Feminism

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by anakin_girl, Mar 19, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    I describe myself as a feminist, meaning I believe in complete equality between men and women. That is the original definition--not that the current feminist movement hasn't perverted it to some extent.

    Here are the believes that make me a feminist:

    1. Women and men should be able to do the exact same jobs, including combat jobs and playing in the NFL, and receive the exact same pay for it. If any employer has the choice between hiring a man and hiring a woman, and all other things being equal, chooses to hire the man because the woman is of child-bearing age, married and "might" get pregnant and want maternity leave, the employer should be taken to the cleaners in court.

    2. Women should only have children or take their husbands' last names if they want to. They should not feel obligated to in any way. Motherhood is too important a job to enter into it out of some sense of duty or obligation--the overwhelming maternal desire should be there before even considering going off birth control.

    As far as last names, I have my husband's, but only because it was important to him and I knew I was just exchanging one man's last name for another--and what was the difference between husband's and father's, other than husband's has one letter fewer, a different nationality (I get joked for my Irish looks and Italian last name), and it's closer to the beginning of the alphabet?

    3. Birth control should be readily and easily available, and women should be educated on how to use it. Abortions should be available during first trimester with no questions asked.

    All young girls should be taught self-defense in school in order to avoid being taken advantage of by machismo men.

    4. Women should be able to dress however they want. If men can take off their shirts in public, we should be able to take off ours. Complaining about Brandy Chastain stripping down to her sports bra was the ultimate in hypocrisy. How many men take their shirts off when they're hot?

    It is hot in July where I live. I wear short shorts and cropped halter tops, and I will do so whether men can control their penises or not. The latter is not my responsibility or my problem, and I will not suffer for it.

    5. We need to get rid of gender roles. If a guy wants to play with Barbies, let him. Ditto if a girl wants to play with Matchbox cars. Guys should be taught to clean bathrooms and do dishes, and should be taught that they are not too good to do it, and that it is not "women's work". Girls should be taught to mow grass and take care of their own cars.

    6. Paying on a date should be determined by who initiated the date and who is making the most money, not who has a penis.


    Now, people who make feminists look bad:

    1. All the "feminazis" who are trying to get "women" changed to "womyn" and try to tell other women that they shouldn't put "Mrs." in front of their names, take their husbands' names or stay home with their children. The idea is that we should be allowed to do what's best for us, not that we should put limitations on ourselves on the opposite side. We want to get away from having men oppress us, but we don't want to be oppressed by the agenda of other women.

    2. Women who still expect men to look after them while at the same time screaming about the way men treat them. We have to accept men for the way they are, especially some men, and we have to look out for ourselves. And we can't play dumb. Example: Paula Jones. She is a boil on the ass of feminism. A cop comes to see her and says "The governor wants to see you in his hotel room." Hel-LO, you dumb broad, what did you think he wanted to see you in his hotel room for--milk and cookies? That and she waited three years, until he was conveniently President of the United States, before interrupting his running of the country so that he could deal with her piddly lawsuit. If it bothered her that much (even though she was pretty damn stupid to go to his hotel room and not expect him to want some nookie), she should have brought a lawsuit against him at the time.
  2. Mastadge Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 4, 1999
    star 7
    "Feminism is sort of like God. Many people profess to believe in it, but no one seems to be able to define it to everyone's satisfaction." -- Aaron Allston

    Anyway, I'll respond more after I've eaten dinner.
  3. Moriarte Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Aug 17, 2001
    star 5
    Hrm, a lot of these are not too plausable.

    I describe myself as a feminist, meaning I believe in complete equality between men and women. That is the original definition--not that the current feminist movement hasn't perverted it to some extent.

    I would not even call it feminism anymore, as the word itself does not seem to imply equality between women AND men. I would find a different word altogether. Especially since some radical feminists have hijacked the term as a "punish men" mentality.

    1. Women and men should be able to do the exact same jobs, including combat jobs and playing in the NFL, and receive the exact same pay for it. If any employer has the choice between hiring a man and hiring a woman, and all other things being equal, chooses to hire the man because the woman is of child-bearing age, married and "might" get pregnant and want maternity leave, the employer should be taken to the cleaners in court.

    That's fine, though some medical items need to be taken into account. The NFL?...good luck.

    2. Women should only have children or take their husbands' last names if they want to. They should not feel obligated to in any way. Motherhood is too important a job to enter into it out of some sense of duty or obligation--the overwhelming maternal desire should be there before even considering going off birth control.

    How about, men and women should both be in the discussion process about whether or not to have children. There are times when women pressure men to become fathers, you know.

    3. Birth control should be readily and easily available, and women should be educated on how to use it. Abortions should be available during first trimester with no questions asked.

    All young girls should be taught self-defense in school in order to avoid being taken advantage of by machismo men.


    When two people have sex, both men and women are responsible for the possible consequences that may result, thus BOTH kinds of birth control should be available (and it is), and neither party is exhempt from this responsibility.

    How about young boys learning self-defense to protect themselves from others as well. I did not see you put down "...to avoid being taken advantage by tough women", though AG. Self-defense, as far as I know, is taught in high-school or at least the basics.

    4. Women should be able to dress however they want. If men can take off their shirts in public, we should be able to take off ours. Complaining about Brandy Chastain stripping down to her sports bra was the ultimate in hypocrisy. How many men take their shirts off when they're hot?

    It is hot in July where I live. I wear short shorts and cropped halter tops, and I will do so whether men can control their penises or not. The latter is not my responsibility or my problem, and I will not suffer for it.


    That's a bit tough, AG, as a woman's breasts are considered sexual sociologically and biologically. I don't see a problem with that, though why not just walk around naked as well? I know I would like some degree of constraint.

    5. We need to get rid of gender roles. If a guy wants to play with Barbies, let him. Ditto if a girl wants to play with Matchbox cars. Guys should be taught to clean bathrooms and do dishes, and should be taught that they are not too good to do it, and that it is not "women's work". Girls should be taught to mow grass and take care of their own cars.

    This point has a lot of angst in it and I doubt that what you purport is always the case, or even in the majority. You don't want gender roles, yet you are arguing for boys to do "traditional" girls work and then the other way around? For how long, or both at the same time? How about phrasing one of your points "girls are not too good to get their hands dirty and fix a friggin' car.", but no, let's just jab at boys/men, right? Like it or not, a man's and woman's biological make-up is going to make either sex prone to certain activities. Boys tend to be/play rough, doll or not and girls tend to be/play ni
  4. womberty Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2002
    star 4
    Thanks for clarifying so many points, a_g. :)

    I agree with you on most of it. I'll reserve any differences we might possibly have on abortion for the other thread, though I think we come pretty close these days.

    The one thing I'd have to point out is that you suggested self-defense classes for girls. Make it apply to all kids in school - knowing how to defend yourself is important for everyone.
  5. darth_paul Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 24, 2000
    star 5
    I agree with most of what you said. I do have a few concerns and other thoughts I'll bring up for your consideration.

    If any employer has the choice between hiring a man and hiring a woman, and all other things being equal, chooses to hire the man because the woman is of child-bearing age, married and "might" get pregnant and want maternity leave, the employer should be taken to the cleaners in court.
    I can't absolutely agree with this statement. In general I'm a laissez-faire capitalist and get uncomfortable whenever the government starts intruding upon the business world, so I'd be uneasy about seeing something like that codified. The other, more palpable fear I have is that strong legal stipulations to that effect would open the door to frivolous, unreasonable lawsuits. Employers I know are basically afraid to reject a minority applicant, except on the basis of extreme underqualification, because of the potential for a racial discrimination lawsuit. This is already possible where gender is concerned, and I'd hate to see the problem amplified by more legislation on the subject.

    Basically, my concern is that any time a man is hired over an equally-qualified woman, the woman can sue. While I respect your reasoning, that sort of legal situation can be quite unfair to males. In my opinion, all other things being perfectly equal, an employer is entitled to choose an employee of either gender as he pleases. However, assuming we cannot achieve the kind of laissez-faire capitalism I'd like to see, I have no problems with a woman's being able to sue if an employer instead hires a less-qualified man.

    All young girls should be taught self-defense in school in order to avoid being taken advantage of by machismo men.
    I'm only okay with this if we are also to teach the same self-defense classes to boys. I don't think teaching self-defense to children is a bad idea. But your stipulating that it should be taught to little girls suggests you think girls/woman are either more deserving or more needful of the ability to defend with themselves, and I can't agree with either statement. If you aren't going to offer self-defense classes equally to both genders, then it should be entirely the responsibility/choice of the parents to offer such training. You'd objecct, I'm sure, if girls were sent off to learn sewing while boys did weight training or somesuch. I would see offering these self-defense classes only to girls as no different.

    Women should be able to dress however they want. If men can take off their shirts in public, we should be able to take off ours. Complaining about Brandy Chastain stripping down to her sports bra was the ultimate in hypocrisy. How many men take their shirts off when they're hot?

    It is hot in July where I live. I wear short shorts and cropped halter tops, and I will do so whether men can control their penises or not. The latter is not my responsibility or my problem, and I will not suffer for it.
    I quote this not to question it, but to give my specific support. I've long thought that if men can go about completely topless, woman ought to be able to as well. I was disgusted with the big outcry over Janet Jackson's breast, when men are frequently seen topless on television. Of course, I support legal public nudity, but if that cannot be legally allowed, then equal standards of public decency are a must.

    We need to get rid of gender roles. If a guy wants to play with Barbies, let him. Ditto if a girl wants to play with Matchbox cars. Guys should be taught to clean bathrooms and do dishes, and should be taught that they are not too good to do it, and that it is not "women's work". Girls should be taught to mow grass and take care of their own cars.
    Again, you'll find no refutation from me here. I was blessed to have parents who were not concerned with gender roles, let me play as I pleased, and did indeed teach me to wash dishes and clean
  6. womberty Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2002
    star 4
    Oops, forgot to mention my response to your hotel-room/rape issue. I agree that they can't play dumb, but there is a possibility that they had different expectations. Rape still depends on whether something was forced to do something they didn't want to.

    EDITED: Thanks.
  7. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    How about, men and women should both be in the discussion process about whether or not to have children. There are times when women pressure men to become fathers, you know.

    And any woman who traps a man into fatherhood by "forgetting" her pill is scum and deserves to be left.

    That's fine, though some medical items need to be taken into account. The NFL?...good luck.

    There are men smaller than I am playing in the NFL. Why not women?

    When two people have sex, both men and women are responsible for the possible consequences that may result, thus BOTH kinds of birth control should be available (and it is), and neither party is exhempt from this responsibility.

    I agree, but unfortunately we're the ones who often get stuck with the problem in the aftermath of unprotected sex.

    How about young boys learning self-defense to protect themselves from others as well.

    I don't have a problem with that.

    I did not see you put down "tough women", though AG.

    And you won't. I am one. ;)

    The reason I specifically say young girls is because you don't see too many young boys being raped by grown women.

    I don't see a problem with that, though why not just walk around naked as well?

    I prefer to keep my genitalia protected from the sun, and I would think a man definitely would--but to each his own. Nudity doesn't bother me. I just don't like the idea that a man is allowed to be more comfortable than I am.

    Gender roles will probably never get rid of, as men and women are not androgynous beings.

    If your daughter, when given the choice between a doll and a truck, chooses the doll, then let her play with the doll--I don't have a problem with that. But if she chooses the truck, she shouldn't be persuaded to try the doll because "that's what girls do."

    And yes, I am arguing for men to do "traditional women's work". I didn't make up the idea of housework being women's work. My husband is better at it than I am (I say as I type on the comp and he vacuums the living room). I also think women are rendering themselves helpless if they don't know how to take care of cars--if you're going to drive a car, you need to know what the hell might be wrong with it when it breaks down.

    I will add that men do not deserve to be punished for what some men have done in the past when those men were just as trapped in their own ways as women were.

    I'm not interested in punishing men (some of them maybe, but not the gender as a whole), I just want to be on equal standing with them.

    How many women are going to vote for her, if she runs in 2008, simply because she's a woman? A lot.

    Not this feminist. And I'll have no respect for anyone who votes for her just because she's a woman.

    What about Koby Bryant? What did that girl expect when at 12am a basketball star invites you to his room?

    That was my point. She went in his room, therefore, it wasn't rape, and she needs to shut her mouth.

    As far as Anita Hill--she accused Clarence Thomas ten years after the "fact", saying nothing at the time of the alleged "harassment". And yet feminazis are screaming "Viva Anita".

    #If a woman is pregnant, the potential father has every right to be involved in the decision-making process over what to do about the potential child-as it is his future, not just the mother's as well.

    I agree to a point--it is half his, even if she's the one who has to carry it for nine months. However, I think if he's going to put his foot down and try to stop her from aborting, he should support her throughout the pregnancy and then raise the child himself.
  8. darth_paul Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 24, 2000
    star 5
    That was my point. She went in his room, therefore, it wasn't rape, and she needs to shut her mouth.
    I still can't agree with you. There are decent guys who might just want to talk to a girl, you know. I've been invited into hotel rooms alone by my female friends, and I've invited female friends into hotel rooms when I was the only one there, and not a smidge of sex ever took place. I think the legal ramifications of considering going into a guy's hotel room to be giving consent to sex would be disastrous, and would seriously harm the rights of rape victims. Rape is proceeding with sex over objection, and I won't accept a definition that does not give someone the opportunity to object at any point. If halfway through sex a woman decides she wants to stop and the man continues over her objections, that's rape too. The way you would seek to define consent really worries me.

    As far as Anita Hill--she accused Clarence Thomas ten years after the "fact", saying nothing at the time of the alleged "harassment". And yet feminazis are screaming "Viva Anita".
    I agree that reporting a rape ten years later is rather ridiculous. There probably ought to be some deadline for reporting rapes, but then again, I don't like measures that limit the decision-making power of the courts.

    Really, reporting a rape any time after the first second the guy's not around is waiting too long. In a crime that is almost always witness-free, biological evidence is imperative, and someone who has been raped ought to go to the hospital immediately to have a rape evidence kit collected. I can't stand convictions that are baseed on obscure hotel bills, witnesses saying they entered a room together, and character testimony. Which leads me to my next thought:

    There's a problem with the way rape is handled by the legal system, I think. It may just seem this way because I'm male, but I feel as though in general the burden of proof falls upon a man to prove his innocence. False accusations do happen for all sorts of reasons, and to look at a man as automatically guilty because he has a penis is wrong. Decades ago, if a woman reported a rape, society felt she was at fault. Now, the automatic assumption is that the man is at fault. It's not that the courts need to change; it's that the way society thinks of a rape accusation need to change. Neither party should be considered at-fault or given widespread public sympathy until after there's been a verdict. Assuming the man is at fault is as bad as assuming the woman is lying.

    I agree to a point--it is half his, even if she's the one who has to carry it for nine months. However, I think if he's going to put his foot down and try to stop her from aborting, he should support her throughout the pregnancy and then raise the child himself.
    I think I advocated this in the Abortion thread. In my opinion, a child is the product of two parents, and a woman should not be able to get an abortion if the father objects. However, I also agree that a male objection to an abortion should require the male to take full responsibility for the baby. This would require the father to support the mother emotionally and financially during the pregnancy. If the couple is not on good enough terms for the father to give his own emotional support, he's responsible for paying for therapy for the mother. Also, if it's found that he has abused the child's mother physically or psychologically, then he has waived his rights to be part of the decision-making process. Further, if this abuse happens too late for an abortion, he is financially responsible to the baby (who I suppose would be most likely offered for adoption) and should pay damages to the mother, in addition to any legal penalties. After the child's birth, in a non-abusive situation, the father would assume legal custody of the baby. (In fairness to the father's rights, the woman seeking the abortion would probably have to sign away all her rights to future cont
  9. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    I've been invited into hotel rooms alone by my female friends, and I've invited female friends into hotel rooms when I was the only one there, and not a smidge of sex ever took place.

    I see your point. I think my issue is with what you brought up about how sharply the pendulum has swung. Before, courts were too likely to declare a rape the woman's fault--now, it's the man's fault automatically. And I am a woman--we can be nasty, manipulative creatures--what better way to get back at an ex-boyfriend, or someone we regretted having a one-night stand with, than to accuse him of rape?

    I watched an Oprah episode a few weeks ago that made me furious. This high school senior honor student's life was ruined because he had sex with the wrong girl. Supposedly, they went into a trailer together after school, on school grounds, and he "pinned her against the wall with his hands while pulling her pants down with his elbows". Hel-LO--that's physically impossible. Meanwhile the girl was doing these fake tears while she was telling the story. Oprah asked her if she told him to stop, and she said "No." Sorry, sweetie, it isn't rape. You may regret doing it, but, news flash: you consented to sex. Get over it.

    As far as the Kobe Bryant/Bill Clinton situation--those girls were not exactly entering hotel rooms of male friends. These guys were strangers to them. No way in hell am I going into a hotel room of a guy I don't know, alone, unless I am prepared to have sex. At the same time I do think a woman should be able to say "no" at any point, but going into a strange man's hotel room is still an idiotic thing to do.
  10. darth_paul Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 24, 2000
    star 5
    At the same time I do think a woman should be able to say "no" at any point, but going into a strange man's hotel room is still an idiotic thing to do.
    I don't think we disagree at all there. My chief quarrel with your point there was a legal one; I think we probably see pretty much eye-to-eye as to what the behavior of the women in question says.

    -Paul
  11. Bubba_the_Genius Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 2002
    star 4
    a_g, I think a couple of your complaints are very silly, like African Americans complaining about how the words "black" and "dark" often have negative connotations.

    I wonder how much further you want to go.

    Should TV shows featuring home video bloopers show women getting hurt in the crotch the way they do so for men?

    Should we remove urinals from men's restrooms, or add urinals to women's restrooms? Or should we create unisex restrooms just so that men have to wait just as long as women during halftime at football games?

    After all, you wrote, "I just don't like the idea that a man is allowed to be more comfortable than I am."

    If going topless and paying for a date is actually in the top five (or six) of your complaints, maybe you should find some other issue to worry about.


    The most serious complaint is this:

    1. Women and men should be able to do the exact same jobs, including combat jobs and playing in the NFL, and receive the exact same pay for it. If any employer has the choice between hiring a man and hiring a woman, and all other things being equal, chooses to hire the man because the woman is of child-bearing age, married and "might" get pregnant and want maternity leave, the employer should be taken to the cleaners in court.

    Two questions are obvious.

    First, how do you determine an employer's reasons for hiring?

    Second, on what possible basis would you sue? It is, after all, the employer's company, the employer's money, and the employer's decision to make. If I want to start a company and limit myself to hiring people of a certain sex, or a certain race, or a certain religious background, why can't I? Are property rights of others obsolete the moment they're inconvenient to you?
  12. darth_paul Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 24, 2000
    star 5
    Second, on what possible basis would you sue? It is, after all, the employer's company, the employer's money, and the employer's decision to make. If I want to start a company and limit myself to hiring people of a certain sex, or a certain race, or a certain religious background, why can't I? Are property rights of others obsolete the moment they're inconvenient to you?
    Personally, I agree with you. Unfortunately, the law doesn't. Laws against discriminatory hiring were pushed through with momentum from the Civil Rights movement, and discrimination against women in hiring is already illegal, I'm pretty sure. Now the maternity point is a legitimate issue; I have many reservations about such a law, as I mention above.

    -Paul
  13. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    Second, on what possible basis would you sue? It is, after all, the employer's company, the employer's money, and the employer's decision to make. If I want to start a company and limit myself to hiring people of a certain sex, or a certain race, or a certain religious background, why can't I?

    It's a little thing called "discrimination", and it's against the law.

    You want to start a company and refuse to hire black people, or Italians, or women? Go for it. My brother is going to be a lawyer--I like knowing that he'll have work to do.

    First, how do you determine an employer's for hiring?

    I think, all other things being equal, it would be up to the employer to determine that he didn't discriminate against the female because she has a uterus.

    If going topless and paying for a date is actually in the top five of your complaints, maybe you should find some other issue to worry about.

    Maybe what I choose to worry about is none of your business.

    Free food doesn't bother me as long as a man doesn't expect payback--I was making the comment about paying for a date for the man's benefit, not the woman's.

    And it's easy for you to say that going topless shouldn't be a concern--you don't have to wear a torture rack just because "society" has determined that your chest is sexual.

    Should TV shows featuring home video bloopers show women getting hurt in the crotch the way they do so for men?

    I don't care--I don't think the ones with men are funny either, so maybe they should all be removed.

    And by the way, contrary to popular male belief, it does hurt us to be hit there.

    Should we remove urinals from men's restrooms, or add urinals to women's restrooms? Or should we create unisex restrooms just so that men have to wait just as long as women during halftime at football games?

    Suits me. Never was sure what the purpose of urinals was anyway. Why can't you just go in the toilet like women do?

    After all, you wrote, "I just don't like the idea that a man is allowed to be more comfortable than I am."

    That's right. My question is why is it important to you that women are more uncomfortable than men, or that we not make accommodations to equalize society?

  14. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    I think, all other things being equal, it would be up to the employer to determine that he didn't discrimate against the female because she has a uterus.

    So as far as discimination goes you have to prove your innocence?

    Suits me. Never was sure what the purpose of urinals was anyway. Why can't you just go in the toilet like women do?

    Why don't you just stradle a trough and pee standing up?
  15. womberty Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2002
    star 4
    Should TV shows featuring home video bloopers show women getting hurt in the crotch the way they do so for men?

    No, but then, they shouldn't be showing men getting hit in the crotch because that's not funny in the first place.

    Or do you enjoy laughing at other men's painful groin injuries?


    Should we remove urinals from men's restrooms, or add urinals to women's restrooms?

    Well, I've never seen a urinal in a home, so I'd assume that men can do their business with just a regular commode. However, I'm not going to insist that urinals be eliminated.


    Or should we create unisex restrooms just so that men have to wait just as long as women during halftime at football games?

    Yes. The idea of communal urinals in particular disgusts me. Why not give everyone a private stall with a commode?


    First, how do you determine an employer's reasons for hiring?

    If there's a pattern in the hiring practice or it's disclosed within the discussions on who will be hired, you can.


    Second, on what possible basis would you sue? It is, after all, the employer's company, the employer's money, and the employer's decision to make. If I want to start a company and limit myself to hiring people of a certain sex, or a certain race, or a certain religious background, why can't I?

    If you want to be able to do business with the government, they say you can't. If you want to have a lemonade stand and only sell to the folks on your block, you can get away with all the discrimination you want.


    And by the way, contrary to popular male belief, it does hurt us to be hit there.

    Just not as much, I'd imagine. But yeah, getting hit anywhere hurts - and it's not generally funny. There's room for slapstick comedy, but real-life injuries do not make for good humor.
  16. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    Why don't you just stradle a trough and pee standing up?

    I've done it--not all public restrooms are clean. ;)

    Well, I've never seen a urinal in a home, so I'd assume that men can do their business with just a regular commode.

    My husband does just fine.

    However, I'm not going to insist that urinals be eliminated.

    Me either, although I don't understand how either wanting to be allowed to take my own shirt off, or insisting that it be just as taboo for men to take theirs off, equates with wanting to clear urinals out of restrooms.

    I'm not pro-urinal, I'm not against them. I don't really see the point in them, and I don't understand why guys don't mind standing next to each other and peeing, but it's not a battle I choose to fight either, unless it's forced on me.

    There's room for slapstick comedy, but real-life injuries do not make for good humor.

    Seriously. If it were my husband, my father or my brother getting hit there, I would be pretty damn upset. Do these men who are being laughed at not have wives, daughters or sisters?
  17. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    I don't understand why guys don't mind standing next to each other and peeing

    I don't understand why women need to buddy up before braving the bathroom. They seem to do fine by themselves at home.

    Urinal etiquette is widely commented upon and widely accepted.
  18. womberty Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2002
    star 4
    They're the ones sending in the video tapes. [face_plain]

    Even worse, IMO, is the "funny" tapes of people bouncing off trampolines and landing on their heads. Great, let's encourage our kids to risk serious head and leg injuries for the sake of comedy. [face_plain]


    Why don't you just stradle a trough and pee standing up?

    Maybe if our clothes and undergarments had strategic openings, we could.

    But why would you want to pee in the presence of others anyway? Why is it supposed to be "okay" for guys to pee standing next to each other? Why is there even a door on the bathroom - just so the women won't see? Why are you expected to be okay with doing your private business in the presence of others just because their bodies resemble yours?


    EDIT:
    I don't understand why women need to buddy up before braving the bathroom.

    I suspect it's just to make sure that the other women don't say anything about them at the table while they're gone. ;)
  19. Cyprusg Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Nov 16, 2002
    star 4
    "There are men smaller than I am playing in the NFL. Why not women?"

    I don't actually think there is a rule in the NFL that women can't play. I'm sure we'll see female kickers in the near future, I've heard NFL players talk about it and they've never mentioned that the NFL won't allow females to play.

    But we will NEVER see a female playing any other position in the NFL than kicker. You're dealing with men that are in peak physical condition, world class physical condition, NO FEMALE will ever be able to come close to that. We're physically different, accept it.
  20. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    Perhpas guys are fine with it because they know the other people will respect their privacy as long as you respect theirs.

    We're there to empty our bladders not compare penis sizes, that's what cars are for.
  21. womberty Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2002
    star 4
    So why are there stalls around the commodes in the men's room?

    Or in the women's room, for that matter?
  22. farraday Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 27, 2000
    star 7
    Siting on a toilet takes longer and requires more in terms of exposure.
  23. DerthNader Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 25, 2001
    star 5
    Suits me. Never was sure what the purpose of urinals was anyway. Why can't you just go in the toilet like women do?

    I'm going to try and guess that it's easier for a man to use a urinal when it comes to those mechanics...as to why urinals aren't in homes, would it have a lot to do with the influence of women on home construction? I don't know, I'm just grasping at straws here!!! 8-}

    Women should be able to dress however they want

    Absolutely, and this goes both ways. Let me explain this to you all...a woman who does not want to show off her body, who does not want to wear makeup, who does not have a hair or lingerie fetish, is not a lesbian. Those preferences have nothing to do with sexual orientation, and you're awfully rude to women in general, and lesbians in particular, if you believe that sort of thing. Okay, is that perfectly clear? Good. :D

    We need to get rid of gender roles

    Another absolutely...please rinse and repeat with above for one of many reasons why...

    Take it as a compliment (it shows we care about you and want to treat you well), and, if nothing else, a wallet-booster, since you're having things bought for you. Why turn down free meals and movies?

    I just find it odd that I should deserve this sort of treatment because of my genitalia...I mean, those parts aren't that great-looking on any woman, and one of them has this odd tendency to bleed, and who could be nice to that?

    If I'm going to deserve it at all, let it be for the matter of my character, not the character of my birth defect. ;)

    Rape is proceeding with sex over objection, and I won't accept a definition that does not give someone the opportunity to object at any point

    I'd also like to point out that rape can also be sex occuring with no objection, if the person being raped is not in a position to object, either because they are unconscious, or because there is a real threat of violence if they do try to fight back.

    And it's easy for you to say that going topless shouldn't be a concern--you don't have to wear a torture rack just because "society" has determined that your chest is sexual

    Even if you choose not to wear one of those "torture racks" (great description, BTW), you still have to wear layers just to avoid harrassment. Well, when did I give any guy I don't know permission to look? I keep my eyes to myself, and so should he.

  24. womberty Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2002
    star 4
    Siting on a toilet takes longer and requires more in terms of exposure.

    So... it's okay to expose your penis for short periods of time, but not to expose your thighs or buttocks, or to expose your penis for a longer period of time?

    So why is male nudity in TV and film almost always the buttocks?


    And what happens when a transvestite walks up to the urinal next to yours?
  25. anakin_girl Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 8, 2000
    star 6
    I don't understand why women need to buddy up before braving the bathroom. They seem to do fine by themselves at home.

    Actually, farrie, I don't either. I don't ever get a friend to go to the restroom with me. :p

    And I agree with you, Derth, about the whole prepping thing.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.