[Elliot]

Literally all I care about when it comes to this topic is assuming equality with responsibility or assuming equality while also eradicating the responsibility. Moral progress like this is a slow burner and long track, and I don’t want any sick double standards to slip thru the cracks, is all

Ok and back to big brother..

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Elliot

According to someone else in this thread who gets mad at semantics every time I post it is. It’s not like there’s a mass social advocacy for more women dustbin workers, or miners. The discussion is usually, profession wise anywho, about ceos, phd students, mathematical and scientific graduate fields..

Obviously, why wouldn't women be campaigning for the more interesting high paying jobs? this whole I don't see you wanting equality in the **** jobs is utterly senseless, no one forces men to be miners or dustmen?

[crashandburn]

Originally Posted by Elliot

One of the main things I hate about this gender discussion is the consistency of the double standards that are actually quite harmful, and this is mostly because my mom was quite absusive and we weren’t able to do anything because of this consisting double standard.

I'm sorry to hear that. that must have sucked.

For the record, I don't fully disagree with Cameron's statement. the way see it, if someone hits you, you can hit them back. Man/woman/alien. Doesn't matter. For me that's equality.

But rather than worry about who can hit who, I'd rather focus on making a world where nobody hits anybody.

I'm more offended by the way he puts his comments across and the fact that he's mouthing off about things he knows nothing about that have just been spoon-fed to him.

since everyone associates conservatives with those who oppose social progrsssion, and thus it isn’t taken seriously

Well to be fair, it's a reasonable association to make, considering they are the ones who most often oppose forms of social progression. I mean even the name of their party - Conservative - literally means "keeping things the same."

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Elliot

Literally all I care about when it comes to this topic is assuming equality with responsibility or assuming equality while also eradicating the responsibility. Moral progress like this is a slow burner and long track, and I don’t want any sick double standards to slip thru the cracks, is all

Ok and back to big brother..

Unfortunately there's alot of double standards .
Nobody should hit someone unless they've been violent to them or utterly disgusting .

[y.winter]

hit BACK - which tbh for the sake of the argument, is valid enough.

I can't say I like the Cameron I see in the video, but implying that he supports hitting a woman solely for being a bitch and removing the part of "if she beats him first" - is a reach from reachland.

[Elliot]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Obviously, why wouldn't women be campaigning for the more interesting high paying jobs? this whole I don't see you wanting equality in the **** jobs is utterly senseless, no one forces men to be miners or dustmen?

Well that’s my point then. It’s about wanting the ‘good parts’ of equality, without assuming the bad parts the other gender has to deal with, and completely ignoring it really. Das literally it

[Pink Panther]

Originally Posted by RileyH

tea

I agree with him. Womens that beat men deserve to be hit back. Point blank.

[Elliot]

Originally Posted by crashandburn

I'm sorry to hear that. that must have sucked.

For the record, I don't fully disagree with Cameron's statement. the way see it, if someone hits you, you can hit them back. Man/woman/alien. Doesn't matter. For me that's equality.

But rather than worry about who can hit who, I'd rather focus on making a world where nobody hits anybody.

I'm more offended by the way he puts his comments across and the fact that he's mouthing off about things he knows nothing about that have just been spoon-fed to him.


Well to be fair, it's a reasonable association to make, considering they are the ones who most often oppose forms of social progression. I mean even the name of their party - Conservative - literally means "keeping things the same."

Yeah I think priorities should be evaluated it’d be far better if we could have a world without violence, I’m not sure if that’s a thing that’s gonna happen anything soon tho... baby steps

And yeah ur right it’s just as someone who’s very left/liberal a lot of liberal circles I’ve found myself in don’t give ample criticism to certain flaws in this way of thinking, the only people that do are the conserstives, and due to them being conserstives said criticism gets brushed off.

It’s all part of the discussion and it’s all relevant imo. A lot of times people disregard ‘the other side’ of the gender debate with like ‘well women have it worse so they should supersede it. Like I’m what, one in like millions of people in the debate giving the other spectrum the time of day? I’m sure the absurd rates of sexual assault and gender pay gap are getting amply discussed. Imo everyone who’s in the working class is disadvantaged by gender roles in some way, to different severities. It all warrants discussion tho imo, to move to a future where maybe one day we’ll all be liberated from this bs

[Pink Panther]

Originally Posted by y.winter

hit BACK - which tbh for the sake of the argument, is valid enough.

I can't say I like the Cameron I see in the video, but implying that he supports hitting a woman solely for being a bitch and removing the part of "if she beats him first" - is a reach from reachland.

Exactly removing that part is manipulative and misleading...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Elliot

Well that’s my point then. It’s about wanting the ‘good parts’ of equality, without assuming the bad parts the other gender has to deal with, and completely ignoring it really. Das literally it

They dont "have" to deal with anything, nobody forces people to go for jobs they don't want, what are you on about? I mean are you actually saying women shouldn't be allowed go for good jobs they're interested in because there's not enough women who want to be dustmen?

[Elliot]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

They dont "have" to deal with anything, nobody forces people to go for jobs they don't want, what are you on about? I mean are you actually saying women shouldn't be allowed go for good jobs they're interested in because there's not enough women who want to be dustmen?

Thanks for misrepresenting everything I’ve said and getting mad for no reason

I’m pretty sure I’ve already spelled out how I’ve felt in the like 20 posts I’ve posted on this thread, that would prove what ur saying now to be false

[JoshBB]

"hit BACK" really is the key word here. I'm honestly shook this descended into a full on feminism debate

[AProducer'sWetDream]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

They dont "have" to deal with anything, nobody forces people to go for jobs they don't want, what are you on about? I mean are you actually saying women shouldn't be allowed go for good jobs they're interested in because there's not enough women who want to be dustmen?

I just think he's saying that if equality truly is the end goal, then people should be campaigning to increase participation of women in all parts of the labour market where they are underrepresented e.g. dustbinwomen. Instead, most of the campaigning seems to be focussed on getting women into the boardrooms.

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by RileyH

Am I the only one who doesn't think he said anything that bad?

No

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

"hit BACK" really is the key word here. I'm honestly shook this descended into a full on feminism debate

I'll leave Elliot & Niamh to it , i've said my bit already .

[JoshBB]

Originally Posted by AProducer'sWetDream

I just think he's saying that if equality truly is the end goal, then people should be campaigning to increase participation of women in all parts of the labour market where they are underrepresented e.g. dustbinwomen. Instead, most of the campaigning seems to be focussed on getting women into the boardrooms.

Well yes, it's mostly about power. When there is an equality of power (in terms of gender), the rest should fall in line hopefully. I don't think the boardroom focus is hypocritical/illogical.

[Elliot]

The thing is I’m sure I probably agree with you niahm but you’ve misunderstanding what I’m saying... my only point is it’s not equality if you want to consist detrimental double standards, like men not being allowed to hit women but the contrary being allowed. By definition it’s then not equality, and an entirely different beast to what I thought feminism was?
But yeah like at the above this stuff will probably fall into place so it doesn’t matter too much. My only worry are the double standards

[JoshBB]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

I'll leave Elliot & Niamh to it , i've said my bit already .

Think I must've scrolled past. Care to summarise?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by AProducer'sWetDream

I just think he's saying that if equality truly is the end goal, then people should be campaigning to increase participation of women in all parts of the labour market where they are underrepresented e.g. dustbinwomen. Instead, most of the campaigning seems to be focussed on getting women into the boardrooms.

Why would they if the demand/desire isn't there though? Biologically speaking women (in general) aren't as physically strong as men so it's understandable that women wouldn't be as inclined to go for those kind of jobs, don't you think? That doesn't apply in CEO, media etc type jobs

[AProducer'sWetDream]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

Well yes, it's mostly about power. When there is an equality of power (in terms of gender), the rest should fall in line hopefully. I don't think the boardroom focus is hypocritical/illogical.

So then it's not really about equality in every sense of the word, is it? It's about ensuring women have the same representation in the seats of power as men. There is a diffrrence between campaigning for power to be shared equally between men and women, and wanting true equality between the sexes in different areas of life.

[montblanc]

Originally Posted by Elliot

I agree with the last bit quite a lot
I don’t wanna get too political, but I feel like if women truly want to be accepted on equal terms to men, which is really great, then they should also bear the consequences of this, because surprise being a man in society isn’t all sunshine. I’ll be content when we see moral protest against gender roles on both ends of the spectrum, which I feel is quite lacking in the daily conversation. Right now it’s just more about women wanting powerful roles

this comment is a bit problematic because it implies that men are treated worse than women in society when that's completely the opposite

i don't know if that's exactly what you mean but that's what it's implying

[crashandburn]

Elliot I think you're making a lot of valid points and I respect your opinion even though I don't agree with everything. You're definitely coming from a good, well-intentioned place.

But I think you're getting caught-up in details instead of worrying about the big picture. Sometimes details are important. Sometimes they just distract from the issue.

Regardless of what your opinions are I respect them more than that silly buffoon Cameron.

He's socially awkward, no life experience at all, clearly doesn't know how to interact with others or talk about anything that makes him remotely uncomfortable - lacking maturity and the mentality to deal with the real world.... yet somehow thinks he's in a valid position to know how the country should work. Sure, Jan.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Elliot

The thing is I’m sure I probably agree with you niahm but you’ve misunderstanding what I’m saying... my only point is it’s not equality if you want to consist detrimental double standards, like men not being allowed to hit women but the contrary being allowed. By definition it’s then not equality, and an entirely different beast to what I thought feminism was?
But yeah like at the above this stuff will probably fall into place so it doesn’t matter too much. My only worry are the double standards

I never said that though, clearly no one should be hitting anyone, male or female

[AProducer'sWetDream]

Originally Posted by montblanc

this comment is a bit problematic because it implies that men are treated worse than women in society when that's completely the opposite

i don't know if that's exactly what you mean but that's what it's implying

It's literally just stating the obvious that men have problems too. Show me where he said or implied that men have it worse than women?

[y.winter]

So basically we can change the title of this thread to "OK falsely implies that Cameron supports violence against women, but he doesn't actually"

End of drama. We can move on?