Svenskaflicka
Fountain
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2002
- Posts
- 16,142
Hmmm... OK, I'm beginning to get it now. The togetherness of the outcasts, huh?
FemiNazi
- Thread starter sweetnpetite
- Start date
scarlet vixen
Experienced
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2001
- Posts
- 48
Hey Quasi,
I did not intend to pillory you, and I'll take the word of several that you are of moderate feminist persuasion. That's fine.
Probably I was reacting to a couple terms or phrases of yours, like, the battle is won, and 'unpalatable.'
Since the same issue comes up in what you say below, about a term to 'separate' extremists, let me try to put my point in a kindlier manner. There is no intention to hurt your feelings.
Moderate supporters of feminism are _very_ helpful, in that they pass laws, get elected, and even drive their girl friends to the abortion clinic, to which they contribute.
BUT, the free standing clinic, as in our city, is there because of the actions of an 'extremist', that is, according to your definition, someone not in the moderate wing of feminism, nor in the 'moderate' group of males supporting feminism.
Indeed, 100 years ago, abortion was probably not demanded, if mentioned, by those in the womens mvt. It would have been _very_ extreme.
Similarly there was a time when demanding a vote was 'extreme', that is, NOT on the agenda of moderate feminists, male or female.
If you cast your look back over history, the 'extremists' of one era are very important: In 1776, the Signers of the Declaration were surely 'extremists' NOT representative of the moderates wanting to work things out. In 1960 it was pretty extreme to say, in the US, 'get out of Vietnam.' In the 1950s, Martin Luther King was thought extreme by many in the group of 'moderate' supporters of Black rights; he was under FBI surveillance as a subversive or communist, starting back then.
Even now--for a similar purpose-- cast your eyes around the world. I could picture a Saudi ruler saying "Women in skirts, hair and ankles uncovered--how unpalatable!" "Abolish the royal family's privilege and power--extreme and subversive!"
So please accept my peace offering, and don't rush off in a state of upset, believing that your worth--as a progressive person-- is not appreciated.
I did not intend to pillory you, and I'll take the word of several that you are of moderate feminist persuasion. That's fine.
Probably I was reacting to a couple terms or phrases of yours, like, the battle is won, and 'unpalatable.'
Since the same issue comes up in what you say below, about a term to 'separate' extremists, let me try to put my point in a kindlier manner. There is no intention to hurt your feelings.
Moderate supporters of feminism are _very_ helpful, in that they pass laws, get elected, and even drive their girl friends to the abortion clinic, to which they contribute.
BUT, the free standing clinic, as in our city, is there because of the actions of an 'extremist', that is, according to your definition, someone not in the moderate wing of feminism, nor in the 'moderate' group of males supporting feminism.
Indeed, 100 years ago, abortion was probably not demanded, if mentioned, by those in the womens mvt. It would have been _very_ extreme.
Similarly there was a time when demanding a vote was 'extreme', that is, NOT on the agenda of moderate feminists, male or female.
If you cast your look back over history, the 'extremists' of one era are very important: In 1776, the Signers of the Declaration were surely 'extremists' NOT representative of the moderates wanting to work things out. In 1960 it was pretty extreme to say, in the US, 'get out of Vietnam.' In the 1950s, Martin Luther King was thought extreme by many in the group of 'moderate' supporters of Black rights; he was under FBI surveillance as a subversive or communist, starting back then.
Even now--for a similar purpose-- cast your eyes around the world. I could picture a Saudi ruler saying "Women in skirts, hair and ankles uncovered--how unpalatable!" "Abolish the royal family's privilege and power--extreme and subversive!"
So please accept my peace offering, and don't rush off in a state of upset, believing that your worth--as a progressive person-- is not appreciated.
Quasimodem said:
Dirty Slut
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- May 3, 2003
- Posts
- 525
I tried to read through the whole post but I couldn't..
"The truth is when it comes to sex, women just have to show up."
When it comes to finding an equal paying job, men have no idea what equal pay, stock options, and benifits means. To them it all comes down to the bottom line: Profit & Loss. Women, and certain ethnic groups can be paid less, and still make the company look progressive, and help keep the overhead down thus raising the profit level.
To be honest, there shouldn't be a spot on any job application form for sex, religion, race, or age. What do any of those things have to do with the job that one is applying for? Everybody has sex, eventually. Everybody believes in what they believe as far as God is concerned. Everybody applying for a job is human, or they'd be under investigation, at a carnival side show, or performing in the circus, or on CNN. Everybody applying for a job was born, and will die one day, but how their birthday makes a difference compared to their skill, and experiance is beyond me.
Obviously men put these things on application forms in the first place for a reason, and that reason can only be for controling who they might hire. As I understand it these things use to be in boxes, that you filled out as in SEX: And you had to put down Male, or female. But when people started putting the word "Occationally" that was changed to SEX: Male/Female and you had to circle one or the other. And later became put the dot where you belong on the internet. Male Female and a checkmark, or dot appears next to the one you click on. Same thing happened with RACE: when folks started putting down "Human" as their answer. I suspect the same is true for religion, and age in the future.
Men as a matter of course think nothing of this little devilish devise as they are the ones who came up with it. But it pisses me off when I walk into a room to give my opinion on a work related item, and all I get for my troubles is the latest Blond jokes, after the meeting is over, and nothing changes either way on what I was asked to spend 40 work hours on in the first place.
DS
"The truth is when it comes to sex, women just have to show up."
When it comes to finding an equal paying job, men have no idea what equal pay, stock options, and benifits means. To them it all comes down to the bottom line: Profit & Loss. Women, and certain ethnic groups can be paid less, and still make the company look progressive, and help keep the overhead down thus raising the profit level.
To be honest, there shouldn't be a spot on any job application form for sex, religion, race, or age. What do any of those things have to do with the job that one is applying for? Everybody has sex, eventually. Everybody believes in what they believe as far as God is concerned. Everybody applying for a job is human, or they'd be under investigation, at a carnival side show, or performing in the circus, or on CNN. Everybody applying for a job was born, and will die one day, but how their birthday makes a difference compared to their skill, and experiance is beyond me.
Obviously men put these things on application forms in the first place for a reason, and that reason can only be for controling who they might hire. As I understand it these things use to be in boxes, that you filled out as in SEX: And you had to put down Male, or female. But when people started putting the word "Occationally" that was changed to SEX: Male/Female and you had to circle one or the other. And later became put the dot where you belong on the internet. Male Female and a checkmark, or dot appears next to the one you click on. Same thing happened with RACE: when folks started putting down "Human" as their answer. I suspect the same is true for religion, and age in the future.
Men as a matter of course think nothing of this little devilish devise as they are the ones who came up with it. But it pisses me off when I walk into a room to give my opinion on a work related item, and all I get for my troubles is the latest Blond jokes, after the meeting is over, and nothing changes either way on what I was asked to spend 40 work hours on in the first place.
DS
ComfortablyCold
Virgin
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2003
- Posts
- 19
One thing I would like to see by the time I die is a woman standing behind the presidential podium.
What I never enjoy seeing is a group of people placing blame on another group for their lack of standing in society. Fighting for freedom or sufferage is an admirable thing, but pointing fingers and not taking responsibility for bringing oneself to the best they can be is definately not.
When it comes to feminism, I feel the same way. I know women who consider themselves "feminists" and do great things for the world around them. They participate in stereotypically male-dominated occupations and events and do damn well at both. I admire them for their courage to just get up and do what they want to do. None of them complain about being brought down or being forced into a smaller income, etc. They just fight there way to a place in life where they have "equal rights" and settle for nothing less. That's a beautiful thing.
This goes not only for women, but for blacks, hispanics and all other people with "different" races and religions. I admire them for standing up for what they want and just getting it done.
In today's world, things are looking up. I see more women in upper management positions than in the stories others have told me in the past. It is probably not necessary any more for women to actively promote "feminism", but I do not think it is hurting anyone/anything either.
The termin "feminazi" is definately derrogatory. However, there are some people who do apply to this word. Some posted earlier about being irked by women who hate men simply because they are. Generally speaking, these are the same women who cut their hair like men, date women and dress like men to prove some point. To me, that is more demeaning to women's movements than anything. It is one thing to express oneself as who they want to be and another to force it on themselves to shock people or prove a point.
I admire the woman who stays at home and tends to her home and three kids - that is definately a full time job that can be much harder than most I have worked in the past. I also admire (and am more attracted to
) the woman who has the drive to stand out in the world and make a place for herself in the business and polical world.
Ok...I think I'll get off my soapbox now. Thanks
What I never enjoy seeing is a group of people placing blame on another group for their lack of standing in society. Fighting for freedom or sufferage is an admirable thing, but pointing fingers and not taking responsibility for bringing oneself to the best they can be is definately not.
When it comes to feminism, I feel the same way. I know women who consider themselves "feminists" and do great things for the world around them. They participate in stereotypically male-dominated occupations and events and do damn well at both. I admire them for their courage to just get up and do what they want to do. None of them complain about being brought down or being forced into a smaller income, etc. They just fight there way to a place in life where they have "equal rights" and settle for nothing less. That's a beautiful thing.
This goes not only for women, but for blacks, hispanics and all other people with "different" races and religions. I admire them for standing up for what they want and just getting it done.
In today's world, things are looking up. I see more women in upper management positions than in the stories others have told me in the past. It is probably not necessary any more for women to actively promote "feminism", but I do not think it is hurting anyone/anything either.
The termin "feminazi" is definately derrogatory. However, there are some people who do apply to this word. Some posted earlier about being irked by women who hate men simply because they are. Generally speaking, these are the same women who cut their hair like men, date women and dress like men to prove some point. To me, that is more demeaning to women's movements than anything. It is one thing to express oneself as who they want to be and another to force it on themselves to shock people or prove a point.
I admire the woman who stays at home and tends to her home and three kids - that is definately a full time job that can be much harder than most I have worked in the past. I also admire (and am more attracted to
) the woman who has the drive to stand out in the world and make a place for herself in the business and polical world.Ok...I think I'll get off my soapbox now. Thanks
Icingsugar
peas o kayk
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2003
- Posts
- 2,051
Yeah, something like that. In the N-word case it is a clear case of taking control. If you use a demeaning word on yourself and your peers, in an afffectionate way, you make anyone who tries to use it in it's original oppressionate way a bit more ridiculous. If a black man already calls himsef a nigger, and a woman calls herself a bitch, then what is the point for Mr Chauvinist Racist to use those words for insult purposes?Svenskaflicka said:
Comfortably cold said,
"One thing I would like to see by the time I die is a woman standing behind the presidential podium. "
Me too. But there is one little snag our British ffriends have encountered. in the form of Maggie Thatcher. Do you want the woman at that price?
In the US, similar probs are arising. Clarence Thomas is a very conservative Black person appointed to the Supreme Court.
Recently a Hispanic was blocked by democrats and oppsed by many Hispanics: he was an appt to the Federal Appeals court.
Not to seem too paranoid, but 'the system' can perfectly well 'work' with a woman in the White House, and if she is, for instance, an evangelical right=to-lifer whose hubby is a giant defense contractor, what are ya goona do? Suppose she was running against someone like Bill Clinton? (who consistently blocked the abortion curb (so called partiial birth, dr's call
"D and X") that Bush just signed into law?
"One thing I would like to see by the time I die is a woman standing behind the presidential podium. "
Me too. But there is one little snag our British ffriends have encountered. in the form of Maggie Thatcher. Do you want the woman at that price?
In the US, similar probs are arising. Clarence Thomas is a very conservative Black person appointed to the Supreme Court.
Recently a Hispanic was blocked by democrats and oppsed by many Hispanics: he was an appt to the Federal Appeals court.
Not to seem too paranoid, but 'the system' can perfectly well 'work' with a woman in the White House, and if she is, for instance, an evangelical right=to-lifer whose hubby is a giant defense contractor, what are ya goona do? Suppose she was running against someone like Bill Clinton? (who consistently blocked the abortion curb (so called partiial birth, dr's call
"D and X") that Bush just signed into law?
Svenskaflicka
Fountain
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2002
- Posts
- 16,142
Icingsugar said:
Just like my cousin used to call our immigrated cousin from Brazil "hey, you, blackie!" just to take the edge of the insult.
The weird thing was that he was even more blond than I am.
I think the term for this outgroup usage is 'appropriation' or 're-appropriation'. As Icing says, it undercuts the power of the ingroup to say, as gay people do: "I'm here, and I'm queer." Some of the university programs in gay areas are now called "Queer Studies."
LL
LL
G
Guest
Guest
Yes, there are even sections in bookstores labeled Queer Studies (at least in San Francisco).ladylust said:
I'd love to have a "women studies" department or area labeled "Cunt Studies". Seriously. I know many women (including some of my best friends on the AH) still can't get 'round the word, but I love "cunt". It's a powerful word for me in a very positive way, esp. vs. pussy which I find a bit puerile most of the time.
a proud cunt, Perdita
ComfortablyCold said:
I'd personally qualify this by saying: if the female candidate deserves it more than the males. I'll die happy if every president in my lifetime is male, as long as they are more qualified for the office than any female candidates available in each election.
I'm much like Tatelou. I am in a job where my pay is based solely upon performance, a relationship where the power imbalance is deliberate and fulfilling, and a life where I have the liberty to say what I want wherever and whenever I please. I don't take this for granted but neither do I feel guilty because I am not actively working to free my oppressed sisters. Sic.
LorriLove
flirting slut on heat
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2003
- Posts
- 2,590
hiya perdy
how's your cunt honey
i have a wet pussy, well it's raining here and he just got in, my cunt's just a bit damp, giggle!!
i think this feminist thing is a bit of a cultural affair reading through the posts, i didn't realise you in the US don't have the same law given rights we do in europe.
we have an equal opportunities employment law which covers gender, race, and age, discrimination, no firm here dare deliberately hold back a woman from promotion or pay increase or they face prosecution, same goes for colour of skin, or age of applicant.
before you stand up and say "see we feminists got you this law" it was brought in by a male dominated political system with no coercion, and as i said covers more than just women's rights.
i got my job on merit, i won promotion on merit, and i now get paid more than some of the guy's.
i'm not ashamed to admit i love my hubby and respect him as an equal, and he loves and respects me the same way, anyone can be this way, you need to work at it though, just cos you're a gal it shouldn't be handed to you on a plate. that applies in love and work or other walks of life.
male or female, you get's what you earn's in this life.
luv lorrilove xxxxxxxxxxxxx
perdita said:
how's your cunt honey
i have a wet pussy, well it's raining here and he just got in, my cunt's just a bit damp, giggle!!i think this feminist thing is a bit of a cultural affair reading through the posts, i didn't realise you in the US don't have the same law given rights we do in europe.
we have an equal opportunities employment law which covers gender, race, and age, discrimination, no firm here dare deliberately hold back a woman from promotion or pay increase or they face prosecution, same goes for colour of skin, or age of applicant.
before you stand up and say "see we feminists got you this law" it was brought in by a male dominated political system with no coercion, and as i said covers more than just women's rights.
i got my job on merit, i won promotion on merit, and i now get paid more than some of the guy's.
i'm not ashamed to admit i love my hubby and respect him as an equal, and he loves and respects me the same way, anyone can be this way, you need to work at it though, just cos you're a gal it shouldn't be handed to you on a plate. that applies in love and work or other walks of life.
male or female, you get's what you earn's in this life.
luv lorrilove xxxxxxxxxxxxx
G
Guest
Guest
Re: hiya perdy
Feminism does mean and do different things around the world. Mexican feminists call themselves "mujeristas" as the word mujer is very distinctive from feminine or female. Japanese feminists are way behind many others, and god help those in Africa and China.
give a good peck to the hubby for me, Perdita
Hiya, Lorri, love. My puss is a bit neglected these days but she'll live (I hope).LorriLove said:how's your cunt honey
Feminism does mean and do different things around the world. Mexican feminists call themselves "mujeristas" as the word mujer is very distinctive from feminine or female. Japanese feminists are way behind many others, and god help those in Africa and China.
give a good peck to the hubby for me, Perdita
sweetnpetite
Intellectual snob
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2003
- Posts
- 9,135
Quint said:
I'll be happy when there have been so many women as presidents, vicepresidents and candidates that it''s not longer an issue. I'll really be happy when the democratic and republican final candidates are both female at the same time.
I'll also be happy to take her any way we can get her. We only have to put up with her for 4 years, and she can't be any worse than who's presently in office.
Last edited:
Dirty Slut
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- May 3, 2003
- Posts
- 525
sweetnpetite said:
I'll be happy when there aren't any republican party members at all. LOL
DS
sweetnpetite said:
If all the women in America rallied behind me (and I were 35) simply based on gender, I could be elected President. I would make a royal fuckup of it, and in addition I would make of myself a pawn to be used by whatever unscrupulous males you fear would be in secondary seats of power. Lots of hell can break loose in 4 years. How could that be any better than having a strong President who supported equality for all and just happened to possess a penis? Further, how can you claim to wish for "equal rights" in one breath and then expect superior treatment in the next based not on performance but on ovaries? Please explain this to me.
kiwiwolf
Gun Totin'
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2001
- Posts
- 7,839
Interesting thread sweetnpetite. I won't try to answer all the questions because i don't know enough about the subject to be able to offer an informed arguement. And yes, I agree with your dislike of the term feminazi. I'm tired and only hope that the following ramblings make at least a modicome of sense.
I do consider myself a feminist within the scope of my understanding of the term. I base this on my belief that women are totally equal in all respects to men. Intellectually, emotionally and physically. And in some repects they are possibly ahead of men.
Physical
Okay now I see guys hopping up and down in the background screaming "Bullshit, bullshit... I can lift twice what my wife can. I can benchpress a Mack truck!" Fair arguement guys, but then look at the other side of the coin. Could you pass an object the size of a basketball through an opening only a few inches in diameter? I doubt it. Strength comes in many forms. Are females the tougher of the species? Hell yes! Generally the females pain threshold is way beyond that of a male.
Emotional
This I will address as a Kiwi male. The males in this country generally suffer from a massive overdose of testosterone which tends in turn to stifle any attempt at normal emotive expression. Guys here will grin and joke about their left arm lying amputated at their feet, or shrug off the departure of the woman of their dreams. MALES WILL NOT SHOW EMOTION... it is un-manly.
I've watched guys bottle up emotion until they are totally wrecked. Women, again generally, are way more stable emotionally. They are more in tune with emotions and know how to express them. Emotionally I reckon females are emotional giants as compared to your average emotional dwarf male.
Two out of three catagories I have used for my arguement have gone to the ladies. Intellectually? Well that is something you can't generalise isn't it. It is judged on a case by case basis.
I consider myself a feminist because I firmly believe that women are in every respect, equal to men.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ComfortablyCold
One thing I would like to see by the time I die is a woman standing behind the presidential podium.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a woman sitting in the Prime Ministers seat here in New Zealand. The Chief Justice is a woman as is the Governor General. They aren't there because they make a nice peach flan... they're there because they can do the job.
God this has rambled... sorry folks. that's what happens when you let a kiwiwolf loose with only 3 hours sleep.
I do consider myself a feminist within the scope of my understanding of the term. I base this on my belief that women are totally equal in all respects to men. Intellectually, emotionally and physically. And in some repects they are possibly ahead of men.
Physical
Okay now I see guys hopping up and down in the background screaming "Bullshit, bullshit... I can lift twice what my wife can. I can benchpress a Mack truck!" Fair arguement guys, but then look at the other side of the coin. Could you pass an object the size of a basketball through an opening only a few inches in diameter? I doubt it. Strength comes in many forms. Are females the tougher of the species? Hell yes! Generally the females pain threshold is way beyond that of a male.
Emotional
This I will address as a Kiwi male. The males in this country generally suffer from a massive overdose of testosterone which tends in turn to stifle any attempt at normal emotive expression. Guys here will grin and joke about their left arm lying amputated at their feet, or shrug off the departure of the woman of their dreams. MALES WILL NOT SHOW EMOTION... it is un-manly.
I've watched guys bottle up emotion until they are totally wrecked. Women, again generally, are way more stable emotionally. They are more in tune with emotions and know how to express them. Emotionally I reckon females are emotional giants as compared to your average emotional dwarf male.
Two out of three catagories I have used for my arguement have gone to the ladies. Intellectually? Well that is something you can't generalise isn't it. It is judged on a case by case basis.
I consider myself a feminist because I firmly believe that women are in every respect, equal to men.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ComfortablyCold
One thing I would like to see by the time I die is a woman standing behind the presidential podium.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have a woman sitting in the Prime Ministers seat here in New Zealand. The Chief Justice is a woman as is the Governor General. They aren't there because they make a nice peach flan... they're there because they can do the job.
God this has rambled... sorry folks. that's what happens when you let a kiwiwolf loose with only 3 hours sleep.
sweetnpetite
Intellectual snob
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2003
- Posts
- 9,135
The ceiling needs to be broken.
That is my first priority. You are free to disagree.
I would have voted for Libby in a heartbeat. I was very disapointed when she dropped out. (For financial reasons- please. I think her party made it clear that they would not give her full support.
The president does not have absolute power, and does have advisers. There are checks and ballances and I don't think that one woman could ever fuck up the country so bad in four years so much that it couldn't be fixed. They can't fuck it up any worse than the wrong man can- and we've had the wrong man more than once. If they do such a terrible job, we have recall, impeachment and forced resignation. A bad woman prez would not be the end of the world, any more than a bad man prez ever has been or would be.
being a good president vs. 'fucking everything up' is highly subjetive anyhow. the dems think that GWB is fucking everything up and the Repubs think that Clinton fucked everything up. With a woman in power, the same groups would say the same damn thing.
This 'best person qualified for the job' is an utter and complete myth. Its not about qualification, it's about where you stand on issues. Male or female, some are gonna agree, some will disagree. "qualifications" is a red hering. 'best person for the job' is a red hering as well. People vote with there emotions, whether they admit to it or not. People will vote for a 'handsom' president cuz he's handsom or a republican cuz he's a republican, so why not a woman cuz she's a woman?
--I never said anything about equal rights.
That is my first priority. You are free to disagree.
I would have voted for Libby in a heartbeat. I was very disapointed when she dropped out. (For financial reasons- please. I think her party made it clear that they would not give her full support.
The president does not have absolute power, and does have advisers. There are checks and ballances and I don't think that one woman could ever fuck up the country so bad in four years so much that it couldn't be fixed. They can't fuck it up any worse than the wrong man can- and we've had the wrong man more than once. If they do such a terrible job, we have recall, impeachment and forced resignation. A bad woman prez would not be the end of the world, any more than a bad man prez ever has been or would be.
being a good president vs. 'fucking everything up' is highly subjetive anyhow. the dems think that GWB is fucking everything up and the Repubs think that Clinton fucked everything up. With a woman in power, the same groups would say the same damn thing.
This 'best person qualified for the job' is an utter and complete myth. Its not about qualification, it's about where you stand on issues. Male or female, some are gonna agree, some will disagree. "qualifications" is a red hering. 'best person for the job' is a red hering as well. People vote with there emotions, whether they admit to it or not. People will vote for a 'handsom' president cuz he's handsom or a republican cuz he's a republican, so why not a woman cuz she's a woman?
--I never said anything about equal rights.
ComfortablyCold
Virgin
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2003
- Posts
- 19
Women are not always stronger than men - physically, or emotionally. On that same token, I have known women that were significantly more stable and a lot stronger than most men I know.
Generalizations are what cause these bias' and racial problems to start. If a woman had the mental stability, charisma and strength to lead this country, all the power to her - I want to see her in power. I know there are several thousand out there with that potential, unfortunately, the ultra-conservative majority of our nation will refuse to let it happen until their generation has been whittled out.
I by no means want to see a person in office who does not have the intelligence or confidence to lead - man or woman (coughGeorgeWcough).
I think we'll get to the point where people have forgotten their prejudices and social stigmas and move on. We don't segregate the Irish anymore. Unfortunately, while I think that day is close, it might not be for a few decades.
Generalizations are what cause these bias' and racial problems to start. If a woman had the mental stability, charisma and strength to lead this country, all the power to her - I want to see her in power. I know there are several thousand out there with that potential, unfortunately, the ultra-conservative majority of our nation will refuse to let it happen until their generation has been whittled out.
I by no means want to see a person in office who does not have the intelligence or confidence to lead - man or woman (coughGeorgeWcough).
I think we'll get to the point where people have forgotten their prejudices and social stigmas and move on. We don't segregate the Irish anymore. Unfortunately, while I think that day is close, it might not be for a few decades.
Dirty Slut
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- May 3, 2003
- Posts
- 525
ComfortablyCold said:Women are not always stronger than men - physically, or emotionally. On that same token, I have known women that were significantly more stable and a lot stronger than most men I know.
Generalizations are what cause these bias' and racial problems to start. If a woman had the mental stability, charisma and strength to lead this country, all the power to her - I want to see her in power. I know there are several thousand out there with that potential, unfortunately, the ultra-conservative majority of our nation will refuse to let it happen until their generation has been whittled out.
I by no means want to see a person in office who does not have the intelligence or confidence to lead - man or woman (coughGeorgeWcough).
I think we'll get to the point where people have forgotten their prejudices and social stigmas and move on. We don't segregate the Irish anymore. Unfortunately, while I think that day is close, it might not be for a few decades.
Isn't it funny how most people are willing to sit around and wait for the eventual change that they suppose logically should take place very soon? And if they were right, then Why aren't we colonizing Mars yet? Because every year we whittle down the budget of our spaceprogram thanks to media hype, and apathy.
DS
Seattle Zack
Count each one
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2003
- Posts
- 1,128
Dirty Slut said:
Exactly. Or a comprehensive energy policy that would eliminate our dependance on foreign oil, something akin to the space program that JFK so eloquently set in motion in the early 60's.
Icingsugar
peas o kayk
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2003
- Posts
- 2,051
Wait a minute. You say 'vote for a woman because she's a woman' and compare it with voting for the handsome candidate? Do you say that it is right that people vote for the looker?sweetnpetite said:
Besides, isn't being a democrat or a republican all sbout where you stand on issues, and thus something that you should consider when voting?
Just nitpickin'
Personally I'd root for a young, black, gay woman for president. Preferrably non-christian too. Provided she is a sane, humble, level-headed, educated, competent humanist with social skills. Not that very many in that office has been, but a man has got to have some dreams, right?
/Ice
sweetnpetite
Intellectual snob
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2003
- Posts
- 9,135
the majoriy of voters don't give it any more consideration than that. (D vs R)
stand...issues... are we talking idealism here or politics?
stand...issues... are we talking idealism here or politics?
Linbido
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2003
- Posts
- 515
Isn't that why political parties exist? To give the untinterrested voter a clear set of options. The only problem I see is that the political system in the US is not representative, but regional, and that there are only two real options when it really comes down to it.sweetnpetite said:
I think the politic arena in the states, as well as in UK and other places would be a lot healthier if the regional run for parlament and/or presidency was scrapped (Use the 'popular vote', or whatever that democrat mantra was last election.) and use a full on percentage-of-the-popular-vote perpresentation systen nation-wide for the senate/parlamet/what-have-you.
Still, I too believe that D vs M is more important than M vs W. And that comes from a girl from a country where the most popular and successful prime minister ever was a woman. G-H Bruntland would kick Maggie Thatcher's bony ass any time of the day.
Edit: AND she'd make Dubya her bitch.
-Lin
Last edited:
Xelebes
Little Blue Alien
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2003
- Posts
- 13,068
Re: I tried to read through the whole post but I couldn't..
Actually in Canada, I believe it is illegal to ask your race or sex in an application form. (Race includes religion.) It may not be set law or anything, just that I have never seen it put on an application.
Time for realistic non-trolling conversation here.
Dirty Slut said:
Actually in Canada, I believe it is illegal to ask your race or sex in an application form. (Race includes religion.) It may not be set law or anything, just that I have never seen it put on an application.
Time for realistic non-trolling conversation here.
Xelebes
Little Blue Alien
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2003
- Posts
- 13,068
sweetnpetite said:
I would go with best person qualified. Moral standings mean nothing, just look up here in Canada at our present, soon to retire prime minister. I view him as incapable of leading, except to lead members of parliament to conclusions that they can get away with acts of high corruption. I'm sure he was voted in on the premixe of his Liberal platform, but I certainly do not think he had the backbone to stick to it. There are a multitude of occassions of which I could point out these failures in his spinal column, more than can be pointed out of the things he has stood straight on.
Similar threads
