• 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 anything good about past gender roles?

SDET said:
What about the ones sold at the erotic bakery?
Click to expand...
Those are gender rolls. Homonyms are tricky like that.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
maquiscat said:
You couldn't be more wrong. The fact that they are social constructs that have shifted and altered across time and societies does not make them any less real. Now if you want to claim that there are no hard and fast gender roles that can be objectively defined, I'd agree with you.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes, that is what I am saying. Objectively, there are no gender roles.
 
devildavid said:
Yes, that is what I am saying. Objectively, there are no gender roles.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Objectively gender roles exist. What they are defined as at any given moment is subjective. The distinction is important.

I get what you are trying to say, and agree that anyone trying to impose their gender roles are wrong. But it is just as wrong to say they don't exist.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
 
Angel said:
According to radical feminist agitprop she should. You'd better check your bilge pump.
Click to expand...

Surely it's a traditional male gender role to beat women for disobedience? While we're on the topic of tradition, should we be rolling back spousal rape laws too? Submitting to a man is a traditional woman's role, right?
 
Notice that they're all white? :shock:
 
COTO said:
Households with the wife as a homemaker are happier, more stable, and raise happier and more stable children than households with two breadwinners.
Click to expand...

Trouble is that today, that's a financial impossibility for the vast majority of all families.
 
spud_meister said:
Surely it's a traditional male gender role to beat women for disobedience? While we're on the topic of tradition, should we be rolling back spousal rape laws too? Submitting to a man is a traditional woman's role, right?
Click to expand...
Surely, according to rad fem agitprop. Like the man said, check your bilge pump.
 
maquiscat said:
Incorrect. Objectively gender roles exist. What they are defined as at any given moment is subjective. The distinction is important.

I get what you are trying to say, and agree that anyone trying to impose their gender roles are wrong. But it is just as wrong to say they don't exist.

Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Gender roles are not objective. They don't exist in nature. They are made up concepts. Concepts do exist, but not in the same way.
 
devildavid said:
Gender roles are not objective. They don't exist in nature. They are made up concepts. Concepts do exist, but not in the same way.
Click to expand...
And just recently you posted to the effect that everything is in nature.
devildavid said:
Yes, it does. It isn't even a choice. We are in nature, just as everything else is. We invented technology in nature, and we use it in nature. There is nothing we use that isn't derived from nature. It's all we have. Maybe you need to look at your narrow definition of nature.
Click to expand...
You seem ready to say anything for something to say, David.
Tsk, tsk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom