Focus50
Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004 From: Newcastle, Australia Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: catize quote:
Of course men would die - we'd be the ones doing the majority of the fighting, as inevitably happens when personal survival is on the line. The law of the jungle takes over.... Alliances form for greater protection and anyone with a necessary survival resource will need to defend it. When it's that primal, it won't be women at the front line while the men are tending the children etc. And if it is the women fighting invading men, you've probably been overrun. With today's weaponry I doubt men are the only good shots. I see, in a post apocalyptic situation, you assume we'll be arming with modern military hardware at 500 metres plus? Or we'll just roll up at the local gun store with Amex in hand...? quote:
quote:
"....women not allowed to exhibit their true natures...." This is entirely the point that brought me into this thread. You're talking about individual nature and I was responding to LadyAngelika's assertion that "no gender is superior". Individuals belong to groups, by gender, race, religion, political parties, countries, etc, There is no group that is superior to any other. Come the apocalypse, I'm sure that will be very comforting to you when some neanderthal claims you as his. Won't be any of that "consenting adults' philosophy to complicate matters, either.... quote:
quote:
I'm sorry but in the climb for sexual equality, a lot of what women can now achieve has to do with what civilisation (and *men*) have allowed and enabled Are you sorry that you made this statement or apologizing for your point of view? Nope, that's me unashamedly and codescendingly apologising for your own naivity. Xena isn't real, or even non-fiction - nor is Buffy; or Charlie's Angels; or the Tomb Raider; or Janeway; or the Halliwell sisters blah blah. It's all gratuitious television/hollywood fiction.... quote:
Women marched in the streets to get the right to vote. This was at a time when 'socially unacceptable' behaviors could ruin an entire family. They risked their 'good names', and their marriages to demand their rights. Your statement that men and civilization 'allowed and enabled' women's suffrage is an insult to the women who were intelligent and articulate and convincing enough that the lawmakers (men) were forced to change their narrow minded views. Women were not given the vote, they demanded it.. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, Lucy Stone are only a few of the American women who are remembered for what thy did; there were other women before them in various countries who fought and won their rights long before American women did. And round n round it goes. AGAIN, you're talking about the evolution of a modern, progressive western *civilisation* and the freedoms that that enables. So who are the Islamic women leading the marches - how come they're not out there demanding rights? I'm not debating what's fair and right; I'm all for equality (when it doesn't exclude men) - the core barrier in the Islamic culture stems from one gender being physically superior to the other and they ain't about to just give over that advantage. quote:
But I don't expect that any of this will get through your testosterone bubble, so I'll just wish you well. And there it is - the magic "t" word.... Posted this just yesterday in Smutmonger's "Generational differences" thread: "When's the last time you heard the word "testosterone" used in a sentence other than as a 'zinger' to diminish/belittle/emasculate a male? I won't be apologising for being a man no matter how unpalatable it apparently is to carry male hormones in modern Western culture. So we end on contemporary woman's favourite cheap shot, ay? Focus.
_____________________________
Never underestimate the persuasive power of stupid people in large groups. <unknown> Your food is for eating, not torturing. <my mum> (Errm, when I was a kid)
|