only a page before where you came in today.


Either that, or you're making the case that gender inequality is a matter solely of abortion. I'm pro-choice, btw.
Funny, I brought up examples of equal pay, contraception.

If you are pro-choice, do you agree with the restrictions that are being put in place at an increasing rate?
 
Yes, it counters your denial that there is not a disparity in pay for equal work. You framed all the difference in pay as being a result of different work, different hours worked.
With the result that the disparity is not the inequality it's portrayed as. If you worked longer hours, and took less holiday and sickness leave, you'd expect to earn more, right? Is that discriminatory? Of course not.


Most? Is that what it would take to get you to accept that it occurs at a significant level? Again, this isn't like a majority vote situation, we are talking about crime statistics. Um, in the US, 92% of rape victims ARE women. The occurrence is very high compared to other industrial states. Again, you don't want to accept the level at all.
If gender inequality is of such doubtless magnitude, you'll forgive me if I ask you to prove that rape affects the majority, since the rape card is what you've decided to play, in order to project an image of such horrendous privation. And I guess you believe that when men or children are raped, it's not so unpleasant an experience. Ya know, since it's less frequent.

WTF? Is that what you think I am trying to prove?

Wow, you are exposing an interesting side.
Cheers. I'm an interesting guy.
 
Well, then if you care to look at it it is only a page before where you came in today.
Alright.

Funny, I brought up examples of equal pay, contraception.

If you are pro-choice, do you agree with the restrictions that are being put in place at an increasing rate?
We've discussed equal pay already. I've explained just why the statistics look so one-sided.

And of course I don't agree with any restrictions on access to abortion. Aside from the fact that I believe a woman's body is her own business, do you think I'd like for women and their feminist handlers to have one more club to wield?
 
Still waiting for some proof that women are ruthlessly and brutally oppressed victims, of savage evil men.
 
With the result that the disparity is not the inequality it's portrayed as. If you worked longer hours, and took less holiday and sickness leave, you'd expect to earn more, right? Is that discriminatory? Of course not.
Again, you think that is the issue being argued, it is not. The argument is the GOP/conservative actions to block and repeal efforts of equal pay/equal work legislation.



If gender inequality is of such doubtless magnitude, you'll forgive me if I ask you to prove that rape affects the majority, since the rape card is what you've decided to play, in order to project an image of such horrendous privation. And I guess you believe that when men or children are raped, it's not so unpleasant an experience. Ya know, since it's less frequent.
What a bunch of crap. You brought the rape issue in to this debate between us, I did not, you refuse to accept the levels that exist and try to make some weird argument that if the majority of women are not raped then it is not an issue. You seem to think that this "point" of yours is proof that things just are not so bad for women since "the majority" are not being raped in their lifetimes.

Now just for you, I looked this up:

One out of every six American women have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape). A total of 17.7 million women have been victims of these crimes. (Prevalence, Incidence and Consequences of Violence Against Women Survey, National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1998)

In 2002, seven out of every eight rape victims were female. (2002 NCVS)

75% of female rape victims require medical care after the attack (U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1994)



Cheers. I'm an interesting guy.
OK, I did not mean it in a good way.
 
Still waiting for some proof that women are ruthlessly and brutally oppressed victims, of savage evil men.
That is a false argument, a straw man, a red herring. That is your debate, not the debate at hand. It is a false premise, a lie. It shows what kind of a person you are, one who cannot debate in an honest manner.
 
Alright.


We've discussed equal pay already. I've explained just why the statistics look so one-sided.

And of course I don't agree with any restrictions on access to abortion. Aside from the fact that I believe a woman's body is her own business, do you think I'd like for women and their feminist handlers to have one more club to wield?
Once again, you show where you are coming from in this discussion, I don't have to add much, but to say that you believe there is a war on you by "women and their feminist handlers".
 
Last edited:
Trust me, dude. For feminists, it is is precisely this simple. It only becomes somehow 'more complex' when men debate it. As far as feminists are concerned, women are victims. That's it. For them, there is nothing simpler.

What disadvantages do you identify for women?

i have already listed a few. many of them are cultural and not quantifiable, at least not to me.
 
Again, you think that is the issue being argued, it is not. The argument is the GOP/conservative actions to block and repeal efforts of equal pay/equal work legislation.
No, that's your issue. Not mine. Look to the thread title in order to regain your bearings.

What a bunch of crap. You brought the rape issue in to this debate between us, I did not,
Er, no:

The US has the highest level of rape of the major industrial states, most case go unreported.

you refuse to accept the levels that exist
No I don't.

and try to make some weird argument that if the majority of women are not raped then it is not an issue. You seem to think that this "point" of yours is proof that things just are not so bad for women since "the majority" are not being raped in their lifetimes.
It's not a 'weird' argument. It's just an argument. And I've explained why I believe this.

Now just for you, I looked this up:

One out of every six American women have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape). A total of 17.7 million women have been victims of these crimes. (Prevalence, Incidence and Consequences of Violence Against Women Survey, National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1998)

In 2002, seven out of every eight rape victims were female. (2002 NCVS)

75% of female rape victims require medical care after the attack (U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1994)
Cheers. What's the point?

OK, I did not mean it in a good way.
I know.
 
That is a false argument, a straw man, a red herring. That is your debate, not the debate at hand. It is a false premise, a lie. It shows what kind of a person you are, one who cannot debate in an honest manner.
It's central to the point.

As suggested, kindly refer to the thread title.

And don't get angry. You sound like a liberal.
 
Once again, you show where you are coming from in this discussion, I don't have to add much, but to say that you believe there is a war on you by "women and their feminist handlers".
Cool. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I know who's pulling your strings, and it ain't me.
 
i have already listed a few. many of them are cultural and not quantifiable, at least not to me.
Thus far, I've noticed arguments that involve wage 'disparity', the rape card and abortion.

The wages stats are skewed, rape is moot and abortion is legal.

Not quite the living hell the feminists would have me believe.
 
Btw, where are the feminists on this forum?

Going on 4hrs, and not one comment? I've noticed that these debates are usually left to the men to hash out. Divide and conquer perchance? :lol:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom