Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 78

Thread: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this cheap

  1. #26
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 161 Times in 135 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by rickdugan View Post
    Dude, huh? Which government agency or entity do you believe is mandating changes in gender roles?
    I already mentioned the OECD. Another very prominent example would be Australian former Governor-General Quentin Bryce, who in 2014 (as G-G) created the Special Taskforce on Domestic and Family Violence and led the resulting campaign. She and the other leaders in that campaign have said many times that the root of domestic violence is "gender stereotypes" and "rigid" gender roles in the family.

    Bryce also delivered a series of major public lectures (The Boyer Lectures) which declared that workplaces must be restructured and that their "cultures" must be radically changed, in order to remove all barriers to women entering and advancing in the workplace. Obviously, she had support among other government officials for all of this.

    These are decisions that individuals make, not governments or even employers.
    I agree but government officials don't and, since they govern, it doesn't matter what individuals decide, unless they vote in new government officials, which they never do.

    And contrary to your beliefs, the tide has actually rolled back on this as more mothers are deciding - voluntarily - to stay home than was the case during the Gen X years. It actually started with the tail end of the Gen Ys and has extended to the Millennials.
    Also true and also irrelevant; and the reason why the government sees the need to act - to encourage more women to both enter and advance in the workplace.

    Here's one article, but there are many more out there:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahla.../#688281d56a2b
    I've seen those articles too. I remember way back in 2006 when feminist Maria Shriver was a guest on Oprah and made the revelation that she was a housewife and that she wanted to remove the stigma of being a housewife - which only ever existed in the first place because feminists had by then been demeaning housewives for forty years. She seemed genuinely puzzled.

    You're getting too caught up in pre-supposed beliefs and extreme positions supported by fringe groups. Have you ever been to a NOW meeting? I experienced one in college and holy shit they were a wacky bunch.
    They are no longer fringe. They already dominate out universities. Now they are moving into the mass media. You cannot walk into a bookstore without seeing a pallet load of one of their books on display.

    Maybe you're also looking for something to justify your less masculine posture in your dating and overall life, IDK,
    Do I sound like I'm making excuses for not being masculine? I'm not one of the people I'm talking about. I support sex roles.

    Do you live in a big urban area by chance? Because where I live, the traditional household model is quite alive and well.
    If you live within range of a national TV network, it's surprising you have missed it. The traditional household model is still popular even in urban areas but the notion that sexual behaviour is entirely fake, and also toxic, is gaining popularity.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athenathefabulous View Post
    we are all perverts in the SC in my opinion. Hes a pervert, you're a pervert, I'm a pervert.

  2. #27
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 161 Times in 135 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by queenelayliah View Post
    Could you explain your thought here more please. Because im confused, i have been hearing and reading similar things how after the #metoo men are scared of women in the workplace? Like this is going to look bad on my part but i didnt really follow the metoo moment or read the things on twitter because i dont have twitter. But from my understanding it’s a cause about women coming forward about their sexual abuse or assault experience and letting other women know they’re not alone.

    Why are men making me seem like women are now on the hunt for inncoent men to accuse them of rape and assault. Like are they afraid that a woman is going to come to their job and falsely claim that they raped her? I don’t understand why men are afraid after the #MeTo Moment.
    It turned into a witch-hunt. They advocated sacrificing innocent men for the sake of protecting all victims. They started saying that all women should be believed, to eliminate the possibility of real perpetrators going free. This of course made many men afraid.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athenathefabulous View Post
    we are all perverts in the SC in my opinion. Hes a pervert, you're a pervert, I'm a pervert.

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hopper For This Useful Post:


  4. #28
    God/dess rickdugan's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,570
    Thanks
    4,406
    Thanked 7,481 Times in 2,715 Posts
    My Mood
    Amused

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by Hopper View Post
    I already mentioned the OECD. Another very prominent example would be Australian former Governor-General Quentin Bryce, who in 2014 (as G-G) created the Special Taskforce on Domestic and Family Violence and led the resulting campaign. She and the other leaders in that campaign have said many times that the root of domestic violence is "gender stereotypes" and "rigid" gender roles in the family.

    Bryce also delivered a series of major public lectures (The Boyer Lectures) which declared that workplaces must be restructured and that their "cultures" must be radically changed, in order to remove all barriers to women entering and advancing in the workplace. Obviously, she had support among other government officials for all of this.



    I agree but government officials don't and, since they govern, it doesn't matter what individuals decide, unless they vote in new government officials, which they never do.



    Also true and also irrelevant; and the reason why the government sees the need to act - to encourage more women to both enter and advance in the workplace.



    I've seen those articles too. I remember way back in 2006 when feminist Maria Shriver was a guest on Oprah and made the revelation that she was a housewife and that she wanted to remove the stigma of being a housewife - which only ever existed in the first place because feminists had by then been demeaning housewives for forty years. She seemed genuinely puzzled.



    They are no longer fringe. They already dominate out universities. Now they are moving into the mass media. You cannot walk into a bookstore without seeing a pallet load of one of their books on display.



    Do I sound like I'm making excuses for not being masculine? I'm not one of the people I'm talking about. I support sex roles.



    If you live within range of a national TV network, it's surprising you have missed it. The traditional household model is still popular even in urban areas but the notion that sexual behaviour is entirely fake, and also toxic, is gaining popularity.
    Hopper, I doubt that anybody but you in the U.S. gives a shit about what the OECD thinks about anything. That's why they need to spend their time picking on small countries like Australia and I doubt the Australians seriously give a shit either, lol.

    As far as the rest, you're vastly overthinking it and perhaps being over-influenced by media nonsense. You need to stop reading online articles that a small fraction of the country even ever sees, and stop watching television prognosticators that almost nobody ever watches, and just get out there. A few trips to a local soccer practice, PTA meeting or other kids sporting event will tell you more about how many families live today than anything you'll see in the media, especially out here in suburbia.

    So with that, please refer again to post #7 for why it doesn't hurt to spring for dinner when you are courting the prospective mother of your children.

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rickdugan For This Useful Post:


  6. #29
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2018
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,546
    Thanks
    4,562
    Thanked 7,021 Times in 2,699 Posts
    My Mood
    Amazed

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by queenelayliah View Post
    Could you explain your thought here more please. Because im confused, i have been hearing and reading similar things how after the #metoo men are scared of women in the workplace? Like this is going to look bad on my part but i didnt really follow the metoo moment or read the things on twitter because i dont have twitter. But from my understanding it’s a cause about women coming forward about their sexual abuse or assault experience and letting other women know they’re not alone.

    Why are men making me seem like women are now on the hunt for innocent men to accuse them of rape and assault. Like are they afraid that a woman is going to come to their job and falsely claim that they raped her? I don’t understand why men are afraid after the #MeTo Moment.
    #metoo addresses a very real and very serious issue which needs to be dealt with. Their endgame was to scorch the earth. When they say "believe women", they're not saying, "listen to them, investigate the claim, and act accordingly", they're saying, "believe unconditionally". The reason I have a problem with this goes back to when I worked for Lane Construction. There was a period in time when someone decided a "sweet lil' thang" like me shouldn't be in the field, so they tried to make an office girl out of me, and I worked hard to subvert that. Anyhow, I'd listen to them openly brag about how they'd gotten men fired and how their employers - be it Lane or a previous employer - would just act on their claims. One of those men was a field supervisor I had worked with before, and the claim made against him was 100% contrary to every interaction I'd had with him, and what they said made it clear the claim against it was absolute bullshit. He was fired without question. #metoo wants the courts - both of law and of the public opinion - to act the same way. Now, different groups will argue about what the number of false claims may be, and I don't know which side is correct. I don't think it's particularly high, but my issue here is that we all know it's not zero. #metoo et. al. just considers those who get caught up in it a "necessary sacrifice for the greater good", and I have a problem with that. That's not equality. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe I'm being idealistic, but I still believe in a better way. One that's respectful to all parties involved. Do I have the 'magic bullet' solution to make it so? No, I do not. We're not talking about something that one lone individual is going to accomplish anyhow - it needs to be the collective conscience of the people which wills it to happen and to figure out a workable solution. Which, it won't be perfect. Movements such as #metoo do have their merits, still, such as getting victims to come forward, which is important. But I have strong disagreements with what it's devolved into.

    As for that field supervisor? As I said, fired without question. Not a single one of the other female employees he interacted with were ever questioned about his conduct around them. Many of us offered statements in his defense. Not only did nobody want them, but we basically unleashed a pit of vipers against us. Other women who worked for the company - most of whom never knew him or interacted with him at all - turned against those of us for daring to say, "hey, we work with this guy, we've never seen anything even remotely close to what he's accused of from him, and we have doubts". And this was before #metoo.

    So we end up with this Gilette ad, trying to address "toxic masculinity". Which, don't get me wrong - I believe is very real, and I've been on the receiving end of it myself. But their message seems to be saying that masculinity in general is toxic, and that left me scratching my head wondering, "wtf?". Of course, it was all virtue signaling for the sake of selling overpriced razors, but I'll save it for another post before I go breaking down that ad in depth.
    Written on the walls at the house of sorrow
    You can find the names of those who burned
    Greater yet, the pain in little drawings
    I could not remain in that room

  7. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to AChildOfBoredom For This Useful Post:


  8. #30
    God/dess lynn2009's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,147
    Thanks
    8,922
    Thanked 7,163 Times in 2,493 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    ..........
    "There are different kinds of darkness. There is darkness that frightens, the darkness that soothes, the darkness that is restful. There is the darkness of lovers, and the darkness of assassins. It becomes what the bearer wishes it to be, needs it to be. It is not wholly bad or good."
    - The Court of Mist and Fury

  9. #31
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 161 Times in 135 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by rickdugan View Post
    Hopper, I doubt that anybody but you in the U.S. gives a shit about what the OECD thinks about anything. That's why they need to spend their time picking on small countries like Australia and I doubt the Australians seriously give a shit either, lol.
    If it's only me who cares what the OECD thinks, then there is something seriously wrong with the U.S. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development is a major intergovernmental forum, with 36 member countries, all developed, which discusses issues of government and economics. Presumably, they are discussing something important, which means it will affect you whether you care or not. The U.S. government is a member of the OECD, so I am definitely not alone.

    Aside from the OECD, there is an army of U.S. citizens who vocally support exactly what the OECD is proposing on sex roles. Your last President supported it and you almost had another one following who also supported it. In other words, people in the U.S. voted for them.

    Proctor and Gamble, the parent company of Gillette, a U.S. company, also apparently agrees with me and are somehow under the impression that many of their potential customers are also.

    I hope I'm not belaboring the point.

    As far as the rest, you're vastly overthinking it and perhaps being over-influenced by media nonsense. You need to stop reading online articles that a small fraction of the country even ever sees, and stop watching television prognosticators that almost nobody ever watches, and just get out there. A few trips to a local soccer practice, PTA meeting or other kids sporting event will tell you more about how many families live today than anything you'll see in the media, especially out here in suburbia.
    It certainly is media nonsense. But the nonsense is on programs which everybody watches and in newspapers which everybody reads. It is there for a reason. The books are selling by the pallet load at major stores. I don't know what the proportion of people who accept the nonsense is but I know many who do. It is an ideology which is fashionable among a large section of the population. There was even a primary school program in Australia which teaches it, called "Safe Schools". Hence, it is being taught to young children, many of whom will therefore grow up with this belief.

    http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org.au/who-we-are

    I agree with you that most people don't care. Most people do want to have regular families. It's natural for people to want to raise families. Most women are over the feminist dream of being super-moms. There has been a swing in the opposite direction. It seems as if feminists have a hard road ahead of them to achieve the full 50/50 in the workplace. However, I only brought that up as the context for the present, ongoing popularization of the belief in abandoning gender norms.

    So with that, please refer again to post #7 for why it doesn't hurt to spring for dinner when you are courting the prospective mother of your children.
    Thanks for the advice Dad but I already do spring for dinner when courting. Like I said, I don't agree with the ideas I am describing nor am I using them as an excuse to be cheap. I certainly don't approve of what the cheap-ass in the OP did. All I said was that if those ideas do become the norm, I may not even be allowed to spring for dinner.

    Quote Originally Posted by AChildOfBoredom View Post
    #metoo addresses a very real and very serious issue which needs to be dealt with. Their endgame was to scorch the earth. When they say "believe women", they're not saying, "listen to them, investigate the claim, and act accordingly", they're saying, "believe unconditionally". The reason I have a problem with this goes back to when I worked for Lane Construction. There was a period in time when someone decided a "sweet lil' thang" like me shouldn't be in the field, so they tried to make an office girl out of me, and I worked hard to subvert that. Anyhow, I'd listen to them openly brag about how they'd gotten men fired and how their employers - be it Lane or a previous employer - would just act on their claims. One of those men was a field supervisor I had worked with before, and the claim made against him was 100% contrary to every interaction I'd had with him, and what they said made it clear the claim against it was absolute bullshit. He was fired without question. #metoo wants the courts - both of law and of the public opinion - to act the same way. Now, different groups will argue about what the number of false claims may be, and I don't know which side is correct. I don't think it's particularly high, but my issue here is that we all know it's not zero. #metoo et. al. just considers those who get caught up in it a "necessary sacrifice for the greater good", and I have a problem with that. That's not equality. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe I'm being idealistic, but I still believe in a better way. One that's respectful to all parties involved. Do I have the 'magic bullet' solution to make it so? No, I do not. We're not talking about something that one lone individual is going to accomplish anyhow - it needs to be the collective conscience of the people which wills it to happen and to figure out a workable solution. Which, it won't be perfect. Movements such as #metoo do have their merits, still, such as getting victims to come forward, which is important. But I have strong disagreements with what it's devolved into.
    The problem is that with feminism, genuinely addressing the issues is never the actual aim. They use genuine issues to advance their own, greater agenda, which is to destroy the whole "patriarchal system". Simple social reforms are not enough for feminists. Feminism is an ideology, not a regular movement for social advancement. MeToo served to disrupt the system, by sabotaging sexual relations. Sexual relations are the foundation of the "patriarchal system", or in normal language, the family unit. To feminists, sexual equality can only be achieved after this system is destroyed. MeToo is a step in that process.

    As for that field supervisor? As I said, fired without question. Not a single one of the other female employees he interacted with were ever questioned about his conduct around them. Many of us offered statements in his defense. Not only did nobody want them, but we basically unleashed a pit of vipers against us. Other women who worked for the company - most of whom never knew him or interacted with him at all - turned against those of us for daring to say, "hey, we work with this guy, we've never seen anything even remotely close to what he's accused of from him, and we have doubts". And this was before #metoo.
    They probably assumed that you all either closed ranks against the "victim" because you were all close colleagues of the accused or were afraid of losing their jobs for speaking out. MeToo type propaganda has been around for decades before that movement began.

    So we end up with this Gilette ad, trying to address "toxic masculinity". Which, don't get me wrong - I believe is very real, and I've been on the receiving end of it myself. But their message seems to be saying that masculinity in general is toxic, and that left me scratching my head wondering, "wtf?". Of course, it was all virtue signaling for the sake of selling overpriced razors, but I'll save it for another post before I go breaking down that ad in depth.
    The examples of "toxic masculinity" in that ad were mostly behavior which is rare and already disapproved of by most men. The ad suggests that it is common and that men need to be told it is not acceptable. Other examples in the ad are actually not toxic at all. The two kids at the barbecue are obviously just playing, not trying to hurt each other. Even girls sometimes play like that. The guy who sees the attractive girl and walks over to meet her is depicted as a sleazebag but it's not actually wrong for men to approach a strange woman in public. Some of the examples are things which women also do to men and to other women, e.g. the patronizing guy at the board meeting who interrupts the woman.

    Add to that, there is a whole range of equally toxic behavior by women against both men and other women, which Gillette won't be making an ad about because there is no MeToo movement for men. Actually, the founder of MeToo said that MeToo is inclusive of male victims but because it is a feminist movement, it put the emphasis almost solely on female victims of men.

    Yes, feminists believe that masculinity is entirely toxic. They are targeting the overtly "toxic" behavior as a way to attack masculinity as a whole, by blaming the toxicity on masculinity itself. However, feminism is as equally opposed to femininity as it is to masculinity. Feminists believe that "gender" is entirely conditioned by the "patriarchal system" as a means of subordinating women to the interests of men. Feminism tears down everything that women do and denies them everything they want to do, on the grounds that men condition them to do it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athenathefabulous View Post
    we are all perverts in the SC in my opinion. Hes a pervert, you're a pervert, I'm a pervert.

  10. #32
    God/dess rickdugan's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,570
    Thanks
    4,406
    Thanked 7,481 Times in 2,715 Posts
    My Mood
    Amused

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    ^ Hopper, nobody cares what the OECD thinks, whether you think they should or not, and 19 out of 20 Americans probably couldn't tell you anything about what they do. Whacky college academics have existed forever, but then the kids leave college and grow up from a true education in the real world. Nobody cares what most of those talking heads think.

    Obama didn't get elected because the majority agreed with his social views, whatever you think they are, just like Trump didn't either. If Obama had those views, they didn't result in any odd legislation, because he knew better than to try to impose them on the electorate. Oh yeah, and where are all those armies you are talking about? Because they aren't marching in my leafy suburban neighborhood filled with traditional families, nor in any of the neighborhoods of the tens of thousands of families who live in my community, nor on our soccer fields, or in our gymnasiums, or...

    Fun fact: Did you know that more people watch a single episode of "America's Worst Cooks" on the Food Network than tune into CNN or MSNBC during an entire month?

    You need to get out more dude. This country holds over 325 million people, only a very tiny fraction of which read or watch the crap that you do. Rabid urbanites and academics do not define family or cultural values in this wide expanse that is our country, as much as they might believe otherwise. Take a drive about 100 miles inland from whatever city you live near (or in) and go to the places I mentioned before and you'll see what I'm talking about.

    You might also want to consider unplugging for a couple of weeks from news feeds. You'll find that the world still exists and has changed very little when you plug back in.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rickdugan For This Useful Post:


  12. #33
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    291
    Thanks
    159
    Thanked 357 Times in 166 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    how did all this come from showing how cheap one idiot was?

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to OmegaWest For This Useful Post:


  14. #34
    God/dess rickdugan's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,570
    Thanks
    4,406
    Thanked 7,481 Times in 2,715 Posts
    My Mood
    Amused

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by OmegaWest View Post
    how did all this come from showing how cheap one idiot was?
    Hopper was using a diatribe about the supposed takeover of feminist ideals in our society to justify being a cheap ass on dates. When it was challenged, he went down the rabbit hole of grasping for fringe group/rabid academia positions and spinning them as some main stream movement.

    I'm not sure if he's trolling or if he is serious, but I've had fun with it either way. With that said, he's getting circular now, so I'm probably near the end of the line in our little back and forth.

  15. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to rickdugan For This Useful Post:


  16. #35
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2018
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,546
    Thanks
    4,562
    Thanked 7,021 Times in 2,699 Posts
    My Mood
    Amazed

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    The problem is that with feminism, genuinely addressing the issues is never the actual aim. They use genuine issues to advance their own, greater agenda, which is to destroy the whole "patriarchal system". Simple social reforms are not enough for feminists. Feminism is an ideology, not a regular movement for social advancement. MeToo served to disrupt the system, by sabotaging sexual relations. Sexual relations are the foundation of the "patriarchal system", or in normal language, the family unit. To feminists, sexual equality can only be achieved after this system is destroyed. MeToo is a step in that process.

    Slow down a little. Like anything else which impacts the sociopolitical agitprop, these things exist in a spectrum ranging from moderate to various extremes. As you’ve already said, those issues do exist, and I want them addressed. I don’t believe we need to endorse human sacrifice in the process. I’ve seen the existence of the S.C.U.M. manifesto used as an argument against feminism in the past, but in reality, finding someone who actually adheres to the ideology and viewpoints presented by that publication would be akin to finding a needle in a haystack - even among radfems, wokesters, etc., who get overly represented because of the number of slacktivists who think they’re changing the world one Tumblr post at a time. Most Christians wouldn’t feel accurately represented by the Ku Klux Klan, correct? The entirety of feminism isn’t represented by the extremist element, either.

    They probably assumed that you all either closed ranks against the "victim" because you were all close colleagues of the accused or were afraid of losing their jobs for speaking out. MeToo type propaganda has been around for decades before that movement began.
    It was a double whammy. Aside from that and our stepping up to make statements on behalf of a guy who, in twelve years with the company never had a single incident and was one of the field supervisors who truly treated us equally on the job site, there was always animosity between the women who worked on the admin side and those of us who worked on the field side. Can I say for certain he didn’t do it? Of course not. However, this wasn’t the Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby case where multiple victims stepped up after the accusation was finally made - the accusation was made by one of the flakiest women on the admin side, and nobody else had any such claims in twelve years. It strongly played our doubts. We didn’t form a cabal which prevented anyone from stepping up. The admin side knew about what was going on. Those of us on the field side were kept in the dark until the decision was made. Again, whether he did it or not, I don’t know, but my skepticism is high. He at least deserved some semblance of due process.


    The examples of "toxic masculinity" in that ad were mostly behavior which is rare and already disapproved of by most men. The ad suggests that it is common and that men need to be told it is not acceptable.
    I may not agree that it’s particularly rare, but I do agree most men don’t endorse it. My thing with many of their examples is that they were absolute shit. Gillette could’ve had a halfway decent ad, had they taken a more realistic approach. In reality, that ad didn’t come from their board of directors - someone was paid a visit by the Good Idea Fairy to air it, but it was a PR firm which made it. Any semblance they had of it not being agenda driven, IMO, flew out the window the moment they specifically sought out Ana Kasparian to appear in it. Seeing as Gillette has been taking a hit from Dollar Shave Club and Harry’s, failed in an add campaign targeting those two, and had to drop the prices of their products, it would seem fairly obvious this was merely a marketing gimmick. Which, I know plenty of people who are woke to that level, so I ask them why it doesn’t bother them that something they hold so near and dear to them gets reduced to a marketing gimmick, and they either say nothing, they claim it’ll change the way masculinity is marketed, or it’s the importance of the message, etc. Whatever.


    Other examples in the ad are actually not toxic at all. The two kids at the barbecue are obviously just playing, not trying to hurt each other. Even girls sometimes play like that.
    Damn, you’re a step ahead of me. That’s one of the examples I was going to point out. They were wrestling around. It’s all girls and women in this house, and it’s not uncommon for us to do that. No pillow fights in our underwear, though - I paid too much for these pillows to be doing that with them. Sorry if I shattered an illusion here.

    If there were strikes being thrown, or one was yelling for the other to stop, or even an adult just told them, “okay, don’t let it get out of hand”, that would be one thing. We must be horrible women for engaging in that sort of thing?

    The guy who sees the attractive girl and walks over to meet her is depicted as a sleazebag but it's not actually wrong for men to approach a strange woman in public. Some of the examples are things which women also do to men and to other women, e.g. the patronizing guy at the board meeting who interrupts the woman.
    That’s the other scene which stuck out particularly. There is absolutely zero backstory or context to that one. Nothing stating the guy intended to be an asshole, he just went to approach a woman, and we’re to assume him guilty of… something? Did him and the second guy know each other? Did the second guy know something about the first guy which the rest of us don’t? No idea. Now I’m pretty sure my parents, as well as the parents of those responsible for the content of that ad didn’t meet on Tinder, Bumble, EHarmony, etc. I don’t know… maybe some of them did, but not the shot callers behind that ad’s being.

    What if he approached her tactfully, she said she wasn’t interested, and he respectfully disengaged? Then no crime was averted. Again, they could’ve made it something actually decent. E.g., random catcalling and guy #2 steps up and says, “hey, cut the shit already”. Or if he was harassing her and the second guy stepped up and told him to stop. Or if the second even just said, “hey, she looks like she’s in a hurry, right now might not be a good time”. But there’s none of that.

    I’m not ignoring the rest of your post, but I have time constraints, so I’m going to get to what exactly chafes my ass about this ad. As is the folly of all zealots, it’s ultimately counterproductive to the cause they claim to be supporting. Now, any time we want a serious dialog about real issues, that ad is now going to be a barrier and a diversion. Do a Google search for “female jogger attacked”. That’s something we SHOULD be talking about, but that gets grossly overlooked, in part because of a fucking ad campaign for a company trying to cut their losses in selling overpriced razor blades. And I too have fallen into that rabbit hole.
    Written on the walls at the house of sorrow
    You can find the names of those who burned
    Greater yet, the pain in little drawings
    I could not remain in that room

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to AChildOfBoredom For This Useful Post:


  18. #36
    Senior Member SweetJuliaXXX's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2018
    Posts
    87
    Thanks
    267
    Thanked 206 Times in 66 Posts
    My Mood
    Devilish

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Jesus, I don't think I'd have patience for that on my best day. If that's how he writes, can you imagine how he speaks?
    You know what they say about the crazy ones........

    "Experience is a brutal teacher,
    but you learn. My God, do you learn!"
    C.S. Lewis


    General Pics:https://imageshack.com/user/inked_milf

  19. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SweetJuliaXXX For This Useful Post:


  20. #37
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 161 Times in 135 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by rickdugan View Post
    ^ Hopper, nobody cares what the OECD thinks, whether you think they should or not, and 19 out of 20 Americans probably couldn't tell you anything about what they do. Whacky college academics have existed forever, but then the kids leave college and grow up from a true education in the real world. Nobody cares what most of those talking heads think.

    Obama didn't get elected because the majority agreed with his social views, whatever you think they are, just like Trump didn't either. If Obama had those views, they didn't result in any odd legislation, because he knew better than to try to impose them on the electorate. Oh yeah, and where are all those armies you are talking about? Because they aren't marching in my leafy suburban neighborhood filled with traditional families, nor in any of the neighborhoods of the tens of thousands of families who live in my community, nor on our soccer fields, or in our gymnasiums, or...

    Fun fact: Did you know that more people watch a single episode of "America's Worst Cooks" on the Food Network than tune into CNN or MSNBC during an entire month?

    You need to get out more dude. This country holds over 325 million people, only a very tiny fraction of which read or watch the crap that you do. Rabid urbanites and academics do not define family or cultural values in this wide expanse that is our country, as much as they might believe otherwise. Take a drive about 100 miles inland from whatever city you live near (or in) and go to the places I mentioned before and you'll see what I'm talking about.

    You might also want to consider unplugging for a couple of weeks from news feeds. You'll find that the world still exists and has changed very little when you plug back in.
    I know that most people don't care about what intellectuals think or say. They rarely even explicitly say what they think. But the messages do get through over time, in such a way that most people aren't even aware that it is happening. Public opinion changes slowly over time. I agree that most men and women are happily continuing to behave basically the same way they naturally always have but then the way they behave today is also very different to how they behaved even sixty years ago. The natural tendencies of the sexes will never change but fashions in thinking do. Our mainstream culture has changed a lot in that time. Mainstream questioning of "gender differences" is not new and it is now again becoming a major talking point in the mass media. We can't say how much further we will eventually going take it.

    Also, the happy families you are talking about are the lucky majority. If something goes wrong with your traditional marriage, intellectuals and officials are standing by to make it worse, e.g. in the family courts. Many marriages are being affected by the constant pressure kept up by the intellectual elites.

    I stay plugged in to what is happening in the world outside of my leafy suburb, so that I don't wind up stupid, ignorant and blind. That doesn't require me to spend all of my time on the internet.

    Quote Originally Posted by rickdugan View Post
    Hopper was using a diatribe about the supposed takeover of feminist ideals in our society to justify being a cheap ass on dates. When it was challenged, he went down the rabbit hole of grasping for fringe group/rabid academia positions and spinning them as some main stream movement.

    I'm not sure if he's trolling or if he is serious, but I've had fun with it either way. With that said, he's getting circular now, so I'm probably near the end of the line in our little back and forth.
    I wasn't trying to justify the incident mentioned in the OP. I never said that I intended that and I have said a few times now that I did not intend that. Who's trolling here, if you managed to miss that important detail more than once?

    Nor did I begin with a diatribe. It started with a simple question. You diverted discussion of that question into hammering the point that Joe Six-pack doesn't care about what world leaders and academics (not just rabid fringe groups) think. The fact that they don't care doesn't mean that it won't affect them. Our culture has already radically changed in the past sixty years and even in the sixty years before that.
    Last edited by Hopper; 02-12-2019 at 08:35 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athenathefabulous View Post
    we are all perverts in the SC in my opinion. Hes a pervert, you're a pervert, I'm a pervert.

  21. #38
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 161 Times in 135 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by AChildOfBoredom View Post
    Slow down a little. Like anything else which impacts the sociopolitical agitprop, these things exist in a spectrum ranging from moderate to various extremes. As you’ve already said, those issues do exist, and I want them addressed. I don’t believe we need to endorse human sacrifice in the process. I’ve seen the existence of the S.C.U.M. manifesto used as an argument against feminism in the past, but in reality, finding someone who actually adheres to the ideology and viewpoints presented by that publication would be akin to finding a needle in a haystack - even among radfems, wokesters, etc., who get overly represented because of the number of slacktivists who think they’re changing the world one Tumblr post at a time. Most Christians wouldn’t feel accurately represented by the Ku Klux Klan, correct? The entirety of feminism isn’t represented by the extremist element, either.
    I'm not talking about fringe lunatic feminists like S.C.U.M. I'm talking about mainstream feminism. There is no such thing as "moderate" feminism. Feminism is a radical ideology with the primary aim of replacing a society based on the family unit (which they believe is inherently oppressive of women) with an open, communal society. They rarely explicitly say this to the wider public but it is still implied. Feminism has never genuinely been about simply advancing women in our present social system. They want to change the system itself. All major feminist leaders have held this basic view. It is not a fringe feminist view.

    Nor is feminism about hatred of men. Feminism was originally created by men. Although feminism vilifies men and encourages hostility between the sexes when it suits their aims, this is nothing more than a "divide and rule" or "class warfare" political strategy. All demagogues need a grievance to address, real or fabricated, with a "victim" and an "oppressor" to play against one another. For Hitler, it was "Jews" and "Germans". for Marx, it was workers and capitalists. For feminists, it's men and women.

    I lived with a feminist activist for a year. She was the president of a fully affiliated campus "women's" group. I got to know her views very well. I had no choice in that. I had the feminist Gospel ringing in my ears 24/7 for a whole year. I had all the "discussions" (or inquisitions) into the early hours. I heard all the committee meetings, campaign meetings, editorial meetings etc. from the next room. This was not a "fringe" group but it was certainly radical in it's ideology. They were aligned with all of the major feminist organization, issues, leaders and authors. Feminists talk very differently to how they do in their public campaigns when they are gathered at their kitchen tables with nobody else listening to - or caring - what they say.

    So feminists are not Klanners, no; but they are not happy with the way we do things now.

    It was a double whammy. Aside from that and our stepping up to make statements on behalf of a guy who, in twelve years with the company never had a single incident and was one of the field supervisors who truly treated us equally on the job site, there was always animosity between the women who worked on the admin side and those of us who worked on the field side. Can I say for certain he didn’t do it? Of course not. However, this wasn’t the Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby case where multiple victims stepped up after the accusation was finally made - the accusation was made by one of the flakiest women on the admin side, and nobody else had any such claims in twelve years. It strongly played our doubts. We didn’t form a cabal which prevented anyone from stepping up. The admin side knew about what was going on. Those of us on the field side were kept in the dark until the decision was made. Again, whether he did it or not, I don’t know, but my skepticism is high. He at least deserved some semblance of due process.
    Those reactions were induced by something from outside: Sixty years of feminist media conditioning. Sixty years ago, people would not have automatically assumed such a charge to be true. Obviously, the dominant form of feminism has not been a benign or moderate one. The results speak.

    I may not agree that it’s particularly rare, but I do agree most men don’t endorse it. My thing with many of their examples is that they were absolute shit. Gillette could’ve had a halfway decent ad, had they taken a more realistic approach. In reality, that ad didn’t come from their board of directors - someone was paid a visit by the Good Idea Fairy to air it, but it was a PR firm which made it. Any semblance they had of it not being agenda driven, IMO, flew out the window the moment they specifically sought out Ana Kasparian to appear in it. Seeing as Gillette has been taking a hit from Dollar Shave Club and Harry’s, failed in an add campaign targeting those two, and had to drop the prices of their products, it would seem fairly obvious this was merely a marketing gimmick. Which, I know plenty of people who are woke to that level, so I ask them why it doesn’t bother them that something they hold so near and dear to them gets reduced to a marketing gimmick, and they either say nothing, they claim it’ll change the way masculinity is marketed, or it’s the importance of the message, etc. Whatever.
    LOL Kasparian's appearance definitely undermined Gillette's claim of moderation. One other thing which indicates bias that they associate the term "boys will be boys" with the behaviour in the film, which is not what that expression is generally used for. People don't see ten guys chasing one kid five years younger than them down a main street in broad daylight and say "boys will be boys". Or when some asshole kids gang up and abuse some loner kid online. The ad clearly, though subtly, links masculinity to toxicity. "Boys Will Be Boys" is the title of radical feminist Clementine Ford's latest book about "toxic masculinity" which, under the guise of addressing "toxic" masculinity, actually pushes the idea that masculinity itself (as well as femininity) is a harmful social construction.

    Damn, you’re a step ahead of me. That’s one of the examples I was going to point out. They were wrestling around. It’s all girls and women in this house, and it’s not uncommon for us to do that. No pillow fights in our underwear, though - I paid too much for these pillows to be doing that with them. Sorry if I shattered an illusion here.

    If there were strikes being thrown, or one was yelling for the other to stop, or even an adult just told them, “okay, don’t let it get out of hand”, that would be one thing. We must be horrible women for engaging in that sort of thing?

    That’s the other scene which stuck out particularly. There is absolutely zero backstory or context to that one. Nothing stating the guy intended to be an asshole, he just went to approach a woman, and we’re to assume him guilty of… something? Did him and the second guy know each other? Did the second guy know something about the first guy which the rest of us don’t? No idea. Now I’m pretty sure my parents, as well as the parents of those responsible for the content of that ad didn’t meet on Tinder, Bumble, EHarmony, etc. I don’t know… maybe some of them did, but not the shot callers behind that ad’s being.

    What if he approached her tactfully, she said she wasn’t interested, and he respectfully disengaged? Then no crime was averted. Again, they could’ve made it something actually decent. E.g., random catcalling and guy #2 steps up and says, “hey, cut the shit already”. Or if he was harassing her and the second guy stepped up and told him to stop. Or if the second even just said, “hey, she looks like she’s in a hurry, right now might not be a good time”. But there’s none of that.
    They depicted him as a sleazy character to make it seem like what he was doing was sleazy. It's the psychological tactic of linking an idea with an undesirable type of person in order to attack the idea. I immediately thought "Hold on, why is a decent guy even friends with a dickhead like that, or even standing close to him? He seemed to know what he was going to do before he did it".

    I’m not ignoring the rest of your post, but I have time constraints, so I’m going to get to what exactly chafes my ass about this ad. As is the folly of all zealots, it’s ultimately counterproductive to the cause they claim to be supporting. Now, any time we want a serious dialog about real issues, that ad is now going to be a barrier and a diversion. Do a Google search for “female jogger attacked”. That’s something we SHOULD be talking about, but that gets grossly overlooked, in part because of a fucking ad campaign for a company trying to cut their losses in selling overpriced razor blades. And I too have fallen into that rabbit hole.
    Unfortunately, this kind of psychological manipulation does work on most people and is routinely used in films and TV shows as well as marketing and political activism. It is used because if the people doing it merely stated what their cause actually was, it would be laughed at or opposed. How do you sell flavoured corn-syrup mixed carbonated water? Show sexy young people drinking it and having ridiculous amounts of fun. If feminists were to merely arrange an interview on national TV and announce that they are here to abolish the family unit and send all women into the workplace, it would not go over because - as Rick is at pains to inform us , and as the actions of most women demonstrate, it's not what most women want to do. And you can't blame them. Most men don't want to be lawyers, doctors, politicians or scientists either. Most men are happy at their 9-to-5. But only because they need the money, not for any other reason besides that. Most of them, given a clear choice, would probably stay home.
    Last edited by Hopper; 02-12-2019 at 08:41 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athenathefabulous View Post
    we are all perverts in the SC in my opinion. Hes a pervert, you're a pervert, I'm a pervert.

  22. #39
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 161 Times in 135 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by OmegaWest View Post
    how did all this come from showing how cheap one idiot was?
    I posted a question: "Feminists are now pushing for full equality and abolition of gender roles and gaining massive mainstream acceptance of this idea. Is there any reason for a man to pay for a date?"

    People started disagreeing with the first part, as if "toxic masculinity" never happened.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athenathefabulous View Post
    we are all perverts in the SC in my opinion. Hes a pervert, you're a pervert, I'm a pervert.

  23. #40
    Veteran Member queenelayliah's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2012
    Location
    You wish you knew
    Posts
    696
    Thanks
    526
    Thanked 1,096 Times in 430 Posts
    My Mood
    Tired

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by rickdugan View Post
    The #MeToo Movement led to some good and open discussions of these issues, but there was also plenty of hysteria, buyer's remorse, opportunism, and other bad elements mixed in. Suddenly grown women who made conscious decisions to fuck some guy to get ahead became helpless victims who felt justified in throwing it out there. Whether it ultimately did more harm than good remains to be seen, but I know plenty of women, including my Mrs., who thought that it was a ridiculous exercise in victim mentality and more harmful than good for female empowerment.
    As far as it relates to the workplace, the sad reality is that hostile work environment and sexual harassment claims have been weaponized for some time now. it is not uncommon, especially in places like the northeast and CA, for women to level such claims when they are being terminated for job performance issues, usually as a means to negotiate a better deal on the way out. HR Departments are risk averse by nature and accusations alone can be enough to ruin careers, especially in He said/She said situations where it is impossible for the guy to prove a negative. The hysteria surrounding #MeToo just made it a little bit worse. This is why many male supervisors nowadays take care not to be alone behind closed doors or in social situations with female subordinates.



    If you skip to 4:00 and listen to 5:05., this would be my answer to the many male supervisors that is now afraid of being alone with their female subordinates . I was just watching youtube and came across this and was like “yes omg. This was the whole purpose of the movement not to make men afraid of women.” Just had to share this wisdom.
    Last edited by queenelayliah; 02-28-2019 at 02:21 PM. Reason: Spelling mistakes
    Check Out My Site: Whispers of a whore




    I would love feedback on my website send me a private message.

  24. #41
    God/dess DonaDiabla's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    3,820
    Thanks
    5,361
    Thanked 7,701 Times in 2,730 Posts
    My Mood
    Cheeky

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Personally, I just see this an excuse not to pay for dates and bitch about the modern age. If you feel that threaten by the Me Too Movement and feminism, then just get an mail order bride and call it day. This way,you never have to hear alleged "feminism propaganda" and have an traditional submissive housewife whose an 10. But I have an feeling that something else is wrong with you. Also, I wanted to add that women in my family have been working outside of the home for decades before feminism became mainstream. Stop acting like everyone on Earth had these traditional Western gender roles and feminism some how corrupt these roles. That's not true!


    Quote Originally Posted by Hopper View Post
    Serious question: Feminists are now pushing for full equality and abolition of gender roles and gaining massive mainstream acceptance of this idea. Is there any reason for a man to pay for a date?
    Wolves may lurk in every guise / Now as then, 'tis simple truth / Sweetest tongue has sharpest tooth.

  25. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to DonaDiabla For This Useful Post:


  26. #42
    God/dess rickdugan's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,570
    Thanks
    4,406
    Thanked 7,481 Times in 2,715 Posts
    My Mood
    Amused

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by queenelayliah View Post

    If you skip to 4:00 and listen to 5:05., this would be my answer to the many make supervisors that is now afraid robe alone with their female subordinates. I was just watching youtube and came across this and was like “yes omg. This was the whole purpose of the movement not to make men afraid of women.” Just had to share this wisdom.
    Thanks for sharing, though he rather missed the point with that self serving fatuous drivel (specifically referring to minute 4:00 to 5:05, not the rest). I don't give #metoo either much credit or much blame for anything. The issues with how men interact with women in the workplace have been an ongoing consideration for decades now, especially after many states rightly strengthened workplace harassment protections in the 90s.

    Engaging in some fluffy self awareness exercise, which is more or less what this goofy dude is spinning, isn't much of an answer. Truth be told, most male managers in big corporate setting are already very careful about how they interact with female subordinates. But that hasn't stopped some who are being terminated for performance reasons from trotting out charges of harassment and hostile work environments, especially in the blue states. I deal with employment attorneys in NY/CT and helping firms manage this is how many of them make most of their money - it is extremely common. As one attorney explained to me, most of these claims are questionable at best and are often leveled as a bargaining tool for a better exit deal. But the fact that many of these are bogus does not prevent damage to the people being implicated.

    Until a little more sanity comes back into the laws in those states, expect managers to continue to be cautious about being isolated with female subordinates. In my own business, which is subject to blue state employment laws, every woman I've ever hired was over 50 and matronly and I don't see that changing.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to rickdugan For This Useful Post:


  28. #43
    God/dess whirlerz's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2004
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    27,134
    Thanks
    55,898
    Thanked 26,028 Times in 13,271 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    My Mood
    Aggressive

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Just saying I watched 4 - 5 & didn't get much..
    That guy has an annoying announcer voice.
    Now my YouTube page's gonna have all this crap on it

    Love Donna's answer.


    MANY MEN WANTED TO LAY ME DOWN, BUT FEW WANTED TO LIFT ME UP

    -Eartha Kitt

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to whirlerz For This Useful Post:


  30. #44
    Member ElleMae's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    69
    Thanks
    195
    Thanked 150 Times in 45 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by PinkPopcorn View Post
    Why does it have a picture of a muscular black man on the money sent screen? Is that the sender?
    No, that's the cheap asshole. The girl sent him his money back and used the name "Meghan Markle" on the app to do so, lol.

  31. #45
    Senior Member MysteryGirl44's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    36
    Thanked 255 Times in 104 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Lol - I knew his reply was going to be a doozy when I saw that the first word of his text to her was "Shawty"

  32. #46
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2016
    Location
    The internet
    Posts
    724
    Thanks
    1,728
    Thanked 577 Times in 292 Posts
    My Mood
    Yeehaw

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    The author of that news report goes even further:"Rather than wail about the supposed liberation in a woman’s right to choose to shun paid employment, we should make it a legal requirement that all parents of children of school-age or older are gainfully employed."
    Just to be clear, this sounds a awful lot like slavery. I seriously doubt the people of the US would ever accept this without Civil War.

    Also if it becomes illegal for patents to stay home and raise their kids you essentially wind up with all kids being orphans raised by the states from a very early age. Great for indoctrination, not so great for the individual and their success in life. Sure people have a right to use nannys, send their kids to preschool and daycare, and send their kids to public school, but for the most part it's a choice. And that is how it should remain. Families should have a right to choose how to raise their kids so long as they aren't harmful to said kids.

  33. #47
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    896
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 2,152 Times in 643 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by Rispy_Girl View Post

    Also if it becomes illegal for patents to stay home and raise their kids you essentially wind up with all kids being orphans raised by the states from a very early age. Great for indoctrination, not so great for the individual and their success in life.
    Agreed and SO strongly. The Soviet Union made it illegal to be unemployed and stay at home parenting was effectively illegal. Children were raised by the State and indoctrinated nearly from birth. Creepy stuff, really.

  34. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to kirakonstantin For This Useful Post:


  35. #48
    Veteran Member yaya_cash's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2015
    Location
    I get around.
    Posts
    697
    Thanks
    667
    Thanked 886 Times in 422 Posts
    My Mood
    Aggressive

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by kirakonstantin View Post
    Agreed and SO strongly. The Soviet Union made it illegal to be unemployed and stay at home parenting was effectively illegal. Children were raised by the State and indoctrinated nearly from birth. Creepy stuff, really.
    Post-Soviet Union has more unemplyment and street children now.

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to yaya_cash For This Useful Post:


  37. #49
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    896
    Thanks
    88
    Thanked 2,152 Times in 643 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya_cash View Post
    Post-Soviet Union has more unemplyment and street children now.
    Yes. The gulags shut down and the homeless and unemployed are no longer sent to forced labor camps.

    We had it so good back then! [/ sarcasm]

    On a serious note, your comment has nothing to do with what I said or the conversation in general. What, exactly, is your point?

  38. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to kirakonstantin For This Useful Post:


  39. #50
    Featured Member
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,731
    Thanks
    232
    Thanked 161 Times in 135 Posts

    Default Re: A little bit of empathy for the dancers - if they ever have to deal with this che

    Quote Originally Posted by DonaDiabla View Post
    Personally, I just see this an excuse not to pay for dates and bitch about the modern age.
    I don't agree with the move toward removing gender roles, so I am not using this as an excuse for doing anything. All I am saying is that if gender roles are removed, there will be no obligation for men to pay for dates, because that obligation is based on gender roles.

    If you feel that threaten by the Me Too Movement and feminism, then just get an mail order bride and call it day. This way,you never have to hear alleged "feminism propaganda" and have an traditional submissive housewife whose an 10.
    No, there are still many women in my own country who are happy with traditional gender roles. The OP is proof of that. The MeToo movement has become a genuine threat, by demanding that we believe all accusations of sexual assault and also by greatly expanding the definition of what is sexual assault.

    Traditional housewives are not and never have been "submissive" to their husbands. The believe that wives are submissive is just feminist propaganda and your assumption that they are is proof that you have been successfully brainwashed by feminist propaganda.

    But I have an feeling that something else is wrong with you.
    That feeling is feminism.

    Also, I wanted to add that women in my family have been working outside of the home for decades before feminism became mainstream. Stop acting like everyone on Earth had these traditional Western gender roles and feminism some how corrupt these roles. That's not true!
    Women have always worked outside the home. There never were any barriers to women working outside the home. The purpose of feminism was never to give women the "right" to have a career. The purpose of feminism is to prevent all women from working outside the home and abolish gender roles altogether. Hence my original question in this thread.
    Last edited by Hopper; 03-07-2019 at 05:47 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Athenathefabulous View Post
    we are all perverts in the SC in my opinion. Hes a pervert, you're a pervert, I'm a pervert.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. How to deal with dancers who are on drugs and violent
    By Kittykatrina in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 01-03-2018, 06:35 PM
  2. How to deal with other dancers stealing your money?
    By Goodie232 in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-20-2016, 09:15 PM
  3. How to deal with meam/bitchy dancers?
    By hello-kitty in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-16-2010, 03:49 PM
  4. $50 for half-hour- is this a good deal for dancers?
    By SerenaSin in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-26-2009, 08:11 PM
  5. Dancers Cheap When it Comes to Buying Costumes
    By Tina in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 07-13-2006, 10:15 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •