Skateguy
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2009
- Messages
- 2,559
- Reaction score
- 378
- Location
- Houston/Heights
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Most Wimen, would prefer their "Man Child" where their ring in their nose.
Most Wimen, would prefer their "Man Child" where their ring in their nose.
I feel your frustration, but this will never happen. I am wise to your ploy.In your case, we'd like to pierce your tongue and chain it to your tonsil. It would have immediate positive results.
I feel your frustration, but this will never happen. I am wise to your ploy.
Please. All it would take is a single pic of my perfect breasts, and you'd be putty.
OK, you win, I give---show me:roflPlease. All it would take is a single pic of my perfect breasts, and you'd be putty.
OK, you win, I give---show me:rofl
The problem with this is that you'll practically get a different definition of 'feminist' from each person you ask, from misandrous womyn to Andrea Dworkin and the 'all-sex-is-rape' crowd to Womens Sufferage to bra-burning and possibly even to Sheila's Wheels - all of which fit under the description, more or less, and none of which are the whole story.
Feminism (my definition would be 'the movement behind the idea that people should not be treated differently because of their sex or gender') changed things. I'd say for the better.
It got Patsy Schroeder elected.
Babs Boxer is a Senatorette.
So's Frankenstein.
Hillary was able to swindle people through the Rose Law Firm.
It de-stigmatized divorce, so that the majority of children now come from broken homes.
It created the myth that it's just wonderful to be a single mom. (Murphy Brown nonsense).
Funny, though. Because the ERA would have forced the draft to include females, the ERA died.
Now feminism has made Mrs. Ed a nominee for the Supreme Court.
Feminism has created great comic theater, bad cultural evolution.
Women and men aren't equal.
People should start to realize that. I never will be able to pass a bowling ball out between my legs, and have no desire to.
Because it's given choice to those people who did not have it before. It's largely due to feminism that things like [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spousal_rape]spousal rape[/ame] have been made illegal, it's largely due to feminism that women have the right to vote, it's largely due to feminism that men and women receive comparable pay for doing identical jobs. I'm also a fan of breaking down stereotypes - that's a longer story, but the short of it is that by removing preconceptions you better enable people to achieve their potential.Why?.......iangb said:[I'd say feminism was a good thing]
Because it's given choice to those people who did not have it before. It's largely due to feminism that things like spousal rape have been made illegal, it's largely due to feminism that women have the right to vote, it's largely due to feminism that men and women receive comparable pay for doing identical jobs. I'm also a fan of breaking down stereotypes - that's a longer story, but the short of it is that by removing preconceptions you better enable people to achieve their potential.
It's true that 'feminism', as a term, has been used and twisted just like any other concept, be it Christianity, conservatism or evolution. People have done some stupid things under that banner - but that's not different from any other banner, and the original idea behind it is a good one.
EDIT: Curses, I voted wrong.
Overall, was feminism bad for America?
What violation happened?
She wanted dick
He wanted *****
Whether the dick and ***** were had is unbeknown to us - but a good time was, we know that at the least.
Why do you assume that a good time between two people is against feminism? Feminism, if anything, would encourage women to be more open to 'seeing' more men rather than tying their selves into a marriage.
So - in your beef, here, through your eyes - Lewinsky embodies feminism by putting her wants and desires ahead of someone else's issues (meaning - the Clinton's marriage) and Hillery stands against feminism by staying with a man who couldn't be faithful and failed to adhere to the promise he made when they wed. . . and by continuing to do so eventhough they have a fractured and thin-veiled marriage even now.
Now - cheating and being scandalous and unfaithful has been a human+marriage issue since the dawn of time - before the notion of feminism even became a thing to dream of. So why you're having issues with Monica giving a little head now and then is beyond me.
Where does it say that the government has no right to do such a thing - and if it does, why has the government gotten away with it for so long? The government is founded with the power to maximise the 'safety and happiness' of the people - that's all the people, not just the ones with a Y chromosome.Scarecrow said:It's not the government's job to balance paydays between employees of the same company.
You weren't talking about the 'violation of the marriage oath' - you originally said the 'violation of Lewinsky', which is quite a different matter.bicycleman said:So the violation of the marriage oath and the act of adultery represent feminism to you?
It's not the government's job to balance paydays between employees of the same company.
So the violation of the marriage oath and the act of adultery represent feminism to you?
So the violation of the marriage oath and the act of adultery represent feminism to you?
Please stop picking on Monica. Hasn't she suffered enough by ruining her beautiful blue party dress?:roll:
So you're more for conformity than individual freedom?The whole "critical thinking" movement, the idea that all traditional institutions and ways needed to be analyzed to death and thrown out if they seemed the slightest bit illogical...the "anti-tradition" movement you might say, never seemed to realize that societies' customs and institutions are part of the glue that holds it all together, even if some of them don't seem to make perfect sense. Wash all that glue away with "critical thinking" solvent, and what you have left isn't a society, its a bunch of individuals pursuing three hundred million different paths with little in common.