Justin Trudeau marks International Women's Day with $650M for reproductive rights

[tres borrachos]

Well, it got there because women expect men to fight for women, but rarely return the favor. Women get mad when male politician don't support their causes, but I can't even name a female politician that ever supported a male cause ever. In reality male politicians are in fighting for women and female politicians are interested in fighting for women. Men are seen as the enemy and the great oppressors of women, while and boys are put on meds for being boys, and all the while women, the same group responsible for most of the attacks on men and boys, are asking for men and boys to stand up for them. The answer should be no until further notice. I want something for once.

What precisely is a "male cause"?

I know many female politicians. I don't know a single one who sees men as "the enemy".

Which men do you think Margaret Thatcher saw as her enemy? How about Elizabeth Dole? Sarah Palin? Cathy McMorris Rodgers? Nikki Haley? I've known former Senator Kelly Ayotte for years. Tell me - what men did she attack, and who were her male enemies? You seem to know her better than I do. Please share with me so I can ask her to verify.

 

[Erod]

So apparently being a real woman is about demanding free stuff from the government.

 

[ecofarm]

So apparently being a real woman is about demanding free stuff from the government.

Good argument!

:thumbs:

 

[Henrin]

What precisely is a "male cause"?

I have been going over one this whole thread. What about another issue though. What has female politicians ever even attempted to do about child support issues or family court issues? Anything? I can't think of anything, can you?

I know many female politicians. I don't know a single one who sees men as "the enemy".

Which men do you think Margaret Thatcher saw as her enemy? How about Elizabeth Dole? Sarah Palin? Cathy McMorris Rodgers? Nikki Haley? I've known former Senator Kelly Ayotte for years. Tell me - what men did she attack, and who were her male enemies? You seem to know her better than I do. Please share with me so I can ask her to verify.

Ok, so judging by Kelly Ayotte wiki page she only ever fought for women's issues and was active in bills to challenge their issues. Though to be fair to her she did support a bill dealing with military assaults for both genders, but that bill only came into existence because of assaults on women. If women never entered the equation that bill wouldn't have existed.

 

[Scrabaholic]

So you're telling me he purposely picked women over men? You don't think that is discriminatory?

How would it be if he picked a woman equally or better qualified as any man being considered? Would it be discriminatory if he picked a man over a woman?

 

[Scrabaholic]

How the **** did this thread go from the interesting OP to foreskin to affirmative action? Can we get back to ogling Justin's picture now and stop the madness?

Because a serial thread derailer decided to derail this one.

 

[Henrin]

How would it be if he picked a woman equally or better qualified as any man being considered? Would it be discriminatory if he picked a man over a woman?

Because the goal going out was that no matter what he wanted 50/50. At a certain point men were just off the table as he looked for more women to fill the slots.

 

[Scrabaholic]

Because the goal going out was that no matter what he wanted 50/50. At a certain point men were just off the table as he looked for more women to fill the slots.

I don't see the issue. The representation is the same as the representation of men and women in society. And, unlike Trump's cabinet, each member is qualified for the position.

 

[Henrin]

I don't see the issue. The representation is the same as the representation of men and women in society. And, unlike Trump's cabinet, each member is qualified for the position.

So you don't see an issue with picking people because of their gender? You don't see how that means qualified people aren't considered for a job once their gender quota is filled?

Would you be fine with employers picking people by their gender as long as they had a certain percentage of each gender on the job?

 

[Scrabaholic]

So you don't see an issue with picking people because of their gender? You don't see how that means qualified people aren't considered for a job once their gender quota is filled?

Would you be fine with employers picking people by their gender as long as they had a certain percentage of each gender on the job?

Yes, I would be fine with that. I don't understand why you have a problem with a cabinet that is 50% women, 50% men. You never answered my question - Would it be discriminatory if he picked a man over a woman?

 

[tres borrachos]

I have been going over one this whole thread. What about another issue though. What has female politicians ever even attempted to do about child support issues or family court issues? Anything? I can't think of anything, can you?



Ok, so judging by Kelly Ayotte wiki page she only ever fought for women's issues and was active in bills to challenge their issues. Though to be fair to her she did support a bill dealing with military assaults for both genders, but that bill only came into existence because of assaults on women. If women never entered the equation that bill wouldn't have existed.

So you couldn't answer any of the questions, or out forth a single shred of evidence to back up your lie about female politicians. Not at all surprising.

If you want child support to be a pet project of the government, you need to gather millions of like minded men and lobby your male representatives to go the distance for you.

 

[Henrin]

Yes, I would be fine with that. I don't understand why you have a problem with a cabinet that is 50% women, 50% men. You never answered my question - Would it be discriminatory if he picked a man over a woman?

I already told you. Gender quotas are discriminatory because they end up picking people and not picking people because of their gender. They don't even work as they end up lowering quality and leaving qualified people without the job due to nothing more than their gender and being a little late to the party.

 

[Henrin]

So you couldn't answer any of the questions, or out forth a single shred of evidence to back up your lie about female politicians. Not at all surprising.

If you want child support to be a pet project of the government, you need to gather millions of like minded men and lobby your male representatives to go the distance for you.

I never made the claim you claimed you did. :shrug: There is also groups of men fighting for male rights. Look up MRA. They cover issues such as child support, family court issues, prison violence issues, unequal sentencing, genital integrity rights, male parental right issues, etc.

 

[tres borrachos]

I never made the claim you claimed you did. :shrug: There is also groups of men fighting for male rights. Look up MRA. They cover issues such as child support, family court issues, prison violence issues, unequal sentencing, genital integrity rights, male parental right issues, etc.

Uh, no...you made the claim. Here's a gentle reminder of your words.

Well, it got there because women expect men to fight for women, but rarely return the favor. Women get mad when male politicians don't support their causes, but I can't even name a female politician that ever supported a male cause ever. In reality male politicians are interested in fighting for women and female politicians are interested in fighting for women. Men are seen as the enemy and the great oppressors of women, while and boys are put on meds for being boys, and all the while women, the same group responsible for most of the attacks on men and boys, are asking for men and boys to stand up for them.

I asked you what female politicians see men as the "enemy". You can't name a single one. No surprise. Just more ignorant misogyny from you.

 

[Henrin]

Uh, no...you made the claim. Here's a gentle reminder of your words.



I asked you what female politicians see men as the "enemy". You can't name a single one. No surprise. Just more ignorant misogyny from you.

I said they never supported a male cause. None of the examples you provided ever supported a male cause in their political career. The only one that comes close is Kelly Ayotte, but that wasn't her intent going in. I also don't care if you think I'm a misogynist and frankly I kind of enjoy the fact you do.

 

[tres borrachos]

I said they never supported a male cause. None of the examples you provided ever supported a male cause in their political career. The only one that comes close is Kelly Ayotte, but that wasn't her intent going in. I also don't care if you think I'm a misogynist and frankly I kind of enjoy the fact you do.

So nothing to back your claim up. Got it.

Of course you enjoy it. Your troll posts welcome peoples' disgust. That's what you want.

 

[TheGoverness]

How the **** did this thread go from the interesting OP to foreskin to affirmative action? Can we get back to ogling Justin's picture now and stop the madness?

Well thank You-Know-Who for derailing it.

These threads tend to go off the rails on a crazy train, usually when somebody inevitably brings up child support.

 

[Henrin]

Well thank You-Know-Who for derailing it.

These threads tend to go off the rails on a crazy train, usually when somebody inevitably brings up child support.

Maybe we want to stop talking about stupid **** like free birth control at other peoples expense when men still have real issues to discuss. Just a thought.

 

[tres borrachos]

Well thank You-Know-Who for derailing it.

These threads tend to go off the rails on a crazy train, usually when somebody inevitably brings up child support.

Child support and foreskin. Two of the most important issues of our time.

 

[tres borrachos]

Maybe we want to stop talking about stupid **** like free birth control at other peoples expense when men still have real issues to discuss. Just a thought.

Then start a new thread airing your grievances.

 

[TheGoverness]

Maybe we want to stop talking about stupid **** like free birth control at other peoples expense when men still have real issues to discuss. Just a thought.

Then you can create your own thread about that, and bitch about it all you want. Not that hard to do.

 

[Henrin]

Then you can create your own thread about that, and bitch about it all you want. Not that hard to do.

Already did back in 2014. :shrug: So anyway, when are you ladies going to stop complaining you have to pay for birth control?

 

[poweRob]

Already did back in 2014. :shrug: So anyway, when are you ladies going to stop complaining you have to pay for birth control?

When are you going to stop complaining about what other guys decide to do with their dicks?

 

[JayDubya]

Yes, I would be fine with that.

Of course not; you're flatly bigoted on the basis of gender, it makes sense you'd say that.

 

[tosca1]

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau marked International Women's Day by promising $650 million for reproductive health and rights around the world.

The money, which will be invested over a three-year period, will support projects that provide sex education, strengthen reproductive health services, and support family planning and contraceptives. It will also fund programs to prevent and respond to sexual and gender-based violence, including forced marriage and female genital mutilation, and supporting the right of women to get safe and legal abortions.

The figure represents a doubling of current funding, Trudeau said in Ottawa this morning.

Canada is also supporting initiatives that will accelerate the use of contraceptives by 2020.

Justin Trudeau marks International Women's Day with $650M for reproductive rights - Politics - CBC News

=================================================================================================

I find it sad that each country doesn't provide this for it's citizens, especially sex ed and affordable contraception.

I find it sad for a nation's leader to bury its nation in more deficits, just to grandstand on the world stage.

This is the same nation that has its own indigenous people living in third-world conditions!
They can't even have access to clean drinking water! I find it obscenely immoral.

First Nations ‘living in Third World conditions’ as communities endure water advisories

First Nations ‘living in Third World conditions’ as communities endure water advisories - National | Globalnews.ca