Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The War on Women

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The War on Women

    I started a thread in the lobby to condemn some of the actions I've seen lately. Women's rights are still an issue and I've seen that denied in several places in several ways. I think I've proven my point in that thread, but some of the facts about women's rights where questioned. I'm starting a new thread here to discuss them.

    First and foremost, remember there are two sides. You are not 100% correct on anything, and neither am I. When talking about women's rights, we are talking about what women, specifically the women supporting feminism, consider rights. Body autonomy, including abortion is a right, not a privlidge, not a murder, but a right. The "War on Women" is a feminist phrase, so we need to use feminist definitions. Equal opportunity is a right.

    So let me start with "The War on Women" is an exaggeration. It is hyperbolic language to motivate people to action on very real issues. But let me disprove one agrument made against me here. This has not been a bloodless war. 1.2 BILLION dead babies is a larger body count than any other war.
    http://www.numberofabortions.com/

    With that I will start with the attacks on "abortion rights", and remember from the feminist perspective abortion is a right.
    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-07/virginia-abortion-ultrasound-bill/53401720/1
    The state of Virgina has mandated invasive and un-nessicary testing be preformed before abortions. This ups the cost and makes it much harder for women to act upon their "right" to abortions.
    http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/28/us/mississippi-abortion-clinic/index.html
    The State of Mississippi has effectively ban abortions by placing such onerous regulations on abortion clinics as to make them un-runable. This is indisputably an attempt to stop women from getting abortions.
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/election-2012/personhood-bills-pushed-u-s-abortion-social-issues-fore-gop-presidential-contest-article-1.1023878
    There have been many personhood bills that would deem a fetus a person, and killing it murder.

    This is not a small fringe or radical exreamists. This is not the Westburo Church screaming at soldiers funerals. These are bills that are getting passed into law. That abortion is under attack is indisputable, and it's under attack is a very big way. Feminists consider this a right, so women's rights are under attack in a very big way.


    Contraception. This is another issue in the War on women. No, it's not a bunch of spoiled brats saying I want it free. It is much more complicated than that. "The Pill" is a by perscription only medication. This makes it expensive. Not because the pills are expensive, they are not. The Doctor visits are. Fighting about regulations that mandate contraception as a covered medication is a solid move on the part of feminists. First and foremost, when the male pill becomes available, I want that covered. The best way for me to do this is insure that contraceptives are all covered. Second, this is a fight they can loose. It's not the pills, but the doctors that drive cost. By keeping the debate on the pills, it's keeping the doctor's visits off the table. This is a sound strategy. Then there is the cost of the pills, while inexpensive, they are not free. Planned Parenthood is where many women get this medication because they can't afford it, but Planned Parenthood is getting it's funding cut.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/31/komen-planned-parenthood-cuts-karen-handel_n_1245568.html
    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/09/05/796341/public-hearing-on-texas-cuts-to-planned-parenthood-emphasizes-strain-on-low-income-women/?mobile=nc
    It is already illegal to use government money to fund abortions. While PP does provide abortions, it's a profit center for the orginization, not a cost. Cutting funding for PP will not make abortions not funded by government, but make it harder for the poor to get contraception and health screenings. And yes, PP will give men condoms with out hesitation. There are threats to women's access to contraception, and it's not just wanting them for free.

    The last point I'm going to make is the wage gap. I really didn't expect to get challenged on this. I thought 5% was widely accepted. The number touted by the media and most feminists is pure bull shit. There is a raw wage gap of 77 on the dollar, but this is comparing apples to automobiles. That doesn't mean there is no wage gap.

    http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=9118a9ef-0771-4777-9c1f-8232fe70a45c

    This is some feminist BS, but if you bother to read it, it does admit that only 5% is based on discrimination.

    http://www.ijull.co.uk/vol7/2/thomson.pdf

    This study find a wage gap of 4%-10% depending on age.

    The wage gap is real. It can be narrowed down to 4-10%.

    One of the discriminations that happens is called statistical discrimination. Women are much more likely to leave the work force to raise children. This makes training them much more risky. Women are also less likely to work over time and leave early for child care emergencies. This leads to less on the job training and less opportunities, based on gender not the individual. This form of discrimination is the basis for much of the "personal choices" that make up the bulk of the raw wage gap and is accounted out of the 5% number. This is a very real form of discrimination that limits Opportunities, and equal opportunities are worth fighting for.


    While hyperbolic, the "War on Women" does exist. There is a very real attack on the "right" to abortions. There are very real issues with access to contraception. There is a wage gap, and at least part of it is due to discrimination.

  • #2
    RE: The War on Women

    First, thank you for creating a thread with some good data that we can actually discuss. Secondly, please accept my pre-emptive apologies for any spelling or grammatical errors, since all I have to post with is a cheap android.

    Is love to tackle abortion first, as this, to me, is a bit of an ambiguous area.

    While I am, personally, pro-choice, I do feel that an abortion is a procedure that should only be done under grave circumstances. However, it is not a "right". You do not have the freedom to get an abortion like you have the freedom to exercise free speech. Labeling it as a right is an attempt by feminists to make any act of regulating a medical procedure that is tantamount to murder and act of oppression. The fact that you mentioned a 1.2 billion body count shows that you likely share the same viewpoint.
    [hr]
    My phone is already messing up. Cont.

    The states you cited above have every right under their judicial and legislative systems to propose, and if the requirements are met, enact laws that force mothers considering abortion to look at an ultrasound. If the woman in question doesn't like this, her options are to lobby to change it or move. What the state is attempting to do is to get the woman to take some responsibility for what she is doing- something that is almost unheard of. Should a woman not want to jump through the legal hoops required to abort a fetus, there are numerous contraceptive choices at her disposal, and she should familiarize herself with them in order to avoid the onerous procedure of getting a fetus sucked out of her ladybits.

    To call the act of legislating a medical procedure and act of war is simply ludicrous, and the state of Virginia in particular is doing nothing more than making these women look upon their mistakes and realize that, yes, there is a little tiny human being in there. The procedure is still available to them, and they can get one in pretty much any metropolitan area. Regulation is not an act of war.

    As to Mississippi, the regulation of an abortion clinic is a regulation of the clinic alone. It does not involve the woman in question, nor should it. Frankly, if they can't keep a medical clinic running to stringient standards, they shouldn't be in business anyhow. Again, this is a law enacted through the state in question's legal system, and should be addressed by raising public awareness and changing the minds of the people. Legislation through methods certified in the state's constitution is not an act of war.
    \"There he goes. One of God\'s own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.\"

    Comment


    • #3
      RE: The War on Women

      Originally posted by mattycakes
      First, thank you for creating a thread with some good data that we can actually discuss. Secondly, please accept my pre-emptive apologies for any spelling or grammatical errors, since all I have to post with is a cheap android.
      Yea, I'm not really happy about defending feminism. It has done some good, and that does need to be recognized. Women's right, as a topic separate from feminism do need to be defended.

      Is love to tackle abortion first, as this, to me, is a bit of an ambiguous area.

      While I am, personally, pro-choice, I do feel that an abortion is a procedure that should only be done under grave circumstances. However, it is not a "right". You do not have the freedom to get an abortion like you have the freedom to exercise free speech. Labeling it as a right is an attempt by feminists to make any act of regulating a medical procedure that is tantamount to murder and act of oppression. The fact that you mentioned a 1.2 billion body count shows that you likely share the same viewpoint.
      I agree, this is an ambiguous area. I agree it's wrong to call abortion a right. This does not matter. Feminists believe it is a right, an aspect of body autonomy. What matters for "The War on Women" is the feminist perception that it is a right.

      and FYI....I'm much more pro-abortion than the most rabid feminist (and yes I'm pro-abortion, distinct from pro-choice). There is a direct and dramatic correlation between crime rates and abortion rates. Violent crimes are almost all committed by unwanted children later in life. End unwanted children, end violence. If I had it my way there would be an abortion clinic in every walmart and Walgreen's. I do recognize that this is a rather lopsided view.

      Comment


      • #4
        RE: The War on Women

        With regards to contraception: an IUD, or intra-uteray device, is a grand total of $75 for five years of protection. $15 a year, for a grand total of less than $1.50 a month. If you can't afford $1.50 a month, from a responsibility standpoint, you really shouldn't be engaging in an activity that could land you knocked up.

        With the abomination that is ObamaCare bearing down upon us, female birth control will very likely be covered under preventative care. But for the sake of the argument, let's assume it won't be. Women will have to pony up and pay the exceedingly reasonable price of contraception. Oh noes. They may be forced to act with responsibility, or to face the consequences. Truly, a war.

        From a purely utilitarian standpoint, I posit that the government should instead cover male birth control. That is, condoms. They not only perform the same function, but they also prevent the spread of STDs and you can easily tell if they're being used or not, whereas with the pill, you simply have to trust that the woman in question is a responsible human being.

        So, even if birth control isn't covered (which it will be, if only from a cost effectiveness standpoint) there are still crazily cheap, stupendously effective options for women regarding birth control, as well as the male option, which has other benefits on the side.

        I would say that with so many options available, calling the birth control debate a "war" is stretching the term quite a bit.

        Also, as a side question, let's say that Uncle Sam pays for Betty's pills, and Betty ends up pregnant regardless. We, as a society, have already incentivized her acting responsibly by giving her, free of charge and in good faith, birth control. So what happens when she waives that with her own stupidity? Should we press fraud charges? Or, because she already got one handout, should it exempt the taxpayers from having to foot any WIC or TANF for her? From a governmental standpoint, how much should taxpayers reasonably need to invest in this woman to stop her from popping out a kid? Its not like she doesn't know how they're made. How many safety nets does Betty need from Uncle Sam?
        \"There he goes. One of God\'s own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.\"

        Comment


        • #5
          RE: The War on Women

          Women's rights are still an issue and I've seen that denied in several places in several ways.
          Welcome to a voice for MEN.

          I think I've proven my point in that thread, but some of the facts about women's rights where questioned. I'm starting a new thread here to discuss them.
          Yes, we do tend to ask questions. How annoying I know.. can't people just accept what you say without doubting you... men these days.

          You are not 100% correct on anything, and neither am I.
          I'm 100% correct in that i'm about to roast your entire post into flames.

          When talking about women's rights, we are talking about what women, specifically the women supporting feminism, consider rights.
          Welcome. To a voice for MEN.

          Body autonomy, including abortion is a right, not a privileged, not a murder, but a right.
          Lets use Nightstorms phrase. Baby murderers. So you support women killing babies and claim its a right. Right.

          The "War on Women" is a feminist phrase, so we need to use feminist definitions. Equal opportunity is a right.
          Yeah, to bad there isn't a war on women. All those dead women scattered around America from bombs and bullets. OH! You mean a social political war. Well men surely haven't had their rights taken away in ANY shape or form. By the way. Welcome to a voice for MEN.

          So let me start with "The War on Women" is an exaggeration.
          You don't say... ?

          It is hyperbolic language to motivate people to action on very real issues. But let me disprove one agrument made against me here. This has not been a bloodless war. 1.2 BILLION dead babies is a larger body count than any other war.
          http://www.numberofabortions.com/
          OOhhhhh so now their children. My bad.. I thought children had a right to life, but dam I was so mistaken.

          With that I will start with the attacks on "abortion rights", and remember from the feminist perspective abortion is a right.
          From the feminist perspective, so is male genocide.

          The state of Virgina has mandated invasive and un-nessicary testing be preformed before abortions. This ups the cost and makes it much harder for women to act upon their "right" to abortions.
          Oh noes! Women can't afford to kill their babies! What ever will they do!

          The State of Mississippi has effectively ban abortions by placing such onerous regulations on abortion clinics as to make them un-runable. This is indisputably an attempt to stop women from getting abortions.
          Oh noes! Lives are being saved!!!

          This is not a small fringe or radical exreamists. This is not the Westburo Church screaming at soldiers funerals. These are bills that are getting passed into law. That abortion is under attack is indisputable, and it's under attack is a very big way. Feminists consider this a right, so women's rights are under attack in a very big way.
          Yup, and if FEMINISTS consider it a right.. its a right... right? But its a good thing its just women and not men. You know, because men have no production rights at all.. but you know, thats not important. Anyways.. I think I forgot to welcome you here. Welcome.. to a voice for MEN.


          Contraception. This is another issue in the War on women. No, it's not a bunch of spoiled brats saying I want it free. It is much more complicated than that. "The Pill" is a by perscription only medication. This makes it expensive. Not because the pills are expensive, they are not. The Doctor visits are. Fighting about regulations that mandate contraception as a covered medication is a solid move on the part of feminists. First and foremost, when the male pill becomes available, I want that covered. The best way for me to do this is insure that contraceptives are all covered. Second, this is a fight they can loose. It's not the pills, but the doctors that drive cost. By keeping the debate on the pills, it's keeping the doctor's visits off the table. This is a sound strategy. Then there is the cost of the pills, while inexpensive, they are not free. Planned Parenthood is where many women get this medication because they can't afford it, but Planned Parenthood is getting it's funding cut.
          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/31/komen-planned-parenthood-cuts-karen-handel_n_1245568.html
          http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/09/05/796341/public-hearing-on-texas-cuts-to-planned-parenthood-emphasizes-strain-on-low-income-women/?mobile=nc
          It is already illegal to use government money to fund abortions. While PP does provide abortions, it's a profit center for the orginization, not a cost. Cutting funding for PP will not make abortions not funded by government, but make it harder for the poor to get contraception and health screenings. And yes, PP will give men condoms with out hesitation. There are threats to women's access to contraception, and it's not just wanting them for free.
          Dam. Women really want to fuck and have sex, but MONEY is involved! And bills making it harder to force the tax paying MEN to buy it for them! You know, women's sexual activities is not a right. If you fuck, you take full responsibility for whatever happens. Whether you get STD's, get prego's, or whatever. Its not a "right" and its no one elses responsibility. PERIOD. Men don't need to pay for sluts.

          The last point I'm going to make is the wage gap. I really didn't expect to get challenged on this.
          You seem like the type if anyone questions anything about you or your motives. Plus... your really a moron. You come on a male site and spout on about WOMEN'S ISSUES. You know, every other site on the internet has real concern about WOMEN'S ISSUES. But thats not enough for you. It has to be 100% every fucking where. We have to stop talking about men, so we can waste time taking to YOU, about WOMEN's issues.

          But i'm sorry. Im being alittle bit to hasty. I don't think I welcomed you to the forums. Welcome to.. a voice for MEN.


          The wage gap is real. It can be narrowed down to 4-10%.
          The wage gap is really called "the lazy gap". Its a gap where women refuse to do all the hard work or longer hours men do because they decided to get pregnant. And yes, they DECIDED because their is 12 forms of birth control available for women.

          One of the discrimination that happens is called statistical discrimination. Women are much more likely to leave the work force to raise children.
          Yeah, being a stay at home mother certainly wasn't on their agenda.. but its discrimination non-the-less. Feminists say so. It must be true.

          This makes training them much more risky. Women are also less likely to work over time and leave early for child care emergencies. This leads to less on the job training and less opportunities, based on gender not the individual. This form of discrimination is the basis for much of the "personal choices" that make up the bulk of the raw wage gap and is accounted out of the 5% number. This is a very real form of discrimination that limits Opportunities, and equal opportunities are worth fighting for.
          Women don't want equal opportunities. Women want MEN to pay for them and their children so they can sit at home and be "moms". Women have no desire to excel in the career force. They do it till about 30 and then shack up with Mr. Beta provider. Don't forget that bill that also DISCRIMINATES against men to pick WOMEN over MEN.

          But i'm getting ahead of myself. I should really welcome you to the forums before I just shout out like that. Welcome, to a voice for MEN.

          While hyperbolic, the "War on Women" does exist. There is a very real attack on the "right" to abortions. There are very real issues with access to contraception. There is a wage gap, and at least part of it is due to discrimination.
          And with that, my response is.. I.. DON'T.. CARE.

          When women give a shit about MEN's rights, then I MIGHT give a dam about women's rights.

          In the mean time, I don't think I gave you a proper welcome.

          Welcome.. to a voice for MEN.
          Behind every failure is a excuse.

          Comment


          • #6
            RE: The War on Women

            As to the wage gap, as was pointed out before, that 5% falls within the margin of error for the study. I have a selection of articles for.you below.

            http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-07-26/commentary/32859540_1_gender-wage-women-staffers-higher-paying-fields

            http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?pageType=moneywatch&catid=28246 928&feed_id=76&videofeed=43

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/
            [hr]
            The Forbes article in particular is very good. And really, from a financial standpoint, can you get a more trusted name?
            \"There he goes. One of God\'s own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.\"

            Comment


            • #7
              RE: The War on Women

              Mattycakes, you missing the points I made.

              Abortion is a "Right". It is an aspect of body autonomy. The legalities and processes assume it is not a "Right", but a privilege. Abortion is under attack. No debate there. The question is, Is it a "Right".

              The debate about contraception is a tactic, not a goal. It's not about the cost of contraception. Its about what the lobbyists fighting to enforce traditionalism will attack next, if they win the contraception payments argument. If we say yes "personal responsibility" for the cost of the pills, what's next? The cost of the doctor's visit to get them? That is many hundreds of dollars. This is getting into territory that could legitimately be called "war on women"

              I make no bones that "War on Women" is hyperbolic. There are women's issues that are under attack.

              To answer your side question.....It's a matter of statistics and costs. SNAP pays 200$ month per person. IUD's cost $1.50/month. If government handing out IUD's for free prevents only 1% of pregnancies that would have other wise happened, the government is saving money. This is just the money saved from SNAP, ignoring every other program out there. The saftey nets that are needed are what it takes to provide the essentials for living. SNAP, WIC, TANF, Section 8, etc are to weak. We need more. Offering free birth control is not a "Safety net" but a cost reduction for the saftey net programs.
              [hr]
              Originally posted by Nightstorm2516
              Women's rights are still an issue and I've seen that denied in several places in several ways.
              Welcome to a voice for MEN.

              Men's Right's is a denial of Women's Right's???!?!?!??

              You are what's wrong with the MRM.
              [hr]
              Originally posted by mattycakes
              As to the wage gap, as was pointed out before, that 5% falls within the margin of error for the study. I have a selection of articles for.you below.

              http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-07-26/commentary/32859540_1_gender-wage-women-staffers-higher-paying-fields

              http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?pageType=moneywatch&catid=28246 928&feed_id=76&videofeed=43

              http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/
              [hr]
              The Forbes article in particular is very good. And really, from a financial standpoint, can you get a more trusted name?

              I'm not going to dispute that the margin of error is 5%. I posted 2 studies that show the same results. This is significant even if within the margin of error. One study showed a wage gap of 10% for older workers. This is well outside the margin of error. This is significant. None of the articles you linked address statistical discrimination. This is significant.

              Comment


              • #8
                RE: The War on Women

                I agree that it's fiscally responsible to pay for a 100% sure form of birth control like an IUD. It's just good business sense.

                However, what it is not, is a right. Free speech is a right. Protection from illegal search and seizure is a right. Habeus Corpus is a right. Birth control is just something that they (feminists? Women in general?) WANT. There is nothing lost from treating one's reproductive system with the respect and caution it deserves.


                A right, in the constitutional sense, is an unalienable, intrisinc state of our being. Freedom to pursue happiness. Being free from government interference in one's own home. To put "the freedom to indolently bang whoever you want and not get pregnant because someone else is paying for you" is so far from that they may as well be on different planets.

                The arguement for birth control is, at it's roots, just an attempt to get free shit. Free shit that centralized on one specific gender. So as long as that's a "right", I'm going to go ahead and decide it's my right that the government pay for all my food. After all, it's more necessary to survival than birth control, and it's universal, not gender centric. So every time I'm hungry, you're oppressing me.

                Do you see the slippery slope we stand upon? The whole birth control, and abortion arguement, boil down to personal responsibility. You are an ADULT. You can join the army, you can own a gun. With the mantle of being an adult, you take on the responsibility of making proper choices regarding your body, to include reporduction. The abortion and birth control issues are basically just another attempt to Dodge said responsibility.

                We could argue semantics of what constitutes a "right" all night, but it's an ambiguous area and I think it's an issue that neither of us will give ground on.
                [hr]
                Also, nobody is stopping these people from getting abortions. The opportunity cost went up, but they're still legal. It's like gun control. You can still own one, you just need to jump through more hoops.
                \"There he goes. One of God\'s own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.\"

                Comment


                • #9
                  RE: The War on Women

                  Men's Right's is a denial of Women's Right's???!?!?!??

                  You are what's wrong with the MRM.
                  Forgive me Cunt. For I have spoken against thee.

                  You see, I am a moron because I don't understand what you understand, that women are goddesses and that we must worship them and give our very lives to the very end.

                  Right?

                  Anyways cunt, hopefully you get banned to this little section of the site permanently as you rant on and on about your women as your clearly misandric and only care about women period.

                  Paul Elam did a EXCELLENT job of calling this sub-forum the broken record. Because your broken and you keep repeating yourself.

                  By the way, if you think i'm pissed off.. well its because I am, because cunts like you are so hateful towards men that you come on a MEN's site and make it about WOMEN.

                  Welcome to a voice for MEN. I hope your stay is short.
                  Behind every failure is a excuse.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    RE: The War on Women

                    I'm sorry, I'm not really sure what you mean by statistical descrimination. I was more focused on disproving the wage gap, which, I believe, has been done several times over. But. I'll be happy to get you more information disproving it if you'd like.
                    [hr]
                    Also, I have made several arguments against the idea that birth control is a right, but rather that it is a responsibility. As the person making the claim, I believe the burden of proof lies upon you. Can you prove that its a right, rather than a responsibility?
                    \"There he goes. One of God\'s own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.\"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      RE: The War on Women

                      Nightstorm, while I understand your frustration, you're not really adding anything constructive to the conversation. Pages of angry ranting and name-calling are unnecessary. If you're not here to discuss things, and all you want to do is yell at somebody, maybe you should blog it or something. I'm not saying this to be rude or dismissive, I'm saying it because I don't want to have to sift through the pages of shit-flinging to weed out the real discussion.

                      On-topic, I don't really see any of the things listed in the OP as a problem. I'm pro-life, and frankly, a person's right to bodily autonomy doesn't extend to the murder of another person, except in the case of self-defense (in the case of abortion, this would equate to terminating a dangerous pregnancy to save the life of the mother). You can declare this stance as an oppression of women's rights all you want, but between the breadth of available sexual protection and the ability to legally abandon or give up a child for adoption after birth, aborting a pregnancy for anything less than medical reasons is selfish and irresponsible.

                      I could also slap the label "evil" on it, considering we're talking about killing for the sake of personal comfort, but I'd rather not devolve into something that sensational.

                      Also, I agree with Matty on the contraception thing. Sex is a form of entertainment... entertainment that has high risk without the proper protection. And last I checked, entertainment isn't a right, it's a privilege. If you want to entertain yourself without the risks inherent in it, you can pay for your own protection.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        RE: The War on Women

                        Originally posted by Greyfeld
                        Nightstorm, while I understand your frustration, you're not really adding anything constructive to the conversation. Pages of angry ranting and name-calling are unnecessary. If you're not here to discuss things, and all you want to do is yell at somebody, maybe you should blog it or something. I'm not saying this to be rude or dismissive, I'm saying it because I don't want to have to sift through the pages of shit-flinging to weed out the real discussion.
                        The MRM can't be justly called a human right's movement if we deny the rights of humans, women. I've been seeing this happen. Nightstorm is clearly part of the malignancy. Hateful bigots are not restricted to feminism and the KKK. To call out and condemn this behavior is why I made the thread in the Lobby section, not to try and defend feminism. I will admit, that I believed you to be one. Now you have a civil tone and reasonable points, I was wrong and I apologies for misjudging you.

                        I'm pro-life, and frankly, a person's right to bodily autonomy doesn't extend to the murder of another person
                        I agree, feminist do not. To answer the question "Is there a war on women" we need to look at it not from our perspective but that of feminists. Abortion is asserted as a right by feminists. Abortion is under attack. Women's rights are under attack. The rights of body autonomy are grey at best when it comes to pregnancy, so I can't defend the feminist position, only explain what it is. For there to be validity to "The war on women" I don't need to show that abortion is actually a right, only that it is believed to be by feminists.


                        Also, I agree with Matty on the contraception thing. Sex is a form of entertainment... entertainment that has high risk without the proper protection. And last I checked, entertainment isn't a right, it's a privilege. If you want to entertain yourself without the risks inherent in it, you can pay for your own protection.
                        Two points here. Sex is a basic function, like burping or taking a shit. It is wrong to put a basic drive in the category of "entertainment". The second is complicated. I will try to explain this, but it may come across wrong, so I reserve the right to recant and try again. Contraception is not a right. Access to health care is. Contraception is part of health care. Access to contraception is therefore a right. The "women's rights" aspects of contraception are tied up in convoluted ways with access to health care (very unlike buying condoms)



                        Now before you start in on this, let me view my thoughts instead of explaining feminism. Yes, there are very real women's issues. A small wage gap, abortion, and contraception are three of them. These are rights issues.

                        Abortion is weighing the rights of the mother against the rights of the potential person. Either side of the argument it is about rights. When you argue about the unborn, you are arguing human rights.

                        There is a small wage gap. It is real. Addressing it head on with gender quotas and affirmative action is counter productive. First we need to minimize the choices factors so we can get a clear read. We should have men-only scholarships for fields like nursing and early childhood development, and other fields dominated by women. To normalize education. We need "stay at home dad's" programs to normalize child care. We need courts that don't favor women. I do say that the wage gap is real, but it needs to be addressed in an indirect manner.

                        The contraception argument is more complex, but it doesn't need to be. The actual cost of the pills is not really at issue. The cost of health care is. Doctor's visits can can run hundreds and thousands of dollars even for basic stuff. The solution is not to mandate coverage (the I want it free argument). The solution is proper regulation of health care. There is no reason that Birth Control, anti-biotics, and other every day health care needs to be attend to by a PHD with 6 years residency and what ever other qualifications are needed to be a medical doctor. A nurse practitioner is perfectly capable of doing everything needed to attend these issues. Or even make the pill available over the counter. These are much better solutions than what's on the table currently.


                        MattyCakes. Statistical discrimination is discrimination based on statistics, not stereotypes. This is discrimination. It is not looking at individuals, but assining risk to groups based on statistics. It is arguable that this is a valid form of discrimination (like education level requirements). It is also arguable that this is not valid because it does not take the individual into account.

                        Also, do you have links to the actual studies that show no wage gap? You posted articles, not studies or reviews of studies.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          RE: The War on Women

                          Two points here. Sex is a basic function, like burping or taking a shit. It is wrong to put a basic drive in the category of "entertainment".
                          Sorry, I can't see your logic here.

                          Sex is not a required bodily function. You do not die if you do not have sex at all in your entire life.
                          Sex is entertainment (the vast majority of it in the west) and used for reproduction.
                          When men complain that it is not fair for them to be held accountable for a child they may not want, all feminist groups and most women always answer something like "don't have sex then, keep your dick in your pants, etcc.". It makes sense that the same should apply to women, end of story.

                          Regarding the wage gap, if a woman is a riskier prospect due to her physiological needs than it is not "discrimination" that makes her receive less pay, just as it apparently is not discrimination for a man to have to pay more for various types of insurance because of statistic risk.
                          And that is not even touching on the very obvious fact that the vast majority of women simply don't work difficult/high risk jobs which pay more. Instead women need "affirmative action" to get them cushy office jobs over equally (or higher) qualified men, but no such "affirmative action" is done to ensure men are present in jobs that women have a vast majority of the spots in. Or for that matter, where is "affirmative action" to get women into ditch digging and construction work ? Oh right...nevermind..

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            RE: The War on Women

                            "I agree. Feminists do not."

                            Is anyone still taking the bait here? This is as clear as it gets. Rabu, you're closed to discussion (yeah I know you're not but feminists are, whatever), and are not ready to accept things even after you agree with them. Who can argue with such a person? And why?

                            MRM is not about fighting for every human's rights, please. It's specifically about men's right. It's humanitarian in that it doesn't demand any special rights for men. It does not cover fighting for the women's rights. Stop redefining it to suit your (sorry, the feminists') purpose. I repeat, MRM is not about women's rights at all and you can quote me everywhere for that.
                            The MRM Glossary - From Zero to Hero MRA :P

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              RE: The War on Women

                              Originally posted by ruskyandrei
                              When men complain that it is not fair for them to be held accountable for a child they may not want, all feminist groups and most women always answer something like "don't have sex then, keep your dick in your pants, etcc.". It makes sense that the same should apply to women, end of story.
                              I agree it should go both ways. I'm saying it shouldn't be the case for either men or women. Sex is a basic function and drive is used to counter this claim. I'm just applying MRA logic to everyone, including women

                              Regarding the wage gap, if a woman is a riskier prospect due to her physiological needs than it is not "discrimination" that makes her receive less pay
                              http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/discrimination

                              Dictionaries are wonderful things.......Yes, statistical discrimination is discrimination. It is treatment based on group affiliations, not individuals. The very definition of discrimination.
                              [hr]
                              Originally posted by dhanu
                              MRM is not about fighting for every human's rights, please.
                              Big difference between fighting for rights, and denying they exist/are being attacked, or attacking them yourself.

                              Men's Rights and Women's Rights are not mutually exclusive. There is no need to attack women's rights to promote men's rights. The MRM is about fighting for men and boys, but don't attack women's rights in the process.
                              [hr]
                              Originally posted by dhanu
                              "I agree. Feminists do not."
                              You know quote mining doesn't work very well in a forum thread where they can just go look at the whole statement I made, and the context.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X