Sexism

[philpot123]

But not so unique that it's apples and oranges.

 

If we say: "Look at these countries who have had no problem in women in combat."

 

And then you say:

 

"But these problems will pop up."

 

And we saay: "it hasn't happened in these countries."

 

"And you say that's not the US, it's different."

 

How else are we to take that other than we're less civilized than the countries with zero problems?

Perhaps it won't happen. Perhaps I'm wrong. That's why I'm saying we'll see.

[OmegaLily]

If X amount of countries can do it, than it stands to logic that either you're wrong or the US has no morals.

 

Why can't you compare the US to Canada and go "It works. Period."

[coltzen]

Perhaps it won't happen. Perhaps I'm wrong. That's why I'm saying we'll see.

For what reason do you think the situation in the US will be vastly different to similar countries? (like Canada) I'm not American but I doubt you guys are THAT different to the rest of the human race.

[philpot123]

For what reason do you think the situation in the US will be vastly different to similar countries? (like Canada) I'm not American but I doubt you guys are THAT different to the rest of the human race.

It's complicated. And certainly wont make me a popular person on here. I'll just leave it at lets see what happens. What's so hard about that? It might go bad, it might not. We'll see.

[coltzen]

It's complicated. And certainly wont make me a popular person on here. I'll just leave it at lets see what happens. What's so hard about that? It might go bad, it might not. We'll see.

Care to explain how it's 'complicated'? Your view seems completely illogical to me so I'm curious about the reasoning behind it.

[philpot123]

Care to explain how it's 'complicated'? Your view seems completely illogical to me so I'm curious about the reasoning behind it.

The same reason I didn't delve into certain issues on gender is the same reason I won't go into this. Because I will get ripped apart by the public at large and nobody will agree and it will all be pointless. Why is "we'll see what happens in the future because we DON'T KNOW YET" illogical? Just leave it there.

[OmegaLily]

Why is "we'll see what happens in the future because we DON'T KNOW YET" illogical? Just leave it there.

 

It's illogical because we can see what's happening right now in other countries, one of whom's culture is very near our own. It's also illogical because our combat soldiers are already working with female combat soldiers. It's even more illogical because there are more harassment suits filed between men (by percentage) in the military, than between men and women.

[coltzen]

The same reason I didn't delve into certain issues on gender is the same reason I won't go into this. Because I will get ripped apart by the public at large and nobody will agree and it will all be pointless. Why is "we'll see what happens in the future because we DON'T KNOW YET" illogical? Just leave it there.

We don't know for certain, no, but we've got a good idea because other countries have done it. The other countries don't have any problems, so there's a good chance the US won't either. Unless the US vastly different to other countries that is.

 

'Nobody will agree' if you say things without explaining why. If you do explain, perhaps people will agree with you.

[Obscure_Trash]

If someone doesn't want to divulge their reasoning or belief, that is fine and their choice. Let's not try to force people into doing things they don't want to. ^^

[Kestra15]

For what reason do you think the situation in the US will be vastly different to similar countries? (like Canada) I'm not American but I doubt you guys are THAT different to the rest of the human race.

There's a joke about 'super-sizing' here somewhere...

[Saryk]

A woman's place is in the kitchen. A man's is, too. Everyone should be in the kitchen. It would make the world a better place.

[Daydreamer09]

I think what bugs me the most on the topic of sexism is sports. In high school I played school softball, which I didn't mind at all. But it irked me and still does that boys played baseball, while girls (and old guys) played softball. Why do we have two different versions of the same sport?

 

On a different thought tangent...

This past quarter, I think I remember one of my classmates talking about back in the day just before women were introduced to the US army. He said that a lot of the opposition back then came from the wives of men in the service. Their reasoning being that they didn't want to have to worry about their husbands committing adultery with other women when overseas. It's interesting to think about... That women wouldn't want other women joining the branches of the military.

[TheComingUp]

A woman's place is in the kitchen. A man's is, too. Everyone should be in the kitchen. It would make the world a better place.

LOL, I know right?

 

But I don't pay attention to sexist jokes. There are women in the army, so therefore they aren't true :]

[elderberrysyrup]

It's unfortunate that there are a lot of sexist whatevers that are very common, so much so that they are seen as the norm. Anyone who disagrees with the standard is seen as they want 'more rights' for women than men...

[TheDarkCynder]

Sorry for digging this thread up, but relevant.

[Kestra15]

A woman's place is in the kitchen. A man's is, too. Everyone should be in the kitchen. It would make the world a better place.

My partner isn't allowed in the kitchen when I'm cooking, which is often. And I spend an hour cleaning it a day while she's at work.

 

Heck, I kicked her mother out of her own kitchen the other week :~P The kitchen can firmly be a man's domain as well. So long as there's beer and Dave.

[Nectaris]

My partner isn't allowed in the kitchen when I'm cooking, which is often. And I spend an hour cleaning it a day while she's at work.

 

Heck, I kicked her mother out of her own kitchen the other week :~P The kitchen can firmly be a man's domain as well. So long as there's beer and Dave.

I think they are trying to imply that more people should be cooking for themselves, whether it be a man or woman, rather than say relying on frozen dinners and boxed dinners.

 

At least that is what I got from the post.

[Kestra15]

I think they are trying to imply that more people should be cooking for themselves, whether it be a man or woman, rather than say relying on frozen dinners and boxed dinners.

 

At least that is what I got from the post.

I get that; I'm supporting their statement.

[dragon_mando]

Sorry for digging this thread up, but relevant.

...that bill made me see red for the first time in a long while.

[Kestra15]

Sorry for digging this thread up, but relevant.

It doesn't seem unbiased, and since I'm not sure where this is and who it effects, I can't really pass judgement.

[TheDarkCynder]

The people supporting that are basically saying doctors should let pregnant women die when in a state of emergency in a hospital.

 

Only men were allowed to vote on this.

[Kestra15]

The people supporting that are basically saying doctors should let pregnant women die when in a state of emergency in a hospital.

 

Only men were allowed to vote on this.

See, I very much doubt that is the entire story or precise wording. Is it all across America? Every hospital? In any circumstance?

[TheDarkCynder]

See, I very much doubt that is the entire story or precise wording. Is it all across America? Every hospital? In any circumstance?

Obama said he would veto this should it ever reach his desk, so yes. It is all across the USA.

[Maiden]

The people supporting that are basically saying doctors should let pregnant women die when in a state of emergency in a hospital.

What I gather from the story is that hospitals are now allowed to refuse to perform abortions on women even if the abortion is deemed medically necessary and emergent (an emergency) by a doctor.

 

This goes beyond sexist though. Any hospital that tried such a thing would likely get sued for negligence/malpractice. I'm more outraged at what the government thinks it can stick its nose into. If Uncle Sam wants to have a say in my healthcare, he should give it to me for free.

 

Some days, I just want to move to Canada. I don't even care if it's cold.

[AngelKitty]

It doesn't seem unbiased, and since I'm not sure where this is and who it effects, I can't really pass judgement.

This affects the entirety of the US, it's an amendment to the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" regarding abortion coverage and services. You can read the whole legalese thing here. I'm not good at translating legalese, but from what I can gather (and stated in a way that tries to be nonbiased):

 

-The bill would make it so self-purchased health insurance couldn't be used to cover abortions if the company receives any federal funding, to prevent federal (and thus taxpayer) money from going into abortions (except in cases of rape/incest).

 

-It prevents "discrimination" (not sure how they mean this) against health care providers who refuse to perform abortions or refer women to a place where they can have them. There's no language in this area that makes exceptions for victims of rape/incest and women whose lives are in danger.

 

Not sure how birth control and other preventatives come into this (since the linked article mentions them), but the language of these bills makes my head spin so I might just be missing it. o_o

Edited November 2, 2011 by AngelKitty