>
I recently ran across this picture online, which is evidently from a feminist protest in Mexico City in 1991; it was part of an exhibition of photos tracing the history of the feminist movement in Mexico City. (Here’s a link to a Google Translated version of a web page on the exhibition,.)
I think the slogan is a pretty good description of how most feminists would like women to be regarded: Not as saints, not as whores, but just as women.
Or, in language more understandable to a lot of the MRAs/MGTOWers out there: “Not as pretty princesses, not as Ameriskanks, but just as women.”
—
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
>Random Brother: You're not very good at this arguing thing, are you? To recap, I say that jobs that women have traditionally held are paid less because women's labor isn't valued as highly as men's labor. You say: What the hell, everyone should just apply for those vacant CEO positions!Do you see why that (a) doesn't really make sense, and (b) doesn't really address the problem?
>@ BeeWhat a pathetic little straw man you've created. I thought I could have an adult conversation with you but clearly I cannot. Let me simplify so that even you should be able to understand.Here's what you should do (you may want to find someone intelligent to read this to you.)1. There's this little thing called the internet. On it you can actually look up salaries, compensation, requirements, future outlook, etc, of most jobs.2. Use this "internet" to find jobs in the proper salary range that you like. 3. Use this "internet" to find out what the requirements are for those jobs.4. Get the requirements for the jobs.5. Apply to those jobs.6. Get paid. Got it? There has been no time in history where a woman has a better chance to be paid well, to exceed males in pay and still you bitch and moan endlessly, instead of getting off of your ass and doing anything positive. Random Brother
>3. Use this "internet" to find out what the requirements are for those jobs.4. Get the requirements for the jobs.The problem with this is that one of the unspoken requirements for many of the high-paying jobs out there is "a penis." Your denial of this is what's making you sound like a moron.Also the fact that you're a moron.
>Sorry this isn't going as well for you as you thought it might, Random Brother. By the way, when you keep repeating something, and then someone says that you keep repeating that thing you keep repeating–that is somewhat different from someone creating a strawman.And, again–and I don't know how you keep missing this–we are not talking about me, my job prospects, or my ass. I honestly and truly am doing fine financially, though I thank you for your concern.Instead of you moving goalposts again, I've got an idea. How's about you tell us why jobs that are traditional women's jobs are paid less than traditional men's jobs? Or perhaps you can tell us why most servers at expensive restaurants are men and most servers at breakfast diners are women? Or why there exists to this day a socially imposed barrier surrounding women's participation in low-education but high-pay jobs? Or why companies like Walmart employ a minority of women in management even though their workforce overall is mostly female? Or why, even when women make it into management positions or those low-education/high-pay industries I was talking about, it's always on terms set by their male coworkers and supervisors: in order to keep their prized jobs, they have to put up with being called gendered names, listening to jokes whose punchlines are sex discrimination, and being constantly pre-judged on their sex rather than their work?
>Richard wants proof that reality is reality. You can't prove it, can you! Huh.
>@Richard:"The questions then are should the government force you to be flexible? How flexible? How does this pan out over differing types of jobs?" I don't have an answer to this. Should the government force businesses to be flexible? It depends, does the government have an interest in women deciding not to have children? What does the US look like in two generations if our population declines? What does it look like if there is a population decline among highly paid, well-educated people and an explosion among the poor? There's no way to accurately predict the future, but that sounds bad. "For example you may be able to give flex time to a talented women in your department with no ill effects, but what if another less talented woman demands to only be on site 8 hours a week and cites personal child care issues?" I think it makes sense to deal with people's results. If someone is a huge slacker who produces good work, does it really matter if they're on facebook all day? If someone can work from home 32 hours a week, but they're meeting their goals, then there is not a problem. If they are not, you work with them until they are. If that means more time in the office, fine. If they consistently can't meet their goals, the issue becomes how to replace them."What if the government forces you to accept this and there are negative consequences?"I'm sure that this is a problem in some industries, who still have strong union representation, but for the vast majority of people, it's just not an issue. And, in my case, I have had several people who were not happy with our work culture, and the best way I've found to deal with it is to help them find somewhere else to work where they would be happier. The best solutions are usually win-win. "This sounds like a solution for one individual business, but it may be an awful situation for another."Um, of course. Solutions have to be tailored to the problems of the business and the problems of the workers. But just because I can't propose one simple, black and white, easy to implement solution that will solve everything doesn't mean a solution doesn't exist. "There is no way that we can accomdate everyone's whims in regard to employment. Attempting to do so, IMHO, is a waste of time, and someone will get screwed."I understand this position because I sit in meetings all the time with people who have it; it's the, "I don't want to do that, therefore, it must be impossible" formulation. Is there a way to, "accomdate everyone's whims in regard to employment"? I don't know. I know that it has not been tried in the past, but I also know that things are different now and a lot of things that seemed to work reasonably well in the past are failing miserably now. So, we try new things. Sometimes, those things also fail. But eventually we have ideas and make changes that don't fail. And then we start again. Such is life.
>@ triplanetarytriplanetary emoted: "The problem with this is that one of the unspoken requirements for many of the high-paying jobs out there is "a penis."Uh, proof? Links? Anything? Anything at all? Oh, wait you're just pulling it out of your ass. Just like feminists pulled the whole 15 out of 16 rapists never go to prison or on Superbowl Sunday there is an epidemic of wife/girlfriend beating or that we live in a rape culture or any number of other bullshit lies your kind makes up all the time. triplanetary: "Your denial of this is what's making you sound like a moron.Also the fact that you're a moron."No. You're a woman who has taken modern feminism to mean that you should be some sort of entitled parasite. You don't feel you should have to work hard. Everything should be handed to you because your a woman. You have no work ethic, no drive, and no ambition, except to make big daddy gubmint hand your lazy ass money. You have choosen to be a parasite on humankind. And in such you have no value whatsoever. Keep holding out for that big government check for laying around your house doing nothing but sitting on your ass.Random Brother
>You're a womanSwing and a miss.
>Bee: "Sorry this isn't going as well for you as you thought it might, Random Brother."Well I am trying to explain logic to feminists which is kind of like teaching pigs calculus, so I understand why you can't get it.Bee said: "By the way, when you keep repeating something, and then someone says that you keep repeating that thing you keep repeating–that is somewhat different from someone creating a strawman."Do you even know what a strawman is? Your claim is that women get paid less because they are women. Women get paid less because they flock to jobs that have less value. Do you really think that if a ton of men decide to become day care teachers that daycare teachers will see a six figure salary? Are you that dense?Bee said: "And, again–and I don't know how you keep missing this–we are not talking about me, my job prospects, or my ass. I honestly and truly am doing fine financially, though I thank you for your concern."Then quit bitching.Bee said: "Instead of you moving goalposts again, I've got an idea. How's about you tell us why jobs that are traditional women's jobs are paid less than traditional men's jobs?"Before I do that YOU TELL ME why women must go into those poor paying fields, then I'll get back to you. It's almost as if you think women aren't responsible for their own choices.Bee said: "Or perhaps you can tell us why most servers at expensive restaurants are men and most servers at breakfast diners are women?"Let me help you out here. Being a server at a restaurant whether upscale or not will not lead to a good salary. Now most men already know this but is seems my feminists friends need some help with it.Bee said: "Or why there exists to this day a socially imposed barrier surrounding women's participation in low-education but high-pay jobs?"Proof. Proof or call it your bullshit opinion, thanks.Bee said: "Or why companies like Walmart employ a minority of women in management even though their workforce overall is mostly female?"Walmart. You're talking about good jobs/salaries and you bring up Walmart. Jesus. Fine then.Do you have stats on how long women work at Walmart vs men? Do you have stats on male vs female job performance at Walmart, hmm dear? Do you have stats on male vs female education levels in regards to employees at Walmart, hmm dear? Do you have stats on who works the most overtime males or femals in regards to Walmart? No? Then you can't judge who deserves what now can you? Perhaps men who work at Walmart tend to not have children or their wives/girlfriends take care of the kids leaving them able to devote more hours to work and rise faster up the Walmart ladder. Ever think of that hun? Bee said: "Or why, even when women make it into management positions or those low-education/high-pay industries I was talking about, it's always on terms set by their male coworkers and supervisors:"You're supposed to work based on terms set by your supervisors, halfwhit.Bee said: "in order to keep their prized jobs, they have to put up with being called gendered names, listening to jokes whose punchlines are sex discrimination, and being constantly pre-judged on their sex rather than their work?"I thought women were tough and strong and could do anything a man could? A few harsh words sends her screaming out of the office? Weak. Why doesn't she sue for sexual harrassment. Isn't that what you feminuts do? Ruin businesses with shitty lawsuits?I feel like I've fallen into parasite central.Random Brother
>@ triplanetaryWell you're not a man, that's for sure.Random Brother
>@ SallyStrangeIn other words, I have no proof so I'll throw in some lame snark. Thanks for sharing.Random Brother
>Richard, please reread your latest two comments here. Do you notice a certain irony?
>@ DavidDo you not see my long post previous the last two explaining my points?Do you not see that Sally offerred nothing to defend or clarify any point here just snark?Or is your feminism blinding you yet again?Random Brother
>I see you repeating a lot of the same points you've made before, and then launching into weird tirades about "feminuts" and "parasites."
>@ DavidDo you see any points at all made by Sally Strange in this thread? At least my alleged repeated points are an attempt at clarity unlike Sally who has added NOTHING but snark. No points, nothing. Do you get on her at all? No you don't because she has a vagina isn't that right "male" feminist?Oh, and while we're at it do you believe that stay at home moms should be paid $100,000 per year for taking care of their own kids?Random Brother
>No I don't, but I also don't think housewives (or househusbands) are effectively "retired" with nothing to do but sit on their ass eating bon-bons.
>@ DavidI didn't say they were retired. There is however a vast difference between a middle class housewife with three kids and a the houswife of a multi-millionaire with servants doing most of the chores.Random Brother
>I was actually thinking of Chuck, who made the remark about retirement.And, yes, there is a big difference between a middle class housewife and the housewife of a multimillionaire. Granted, most of my information about the latter group comes from the Real Housewives shows.
>There is however a vast difference between a middle class housewife with three kids and a the houswife of a multi-millionaire with servants doing most of the chores.Naturally. But those multimillionaires and their wives constitute 0.9% of the US population, so what do they have to do with housewives in general?
>@ triplanetaryThe point is that differing households have different needs and some housewives have it easy and some hard. Random Brother
>Yes, obviously I understand that part. But when less than 1% of the population makes that much money, you can't argue that these easy-living housewives represent any kind of norm.
>@ triplanetaryI agree that easy living housewives are a small portion of most housewives but even among those who work hard there must be vast differences. A women with say two well behaved children will undoubtedly work hard, but place her time and effort versus a woman with four kids one with a developmental disability, there will, I suspect, be a vast difference in the amount of work done. So how can there be a calculated sum for how much a houswife should be paid? That's not even getting into the argument that paying a woman for taking care of her own kids is patently ridiculous to start with and who the hell should pay for it.You take care of your own kids! Here's some government money! Do you see how ludicrous that sounds?Random Brother
>That's not even getting into the argument that paying a woman for taking care of her own kids is patently ridiculous to start with and who the hell should pay for it.You take care of your own kids! Here's some government money! Do you see how ludicrous that sounds?Except that she's working to raise children who will become part of the next generation of taxPAYERS, so maybe it's not as ludicrous as it initially sounds.
>@ PamThe more I hear about feminism the worse it sounds. If you have your way I will have to pay someone to take care of THEIR OWN FUCKING KIDS, while I have no voice in whether she has kids, nor how many nor when. I just have to stand there and let the government yank dollar after dollar out of my wallet and smile or I'm an asshole misogynist. I have to smile if I'm quota'd out of a job or I'm an asshole. If my coworker chooses to get pregant and can't do her job I have to help her or I'm an asshole. If I start a business, I have to bend over backward to provide flextime and training for women regardless of how it effects my bottom line or I'm an asshole.If after spending money to train her, she quits to be a stay at home mom and I'm upset well then I'm a child hating asshole. And if the femiloons have their way when the woman quits to become a stay at home mother I'll have to still pay her via taxes or again I'm an asshole. The world is just a big ATM machine to you feminists, isn't it?No ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country at all in feminism. Relentless parasitism.Random Brother
>What I hear from Richard is "me me me me"*I* do not want to have to pay into a community *I* did not create. *I* do not want to pay for anything but what *I* think is appropriate. Look Richard-you live in a society created by people who paid for things you like without you paying for them yourself. Roads, the interwebz, the water distribution system, the telephone lines, the development of safe cars, the development of safe air travel…thousands of little things all day long make your life livable were created and paid for long before your whiny self was even thought of.Someone else paid for that-some of it was public (roads, clean water requirements, jails/prisons to house lawbreakers, schools, university research…etc), some of it was private (coding, cars, planes, mining materials…etc) however you did not…And someone had to have those babies who grew up to create all of the shit you take for granted daily.Someone had to wipe their nose, teach them how to do whatever, change their diaper, and watch to make sure they did not kill themselves before they grew up enough to make the stuff you want.And when you get old? Those children you hate because their parents did not consult with you prior to their conception and birth because heaven forbid you pay a dime to help make sure they grow up to be productive, will be the ones taking care of you when you are too feeble to help yourself. If you get Alzheimir’s and have to have someone to keep you from being hurt, they will be the ones doing this. If a cure is developed for something like arthritis, it certainly will not be you doing it (or if you do, definitely not alone) but you will be benefiting. It is called the social contract-someone else paid for your upbringing/infrastructure so you pay for the next generation’s upbringing/infrastructure and they pay (in more than money) for your needs as you grow old and useless. Or do you propose we take our elderly out the back door and shoot them?No? Then someone has to make sure they are okay, just as someone had to make sure they (you) were okay when they (you) were little. So yes, you are an asshole for complaining about paying to help some woman raise her kids she did not consult with you before having. You are an asshole for whining you have to help your pregnant co-worker (who if you had a sick kid at home would probably be willing to cover your shift). Or whining because someone wants to raise her child to be a productive citizen when you had paid for her training (since, again, someone has to produce the people that will clean up your whiny ass in just a few years.)