(January 6, 2015 at 11:27 am)Blackout Wrote: I think the problem is that simply labelling these characteristics as "feminine" or "masculine" already creates some division and people start, logically associating the former with what a woman is supposed to be, and the later with what a man is supposed to be - For that matter, I think you can adopt any behaviour you want, but there's no need to associated with "traditional" gender roles because that propagates the subconscious idea that it's the way to go... If you want to be a housewife, fine, househusband, fine, you want to work and are a female? Fine. Are you a male? Fine - But don't attribute it to people's sex, rather personal choices, it's like chivalry, there's no point in giving special treatment to women under the thinking that we are fulfilling some traditional supported role, it's best to just treat everyone with politeness, I open the door to my girlfriend, she opens it for me, and so on....

I think the talk on biological differences is that no one really argues for complete equality - What people like me argue for, or better - Ask directly - Is if those supposed differences are sufficient, enough or justifiable to support gender discrimination, double standards, gender roles, and socially accepted prejudice? Which I don't agree with, not to mention these gender roles become complicated when applied to homosexual couples and other people who don't fit the norm.

Hey Daenerys, to support your view, I have a female friend who would kick my ass, and any other guy's, it's hard to think of her strength as being into the gender roles spectrum - Lol

(January 6, 2015 at 11:51 am)Chili Wrote:

(January 6, 2015 at 11:27 am)Blackout Wrote: I think the problem is that simply labelling these characteristics as "feminine" or "masculine" already creates some division and people start, logically associating the former with what a woman is supposed to be, and the later with what a man is supposed to be - For that matter, I think you can adopt any behaviour you want, but there's no need to associated with "traditional" gender roles because that propagates the subconscious idea that it's the way to go... If you want to be a housewife, fine, househusband, fine, you want to work and are a female? Fine. Are you a male? Fine - But don't attribute it to people's sex, rather personal choices, it's like chivalry, there's no point in giving special treatment to women under the thinking that we are fulfilling some traditional supported role, it's best to just treat everyone with politeness, I open the door to my girlfriend, she opens it for me, and so on....

I think the talk on biological differences is that no one really argues for complete equality - What people like me argue for, or better - Ask directly - Is if those supposed differences are sufficient, enough or justifiable to support gender discrimination, double standards, gender roles, and socially accepted prejudice? Which I don't agree with, not to mention these gender roles become complicated when applied to homosexual couples and other people who don't fit the norm.

Hey Daenerys, to support your view, I have a female friend who would kick my ass, and any other guy's, it's hard to think of her strength as being into the gender roles spectrum - Lol

And that is all true what you write, and should be accepted as normal in our gender equal society today. I have no problem with that and very much agree that females potentially are much greater than males. That is just the nature of who she is as the back-bone of males, and is the womb as wisdom retained for the next generation to bare, as I wrote before.

From here it is better to milk her breast and not her brain by making her more human like males, is what position is in the colloquial here.

That is where, how and why beauty is the vapor of truth and has its own right to be. So why bleed it and soon grow hair on their much like males in the extreme opposite here?

(January 6, 2015 at 11:53 am)Blackout Wrote:

(January 6, 2015 at 11:51 am)Chili Wrote: And that is all true what you write, and should be accepted as normal in our gender equal society today. I have no problem with that and very much agree that females potentially are much greater than males. That is just the nature of who she is as the back-bone of males, and is the womb as wisdom retained for the next generation to bare, as I wrote before.

From here it is better to milk her breast and not her brain by making her more human like males, is what my position is in the colloquial here.

That is where, how and why beauty is the vapor of truth and has its own right to be. So why bleed it and soon grow hair on their much like males in the extreme opposite here?

I hate it when people twist my position to justify an argument I'd never support, or in this case, understand.......

(January 6, 2015 at 11:53 am)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Ugh, can't wait till Chili passes from this forum like so many chili-shits.

(January 6, 2015 at 11:27 am)Blackout Wrote: Hey Daenerys, to support your view, I have a female friend who would kick my ass, and any other guy's, it's hard to think of her strength as being into the gender roles spectrum - Lol

(January 6, 2015 at 11:55 am)Chili Wrote: I can give you three examples that the national mindset will destroy what they seek to find.

1. Only one generation ago 'free abortion for all' became entrenched as a social norm. Now, only 30 years later fertility clinics out-number abortion clinics by far.

(January 6, 2015 at 11:55 am)Chili Wrote: 2. Only one generation ago 'daylight saving' time became a social norm to place our free time ahead of our work. Now, only 30 years later we do not need it no more because we no longer can find a job that suits us, as if so important we are.

(January 6, 2015 at 11:55 am)Chili Wrote: 3. Only one generation ago, free, or subsidized education for all became the norm (at least here in Canada, I should add). Now, only 30 years later we have learned that this will reduce our intellect to mediocre at best, and we will [nearly] always graduate at the bottom half and strangers will get the good jobs and we just do the dirty work for them.

(January 6, 2015 at 11:55 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote:

(January 6, 2015 at 11:55 am)Chili Wrote: I can give you three examples that the national mindset will destroy what they seek to find.

1. Only one generation ago 'free abortion for all' became entrenched as a social norm. Now, only 30 years later fertility clinics out-number abortion clinics by far.

Link, please.

(January 6, 2015 at 11:55 am)Chili Wrote: 2. Only one generation ago 'daylight saving' time became a social norm to place our free time ahead of our work. Now, only 30 years later we do not need it no more because we no longer can find a job that suits us, as if so important we are.

Wrong. DST is almost a century old.

(January 6, 2015 at 11:55 am)Chili Wrote: 3. Only one generation ago, free, or subsidized education for all became the norm (at least here in Canada, I should add). Now, only 30 years later we have learned that this will reduce our intellect to mediocre at best, and we will [nearly] always graduate at the bottom half and strangers will get the good jobs and we just do the dirty work for them.

Well, you're working with Canuckistanis there ... not really the cream of the crop, Chief.

(January 7, 2015 at 10:29 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Depends on who else was in the bathroom with them at the time, one would imagine.

(January 8, 2015 at 2:41 am)Chili Wrote: That may be true, but we have since learned that having sex does not make babies.