Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 10:46:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2015 12:30:57 GMT -5
Where I live there was a bit of a movement to buy local. I think the same thing would work to an extent for buy black or buy hispanic or whatever. I think black leaders instead of focusing on what is best for them personally could pressure large companies to hire blacks in the same percentage as they are customers, not hired for low level jobs but for executive or mid-level jobs. Maybe it would not work, maybe it would, maybe it would work a little bit, who knows. I think the idea would be rejected as racist now. Just part of the world we live in where people cannnot help except in approved ways. Buying local is always a good idea-be it a local minority business or a small hardware store competing against a super-sized Walmart. As for black leaders personally putting pressure on large companies to hire more black employees in the same percentage as their customer base, kind of runs right into a different type of the EEOC/Affirmative Action scenario. But instead of the EEOC encouraging businesses to hire and utilize more females and minorities, you have black leaders pressuring white-majority businesses to hire more minorities to reflect the racial makeup of their customers. It would be great if they did, but there is no financial pressure to the business to do what may be the right thing to do, especially if the business is outside of a minority majority neighborhood/area. As for not hiring minorities to fill not low level jobs but mid-level and executive positions, well just about everyone started at the bottom and worked themselves up when possible. Again, hiring minorities for mid-level and executive positions just because they are a minority starts getting into Affirmative Action again. It is my understanding that blacks spend a lot of money in this country, so have power. If a large enough percentage of them told Coke or Wal-Mart or most any company they buy at, that they would boycott until the hiring matched the population, they would have power. I am for voluntary Affirmative action if people want that. I am for consumers banding together to force ideas they want, just not forcing through law.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2015 12:36:43 GMT -5
One of the two major parties, the Republican Party, has become an insurgent outlier — ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.
-Thomas Mann
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Sept 28, 2015 12:41:40 GMT -5
Buying local is always a good idea-be it a local minority business or a small hardware store competing against a super-sized Walmart. As for black leaders personally putting pressure on large companies to hire more black employees in the same percentage as their customer base, kind of runs right into a different type of the EEOC/Affirmative Action scenario. But instead of the EEOC encouraging businesses to hire and utilize more females and minorities, you have black leaders pressuring white-majority businesses to hire more minorities to reflect the racial makeup of their customers. It would be great if they did, but there is no financial pressure to the business to do what may be the right thing to do, especially if the business is outside of a minority majority neighborhood/area. As for not hiring minorities to fill not low level jobs but mid-level and executive positions, well just about everyone started at the bottom and worked themselves up when possible. Again, hiring minorities for mid-level and executive positions just because they are a minority starts getting into Affirmative Action again. It is my understanding that blacks spend a lot of money in this country, so have power. If a large enough percentage of them told Coke or Wal-Mart or most any company they buy at, that they would boycott until the hiring matched the population, they would have power. I am for voluntary Affirmative action if people want that. I am for consumers banding together to force ideas they want, just not forcing through law. It's honestly a nobel thought...BUT it only works if those who have the power (let's be honest here - rich older white men) can get beyond their programming and honestly see people for who they are, instead of what they look like. If not for equal rights laws, there would still be businesses that wouldn't allow minorities or women to go there (hell - they still exist today). If you happen to be in an area where you really are the minority, then you don't have enough economic clout to encourage change. Thus, in some cases change through legislation makes sense because it won't happen otherwise. That being said, I think affirmative action may be doing as much harm, as good.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 10:46:05 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2015 12:45:52 GMT -5
It is my understanding that blacks spend a lot of money in this country, so have power. If a large enough percentage of them told Coke or Wal-Mart or most any company they buy at, that they would boycott until the hiring matched the population, they would have power. I am for voluntary Affirmative action if people want that. I am for consumers banding together to force ideas they want, just not forcing through law. It's honestly a nobel thought...BUT it only works if those who have the power (let's be honest here - rich older white men) can get beyond their programming and honestly see people for who they are, instead of what they look like. If not for equal rights laws, there would still be businesses that wouldn't allow minorities or women to go there (hell - they still exist today). If you happen to be in an area where you really are the minority, then you don't have enough economic clout to encourage change. Thus, in some cases change through legislation makes sense because it won't happen otherwise. That being said, I think affirmative action may be doing as much harm, as good. People who spend money have power. Rich old white people are not the ones keeping Coke or Wal-Mart in business.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 28, 2015 13:40:52 GMT -5
I don't like Affirmative Action or the idea behind it any more than you do. I consider it unjust, inefficient, racist (true racism, per the definition), instrumental in fostering resentment for minorities, and anachronistic. It would be wonderful to live in a world where we could be certain Ms. Noor was hired for being the most qualified candidate and not because she's a dark-skinned Islamic woman who grew up abroad. We could celebrate her appointment and wish her well without skepticism. Unfortunately, we don't live in such a world. Her belonging to various minority groups may well have contributed to her appointment. Having said this, we have no evidence that she was afforded any kind of preference. I don't know what the statistical likelihood of preferential appointments is, but I don't believe it's so high that Ms. Noor doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt. She does have first-hand experience with the immigration system (this falls into the category of what is called "lived experience", which is counted as an asset, especially for employment in the social services), a degree from a reputable university, and good academic credentials. It behooves us to assume she's the most qualified person for the job, hope she knows what she's doing, and wish her well. "Do unto others, ..." This is what I'd have others do unto me in these circumstances. I would argue that that would make her a bit more qualified to understand the nuances of our immigration system than someone who is native born. As with any organization, you have to start somewhere. I think people who have had to go through a process are better suited to identify weaknesses and suggest improvements. Maybe we should get more people in different areas who are representative of those whom those areas serve. That's my "lived experience" argument in a nutshell, although her experience isn't a guaranteed boon to the country. If her duty is to facilitate immigrants' adapting to life in America, that work will obviously benefit from her insight on the specific challenges they face. If she rises to a position where she's able to influence policies/procedures on who's selected, how many are selected, how much free aid and/or special accommodation is extended, etc., the issue becomes a whole lot muddier. Her empathy for would-be immigrants might well lead her in a direction contrary to the US national interest. There's a reason European governments are presently locking down their borders to Syrian refugees in spite of humanitarian concerns by the hoi polloi. An immigrant that imports poverty, sectarianism, or foreign nationalism is a liability, and the west is already swimming in liability. Many European states are dangerously close to being overrun by unprofitable, unassimilated first- and second-generation immigrants who've imported the very problems that compelled them to emigrate. The US doesn't need the same demographic nightmare. It should come as no surprise to anyone here that Islam is high on conservatives' list of unwanted imports.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2015 14:00:22 GMT -5
One of the two major parties, the Republican Party, has become an insurgent outlier — ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition. -Thomas Mann -faint-I guess he hasn't been paying attention to the democratic party then if he thinks it's only one party. what part of this applies equally to Democrats? they are certainly not contemptuous of inherited social and economic policy. they are dyed in the wool Kensians (which is the prevailing economic policy since WW2), and would rather die than dismantle welfare. and since when have Democrats ignored science? if you are saying they are ideologically extreme and dismissive of the opposition, i agree.
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Sept 28, 2015 14:25:57 GMT -5
-faint-I guess he hasn't been paying attention to the democratic party then if he thinks it's only one party. what part of this applies equally to Democrats? they are certainly not contemptuous of inherited social and economic policy. they are dyed in the wool Kensians (which is the prevailing economic policy since WW2), and would rather die than dismantle welfare. and since when have Democrats ignored science? if you are saying they are ideologically extreme and dismissive of the opposition, i agree. Don't forget being scornful of compromise and being unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts because they definitely are just as guilty as "cooking the numbers" to make up their own "facts".
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2015 14:30:05 GMT -5
what part of this applies equally to Democrats? they are certainly not contemptuous of inherited social and economic policy. they are dyed in the wool Keynsians (which is the prevailing economic policy since WW2), and would rather die than dismantle welfare. and since when have Democrats ignored science? if you are saying they are ideologically extreme and dismissive of the opposition, i agree. Don't forget being scornful of compromise i disagree that they have been scornful of compromise. i can list examples, if you like.and being unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts because they definitely are just as guilty as "cooking the numbers" to make up their own "facts". examples? PI- don't think i am just harassing you, here. i am SINCERELY interested in how you developed this impression, and will entertain anything you can bring to support your position.
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Sept 28, 2015 14:41:54 GMT -5
Don't forget being scornful of compromise i disagree that they have been scornful of compromise. i can list examples, if you like.and being unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts because they definitely are just as guilty as "cooking the numbers" to make up their own "facts". examples? PI- don't think i am just harassing you, here. i am SINCERELY interested in how you developed this impression, and will entertain anything you can bring to support your position. Let me answer that question with a question. So you honestly believe Democrats are open to compromise and the impasses are all on Republicans?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2015 15:22:14 GMT -5
examples? PI- don't think i am just harassing you, here. i am SINCERELY interested in how you developed this impression, and will entertain anything you can bring to support your position. Let me answer that question with a question. So you honestly believe Democrats are open to compromise and the impasses are all on Republicans? i don't think it is ALL on anyone. do i think that the Democrats were MORE open to compromise? absolutely. your turn.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 28, 2015 15:39:39 GMT -5
I'm not buying your backtracking to cover up the fact that you had no idea what you're talking about. This isn't the first time you've done this. Why can't you just own it, like a big boy? While that's one way to look at this whole exchange, it's not the only way. It's never, IMO, good to assume we know why someone did something. We might think we know bu the one who really knows is the one who did the something. Even you accused him of baiting. Look at posts 1 and 6. He speaks his mind, then backtracks and says "Oh, it was just a test to see what you'd say" when he doesn't garner enough support for his views. It's not the first time he's done this and it won't be the last.
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Sept 28, 2015 15:44:03 GMT -5
Let me answer that question with a question. So you honestly believe Democrats are open to compromise and the impasses are all on Republicans? i don't think it is ALL on anyone. do i think that the Democrats were MORE open to compromise? absolutely. your turn. I disagree, which I guess explains our different views on the subject. Democrats haven't shown themselves to be more open to compromise with Republicans IMO, they have their sticking points just like republicans do..but it seems the republicans are getting all the blame right now either way.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2015 16:01:29 GMT -5
i don't think it is ALL on anyone. do i think that the Democrats were MORE open to compromise? absolutely. your turn. I disagree, which I guess explains our different views on the subject. i didn't ask for an explanation. i asked for examples of them "cooking the numbers" to prove their "facts". you have anything to back that up?
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Sept 28, 2015 16:23:24 GMT -5
I disagree, which I guess explains our different views on the subject. i didn't ask for an explanation. i asked for examples of them "cooking the numbers" to prove their "facts". you have anything to back that up? Gender-wage gap to prove how unfair women are being treated comes to mind, mostly because it's a recent conversation. ACA numbers taking credit for things already in progress like EHRs comes to mind, and I'm sure there are others I can come up with where numbers have been manipulated to push an agenda. I'm not saying Republicans don't do it, but you can't complain when republicans do it, while ignoring when democrats do it too. There are a lot of similarity between the parties in their flaws.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 28, 2015 16:50:50 GMT -5
i didn't ask for an explanation. i asked for examples of them "cooking the numbers" to prove their "facts". you have anything to back that up? Gender-wage gap to prove how unfair women are being treated comes to mind, mostly because it's a recent conversation. ACA numbers taking credit for things already in progress like EHRs comes to mind, and I'm sure there are others I can come up with where numbers have been manipulated to push an agenda. I'm not saying Republicans don't do it, but you can't complain when republicans do it, while ignoring when democrats do it too. There are a lot of similarity between the parties in their flaws. There's also been progressively worse fudging of GDP, inflation, and real employment calcs. But in fairness, it started under the Bush administration.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,480
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 28, 2015 16:58:32 GMT -5
Gender-wage gap to prove how unfair women are being treated comes to mind, mostly because it's a recent conversation. ACA numbers taking credit for things already in progress like EHRs comes to mind, and I'm sure there are others I can come up with where numbers have been manipulated to push an agenda. I'm not saying Republicans don't do it, but you can't complain when republicans do it, while ignoring when democrats do it too. There are a lot of similarity between the parties in their flaws. There's also been progressively worse fudging of GDP, inflation, and real employment calcs. But in fairness, it started under the Bush administration. The story starts after the inauguration of John F. Kennedy in 1961, when high jobless numbers marred the image of Camelot-on-the-Potomac and the new administration appointed a committee to weigh changes. The result, implemented a few years later, was that out-of-work Americans who had stopped looking for jobs—even if this was because none could be found—were labeled “discouraged workers” and excluded from the ranks of the unemployed, where many, if not most, of them had been previously classified. Numbers Racket Why the economy is worse than we know
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2015 17:16:25 GMT -5
i didn't ask for an explanation. i asked for examples of them "cooking the numbers" to prove their "facts". you have anything to back that up? Gender-wage gap to prove how unfair women are being treated comes to mind, mostly because it's a recent conversation. ACA numbers taking credit for things already in progress like EHRs comes to mind, and I'm sure there are others I can come up with where numbers have been manipulated to push an agenda. I'm not saying Republicans don't do it, but you can't complain when republicans do it, while ignoring when democrats do it too. There are a lot of similarity between the parties in their flaws. ok, those are pretty good. thanks. candidly, i am still trying to understand the equal pay argument, and the degree to which it is a problem. i don't even debate it anymore.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2015 17:19:36 GMT -5
Gender-wage gap to prove how unfair women are being treated comes to mind, mostly because it's a recent conversation. ACA numbers taking credit for things already in progress like EHRs comes to mind, and I'm sure there are others I can come up with where numbers have been manipulated to push an agenda. I'm not saying Republicans don't do it, but you can't complain when republicans do it, while ignoring when democrats do it too. There are a lot of similarity between the parties in their flaws. There's also been progressively worse fudging of GDP, inflation, and real employment calcs. But in fairness, it started under the Bush administration. the BLS changed it in 1994. i am not aware of any changes since then. edit: i was referring to UE stats, here, not the other stuff, for clarification.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 28, 2015 17:24:36 GMT -5
There's also been progressively worse fudging of GDP, inflation, and real employment calcs. But in fairness, it started under the Bush administration. The story starts after the inauguration of John F. Kennedy in 1961, when high jobless numbers marred the image of Camelot-on-the-Potomac and the new administration appointed a committee to weigh changes. The result, implemented a few years later, was that out-of-work Americans who had stopped looking for jobs—even if this was because none could be found—were labeled “discouraged workers” and excluded from the ranks of the unemployed, where many, if not most, of them had been previously classified. Numbers Racket Why the economy is worse than we know Indeed. But it's worth pointing out that the divergence between myth and reality has been accelerating as of late. I've posted about many of the new fudges over the years: counting various illegal activities towards GDP, lowering the minimum number of hours a person must work per week to count as "fully employed", reweighting GDP and CPI components to obtain more favourable results, epic serial revisions of GDP growth, and the list goes on. I've long since known about shadowstats as a gauge of US macro statistics with straightforward methodology, but I also recently stumbled on the Chapwood Index, which quantifies cost of living increase without all of the detritus now built into the CPI.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 28, 2015 17:36:59 GMT -5
Virgil- i bookmarked one of your links. thanks for posting.
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Sept 28, 2015 21:53:19 GMT -5
Gender-wage gap to prove how unfair women are being treated comes to mind, mostly because it's a recent conversation. ACA numbers taking credit for things already in progress like EHRs comes to mind, and I'm sure there are others I can come up with where numbers have been manipulated to push an agenda. I'm not saying Republicans don't do it, but you can't complain when republicans do it, while ignoring when democrats do it too. There are a lot of similarity between the parties in their flaws. ok, those are pretty good. thanks. candidly, i am still trying to understand the equal pay argument, and the degree to which it is a problem. i don't even debate it anymore. I don't usually try to debate it anymore, unless it hits me in the right mood. I recently had a person tell me I was being close minded for not believing their statistics about women only 77 cents an hour as a man for the same job, and when I showed them the studies quoted and mentioned the flaws I saw in it, all I got wasn't really open to a discussion. When I asked what flaws the saw with the studies I showed them, or even when I gave links to their own cited studies about explanations given; the only answer I got was back to me not being open-minded and only wanting to be argumentative. I keep asking what flaws they see and what they think I'm not taking into account because I told that person what flaws I saw in their links; but I'm still waiting for an answer. However, that is getting way off topic from the OP.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 29, 2015 10:15:51 GMT -5
Actually RichardInTenn, I don't have much problem with her either, she has apparently worked very hard, made the right connections. The was just a little experiment to see how far my friends "on the other side of the fence" to defend this young woman You did not disappoint me. I knew that this was nothing more than an "Embellishment of the truth" just like you read on almost every resume'. oldcoyote is feeling really good, Just think you only have a week of this before I go back to work. I thought the part of making fun of oldcoyote was good. the blood in the water would draw you in. I was going to question her father immigration status, you know just over which border did he sneak over. On to other things. So, am I to take from this post, OldCoyote, that you're baiting other posters into board battles? Please read our CoC; particularly, the part about baiting. Baiting other posters into a battle is a breach of our CoC. With that said, I'm confident you won't do this again. Your real opinions are welcome here. Your baiting posts are not. Thanks. mmhmm, Administrator Good Morning mmhmm, I looked through the CoC's with of course my liberal (Jeees I dislike using that term for my benefit ). interpretation, I do not see where I baited any Individual in to violating CoC. A small group is grumpy because they fell into the coyote trap, please note others known to reside on the other side of the fence were much more mellow. The part of poor oldcoyote being picked on was a nice little add on. Cause oldcoyote had not been picked on by anyone. Please note oldcoyote did not respond to any Posters That were individually baiting. I didn't care. Not in a mean way.(By the way they did get even in a round about way, Yea, at one point I started laughing, My incision made me pay.) Me thinks some are too quick to take up an arugement.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2015 12:04:07 GMT -5
ok, those are pretty good. thanks. candidly, i am still trying to understand the equal pay argument, and the degree to which it is a problem. i don't even debate it anymore. I don't usually try to debate it anymore, unless it hits me in the right mood. I recently had a person tell me I was being close minded for not believing their statistics about women only 77 cents an hour as a man for the same job, and when I showed them the studies quoted and mentioned the flaws I saw in it, all I got wasn't really open to a discussion. When I asked what flaws the saw with the studies I showed them, or even when I gave links to their own cited studies about explanations given; the only answer I got was back to me not being open-minded and only wanting to be argumentative. I keep asking what flaws they see and what they think I'm not taking into account because I told that person what flaws I saw in their links; but I'm still waiting for an answer. However, that is getting way off topic from the OP. feminism has taken a kinda weird turn since the 90's, imo. if you deny any aspect of the argument, you are sexist. at least that is my experience. what i find humorous about this position is that it is a sexist position. basically, you are saying that because i am a man, i don't get it- which is no better than what men have been doing forEVER.
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on Sept 29, 2015 15:41:03 GMT -5
I don't usually try to debate it anymore, unless it hits me in the right mood. I recently had a person tell me I was being close minded for not believing their statistics about women only 77 cents an hour as a man for the same job, and when I showed them the studies quoted and mentioned the flaws I saw in it, all I got wasn't really open to a discussion. When I asked what flaws the saw with the studies I showed them, or even when I gave links to their own cited studies about explanations given; the only answer I got was back to me not being open-minded and only wanting to be argumentative. I keep asking what flaws they see and what they think I'm not taking into account because I told that person what flaws I saw in their links; but I'm still waiting for an answer. However, that is getting way off topic from the OP. feminism has taken a kinda weird turn since the 90's, imo. if you deny any aspect of the argument, you are sexist. at least that is my experience. what i find humorous about this position is that it is a sexist position. basically, you are saying that because i am a man, i don't get it- which is no better than what men have been doing forEVER. Which is why I think it's more about women's issues than equality. There is nothing inherently wrong with that, but it still hides behind the guise of only being about equality. You can be egalitarian and still care about issues that negatively affect women, but you still care about issues that negatively affect men as well.
|
|