What's up with all the conservatives on here?

Post Reply New Topic

Not In the case of child custody. Women are much more likely to be given greater custody rights than men, regardless of income.

And then there's also divorce court. They haven't termed it "being taken to the cleaners" for nothing. My point being that even though we've pretty well reached equal rights, there are still disadvantages on both sides.

I don't mean that anyone is favoured by money, I mean that whoever can afford better counsel comes out ahead. Custody is 50-50 here by default, unless there is an extremely extenuating circumstance which costs money to prove. This isn't in the best interest of the child, of course, but then neither is family court. I've seen men and women destroyed by the imposition of child support costs and I do not think women are necessarily the better parent.

I don't want to debate the issue because everyone has different stories and triggers.

At least in terms of sexual violence, there will always be more towards women than men (excluding in prison). There is always going to be a higher proportion of men with violent tendencies than women, largely owing to men being on average physically stronger than women, and more aggressive due to testosterone. Because most men are heterosexual and they're generally able to overpower women easier as a result of being physically stronger, I can't see how you could make it so there is a more equal number of sexual violence towards both genders. In terms of physical violence, I don't know what the statistics there. The best we can do is work towards minimising all forms of violence, but I would argue that the best approach is to figure out why the abusers are behaving the way they are. A bunch of abuse victims banding together unfortunately don't have much power to stop abusers. In my opinion, you need to get to the root of the issue to solve it as best you can.

And obviously I'm not saying all men are potential rapists or anything like that, but all of the most violent people are going to be male.

In terms of your "wage gap" comment about social services receiving more money, employers pay you what you're worth to them. They're not choosing to pay social service workers less because "oh, it's a woman-dominated field, let's just give them less". Things like childcare and disability support worker aren't as scalable in terms of profit as fields involving innovative technology, and other businesses where you can manufacture and sell products worldwide as opposed to just having one childcare clinic in your city and making money off people who use it. The industries that make the big bucks are those that allow you to reach the most consumers.

I haven't had a chance to reply the last couple days and I'm only seeing this post now. I'm sure I'll have plenty more to say to you in the coming days. First off to get the one thing we actually agree on out of the way I'm w/you on the second amendment even though I didn't used to be and I'm not w/you for the reasons you support it. I went to a vigil after the Virginia Tech Massacre back in 2007 (here and you can see where I am from my profile not in Virginia) and a student at the university I live next to was raped in her own off-campus apartment at that time. So there were actually 2 vigils going on here at the same time but right near each other. At the time I bought into the anti-2nd Amendment argument of liberals and progressives. All the data seemed to support the crazy political power of the nra and its stranglehold over congress and contrary what you claim the gun laws for example in the Va Tech Shooting or a long long list of other serial killer shootings and massacres/terrorist attacks the perp has mental health issues but the state in question either has lax gun laws or they're not enforced. The Santa Barbara shooter Elliot Rodger comes to mind. If the cops had searched that psycho's room they'dve found what he was packing and the 6 people he killed would still be alive now and maybe him too getting the counseling he would've needed the rest of his sorry ass life. From that standpoint you're just flat out wrong Sly they do not regulate guns that much and the congress won't even pass an assault weapons ban that used to be in place.

All that said what I've come to realize is that since the amendment is there and since oppressed peoples who don'y have mental health issues are frequently targeted by the pig cops (and that's what they are pigs!) namely POC women the homeless the poor people who organize politically against the state or the far right that you support (who are often heavily armed and are usually supported and infiltrated by white power groups anyway)... or in the case of violent crime THOSE oppressed peoples have the right to protect themselves by arms if necessary in self defense. As Malcolm X put it. If the Black Panthers could do so then fine it's time to bring them back and as the amendment says especially in a militia you have the right to self defense. That's what the Panthers did and when they stand up to white power militias the latter usually back down. And go back into the rabbit holes being the cowards they are. I may say more later but that's the gist of why I agree w/you on that issue.

That said and that issue out of the way I don't even understand your second sentence. Care to clarify what you mean? In fact a good part of your post is difficult to understand b/c your grammar isn't very clear. What are you trying to say? I think you're saying something about alot of women oppose feminism and abortions and you'd rather (what?) have a partner who's pro-life and anti-feminism? Sure dude whatever floats your boat that's your business. The percentage of women who oppose gender equality and the right to choose is pretty small. Should we do a poll of women on WP? I wouldn't be opposed to it if the question accurately presents gender equality as it's written in something like the ERA if you know what that is. That's the essence of feminism: equality between genders (and there are more than 2 btw) something we do not have in this country by law in the workplace in politics in the home any f*****g where. You can argue we do till your blue in the face the statistics across the board prove you wrong. I won't get into specifics in this post but if you want me to and I can do that in subsequent posts in the coming days.

I'm not clear again what you're trying to say about abortion it just isn't clear from what you wrote. And I didn't say you think being conservative and having this disability is like shooting yourself in the foot. I'M saying that and I stand by it. You didn't answer my question btw anyway but maybe you aren't planning to. That's your decision.

Re: conservatives: who said you're all rich? You are overwhelmingly white that's for sure. That's part of your movement's problem it's de facto racism. You guys really oughta look into that esp when the best you can do is Trump's racist quote: "There's my African American!" What is the guy he's talking about his boy his slave his man-servant picking cotton on the Trump plantation or maybe on one of his stupid golf courses?

You're still conflating liberal and progressive. Do you know the difference Sly? Do those terms mean anything to you? If not why haven't you learned that? You might wanna look into it if you're serious about understanding centre-left versus actual left in the American political spectrum.

You go on to say you're a constitutionalist. Really? Which part of the bill of rights have you spent the whole thread complaining about? I see you going on about the second amendment. I don't see you talking about the other 9 at all. How about Trump's attack on the press right now by going after Manning and Assange? I don't care what he says about CNN you and he are right they do do alot of fake news. Like Trump invents out of his own bs alternative facts. What the f**k are those anyway? LOL How about the right to habeas corpus or the right to not be stopped and frisked by pig cops or the f*****g DEA that TRUMP runs b/c someone has a little pot in their car or their bag or pocket or whatever? How about the right not to have your home broken and entered by the government for what the f ever reason under Trump's DOJ? How about the war on drugs he continues to wage despite its huge failure and the millions of lives it's wrecked in this country since Nixon? Let me be clear: I'm NOT a democrat and I have no use for them. I'm being upfront about my politics and Carter Clinton and Obama all have pulled alot of this s**t too. But they're not in the white house right now and they don't run the Judiciary nor the Senate. The GOP does so all the s**t going down right now is on THEIR hands. And in most of the states too.

Anyway your side doesn't support the crappy constitution that we have Sly. The sooner you learn that the sooner you'll maybe wake up from your political sleepwalking and start politically supporting your working class interests. That's what field you work in right? You don't at present back political forces that support it which is your choice but again shooting yourself in the arm or something. I'll have more for you again tomorrow. Get ready.

I don't think I have time atm to reply fully to your draconian policy ideas but I probably will tomorrow. lol Your framing of the abortion issue is odd. Not sure how to respond to it except to say don't expect it to catch on. Maybe among the pro-life crowd but the large pro-choice majority won't accept it. You wanna put a handful of exceptions on the right to choose. Why? I don't see the reason for any limitations that's in the mother/woman's interests. Try providing some if you're serious about equality. The problem w/letting men off scott free is they don't do most of the work w/child-bearing or rearing. There's a ton of un-remunerated labor women do in this society in addition to need to hold down one or more jobs to support their kids. That's part of the institutional patriarchy that dominates US society still and at the core of why I'm a feminist. Because we don't have equality. Therefore no you're wrong about the dad being able to get away scott free that's kinda misogynistic and I'm not down w/that at all. Nor are most people in this country (large majority actually).

I'm not sure where you're going w/your draconian unprotected sex point. People have sex including unprotected for all sorts of reasons in this country. Often b/c they're really young or poorly educated due to the sh***y state of sex ed in this country b/c of conservative dogmatic opposition to it. States that have laws and policies like you're advocating having the highest maternal mortality rates the highest rates of unwanted pregnancies the highest rates of STDs the highest poverty levels and generally the poorest educational systems in the country. What you're advocating hurts the poor the working class and even much of the middle class especially women and that's more patriarchal bs. We have so much public policy like that b/c of the power of far right groups including the evangelical churches and their lobbies in DC and the States but they're not in agreement w/public opinion overall. You're righ

My last post got screwed up. Just to conclude, you're right that kids needlessly suffer in all this. Why bring them into this world then if that's the kind of life they're gonna have? There's no real point. Punishing people for having unprotected sex, people who are already here is nuts though. It would be unenforceable and completely ineffective as a policy anyway. Unless you wanna live in Saudi Arabia, in which case by all means live there. It'll never happen here.

Twilight: Thank you for summing up what I was trying to say much more succinctly than I did. Well said.

I see nothing draconian about anything I said, and I didn't say to punish people for having unprotected sex, I said punish people (men or women) if they're responsible for multiple abortions that were the result of unprotected sex. I'm all in favour of implementing more sex education if a lack of education is leading to a prevalence of unprotected sex. With what I'm proposing, a lack of education isn't really an excuse though, because I said only to punish those who have multiple abortions, which would inherently mean they know full-well what can happen as a result of unprotected sex.

It would seem that you see abortion as no more harmful than something like masturbation, and if that's where you're coming from, it would make sense that you don't believe in restrictions on abortion.

I don't see it that way. I don't think terminating a fetus forming in the womb is a moral thing to do (obviously in some situations it's the most favourable option though), and as such I'd like to see it avoided where it is unnecessary (like in the case of conception as a result of unprotected sex). Like I don't think it's too much to ask for people who don't want children to use some form of birth control, whether it be a condom or the pill, or whatever. Actually, I think it would be ideal for the man to use one form of birth control and the woman to use another where possible, to make their chance of conceiving virtually zilch.

In terms of the dad getting away "scott-free", all I'm saying is in situations where women have a way out (abortion), men should be afforded a comparable option, and let the woman know in time so she can still have an abortion, so that if that information influences her decision to carry to term, she can abort knowing she's getting no assistance from the father. Why should women hold all the cards here and get all the choice while the men get no choice?

As to your point about unpaid labour, your labour is only worth anything if it benefits someone to the point that they are willing to pay you to do it. If I work an 8 hour day for an employer, I'm not doing it because it benefits me to do so, I'm doing so for the financial benefit. If I wash my own dishes and clean my own house, it's for my own benefit, and as such I can hardly put my hand out and expect to be paid for it. If you're a homemaker and your partner works, then the person you're benefiting through your labour other than yourself is your partner, and as such you should have access to some of his money.

If you choose to have children, you've also chosen to raise them. That doesn't benefit an employer or anyone who will give you financial remuneration, so unless you have a breadwinner partner, your choices have led to you doing unpaid labour. Don't want to do unpaid labour? Don't put yourself in a position when your labour isn't valuable to anyone with the means to pay you.

I suspect we won't see eye-to-eye on much since I'm not a leftist Marxist like you've claimed you are, but either way.

I think the point is in the fact that the jobs where you take care of other people (nurses, daycares, retirement homes etc.) used to be ones that women did (usually were forced to do) for free, so the idea that those very important jobs don't need a high payment has stuck. I mean, if nurses all decided to change to a different career, people would try to stop it by rising the pay and making better working conditions. That proves that they are in fact needed. Of course, no one is forced to be a nurse (at a hospital, daycare, retirement home or whatever), so in that sense you're right, those women (and men) have made the choice on their own, but personally I don't think it's morally right that nurses of all people have such low wages (here at least; I got no idea how much they earn in Australia.) I mean it's a physically demanding job, it's dangerous since the patients can be any kind of people and there are lot of bacteria around and it's a shift job where you often have to work weekends, holidays, early mornings, late nights, through the night... Of course one gets less money if they choose to stay at home, man or woman, but the wage gap is about certain extremely important jobs being low paid even though they really are necessary and benefit the society. And while there is no proof, many people believe that if there were as many men working in health care as there are women, this problem would've been solved already... although this could also be because people think that majority of men wouldn't tolerate getting a low pay for themselves from such a demanding job the way majority of women in the field do.

Nurses make really good money here, not as much as doctors, but doctors spend 8+ years in college and owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, nurses go to school for 2 -4 years of community college.
My community college has a huge nursing program that makes up a large percent of students. That and dentis program, there’s tons of well paid nursing jobs.
A lot of women are nurses here and make too much to date me. They make as much as a mechanic. Or office worker, so I don’t see how they underpaid.

There are nurses who go beyond that. They sometimes even go for Master's degrees.

You can be an RN with an Associates or a Bachelor's---but hospitals seem to prefer the ones with the Bachelor's these days.

I see... well, that's not the case where I'm from.

I'm like a left-centrist nowadays. I don't believe in the "both sides" crap though. Leftists may be annoying, but conservatives are f*****g evil.

I don't necessarily hate conservatives, I just hate most Trump supporters. I mean I get it, you guys love your pottymouth of a president. But that's no excuse to be dicks about it just because Trump himself is a dick to everyone.

See you haven’t changed your ways.

Nope, sorry but not sorry I'm not bowing down to King Trump or his loyal subjects

I hate Trump and I hate most of his supporters, and if he becomes a dictator or actually starts a civil war like he threatened on twitter I will hate them a whole lot more.