13 ms·

"Women need all the help that they can get because men run everything and often don't really think of women as completely human. Women need help because they ar

by ppprop 13y ago

"Women need all the help that they can get because men run everything and often don't really think of women as completely human. Women need help because they are constantly under attack." Not sure if this is troll bait, but... are you serious? Do you have anything at all to back this up?

athesyn 13y ago
Maybe he doesn't live in a modern liberal society. I doubt it though.
- pessimizer 13y ago
  Any particular point to object to, or just a general speculation about who I am?
  - athesyn 13y ago
    I don't care about arguments with feminists. I'm not a white male or a white woman so those terminologies don't apply to me. It takes time for sexism, racism to work its way out of the system but most of what you said are ridiculous visceral lies.
    - pessimizer 13y ago
      I don't care about arguments with athesyn. Care to point out a ridiculous visceral lie, or was it enough just to tell feminists just what you think of them?
pessimizer 13y ago
1. Men run everything. 2. Men often don't think of women as human. 3. Women are under attack by men. I don't think these points are controversial. 1. Women are 50% of the workforce, but 4.5% of fortune 1000 CEO positions. 2. Women didn't get the right to vote in America until 50 years after black people, who were officially only partially human. 3. Is a characterization.
- ps4fanboy 13y ago
  keep in mind the common man hasnt been able to vote much longer than that either, before that it was just the aristocracy in power.
  - pessimizer 13y ago
    Much longer than since 1920? That's just not true.
    - ps4fanboy 13y ago
      Here is a history lesson, this one is the UK. In 1800, the right to vote was based on wealth and gender (male). Less that 3 adults out of every 100 could vote. Since then, there have been some significant changes to the voting regulations: 1832 Reform Act. Extended the right to vote to certain leaseholders and householders. 5 adults out of every 100 could vote. 1867 Second Reform Act. Further extension of the voting regulations in counties and boroughs. 13 adults out of every 100 could vote, but still based on wealth. 1872 Secret Ballot Act. Introduced voting by secret ballot. 1884 Representation of the People Act. Any male occupying land or property with an annual rateable value of £10 could vote. 24 adults out of every 100 could vote. 1918 Representation of the People Act. All males over the age of 21 were given the vote. Women over 30 got the vote. Women could sit in the House of Commons as MPs. 75 adults out of every 100 could vote. 1928 Representation of the People Act. Uniform voting rights were extended to all men and women over the age of 21. 99 adults out of every 100 could vote. 1969 Representation of the People Act. The voting age was reduced to all men and women over the age of 18. 1985 Representation of the People Act. Voters who, at the time of an election, are abroad, either working or on holiday, may apply for a postal vote. 2000 Representation of the People Act. Introduced changes to electoral registration and extended postal vote provisions. In terms of the US you will probably find something similar that for the most part it was land owners only who could vote.
      - pessimizer 13y ago
        Except in the US, it was 1870 when everybody but women got the vote.
PavlovsCat 13y ago
As a guy, I wonder how one can miss this. I certainly had and have my fair share of WTF moments... at some point I even vowed to make a documentary with a hidden cam about the shit some men say about women behind their back, who act completely different to their faces, but I never got around to it. And frankly, I think some women don't really want to know. Stockholm syndrome comes to mind. So my heart jumps for joy about the strong women who do point (and cuss) this stuff out. I wouldn't know how to prove it to anyone else, but maybe they can prove the opposite to me... ?
- Tehnix 13y ago
  "the shit some men say about women behind their back" or the shit men say about other men or the shit women say about men or the shit women say about women ... I hardly think it's inherent to men only to vent their frustrations or thoughts about a person, regardless of gender, to another person/group. And in the case of male speaking about females, I suspect (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're in general referring to sexually-undertoned comments about their appearances? I don't think anything will be able to take that away, since we are, as men, by nature (unless you're homosexual of course, but I'd say it's fair to call that a minority) attracted to women and vice verse...
  - PavlovsCat 13y ago
    FWIW I didn't downvote you, and upvoted you to undo that a little. If people disagree, let them use words instead of buttons, geez... > I hardly think it's inherent to men only to vent their frustrations or thoughts about a person Or their disrespect, for that matter. What gets me the most is the difference between "public face" and "bro face" I've seen with some, it can be quite the abyss. Sure it's just anecdotal, but my anecdotes are what they are. As a woman on reddit put it: some men are gorillas wearing men suits, and women, once burned, have to make super extra sure to confirm they're not dealing with one of those before making themselves vulnerable. I know to a degree this is true the other way around, too... like, I once had a SO who basically wanted to marry me, have kids, and sleep around behind my back (this is not speculation either, she basically ended up admitting as much), and I know another woman who stopped taking the pill because she wanted a baby from her SO, who didn't want one. Not cool at all, and that the child turned out great and they both love it, though they're not together anymore, doesn't change that. But still, for every one such story I know, I know 3 about things like cigarette burns or rape. Still anecdotal, sure, but those anecdotes do irk me. Ask women close to you about this. Hopefully they will tell you I am full of shit. But maybe, just maybe, they will relate some things to you that will make your toenails curl up. > And in the case of male speaking about females, I suspect (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're in general referring to sexually-undertoned comments about their appearances? No, I was thinking of more vicious things as that, more like something akin to racist jokes. Though reducing people to their sexuality sucks too, I guess that can go both ways. The power differential however, and the smugness and cruelty it results in for some men, doesn't, not really. > I don't think anything will be able to take that away, since we are, as men, by nature (unless you're homosexual of course, but I'd say it's fair to call that a minority) attracted to women and vice verse... I'm not talking about being attracted to, I'm talking about looking down upon, and seeking to control and use. And NEVER would I say "all men do this" -- but enough, too many men, did/do this around me, and the more intelligent a person is, the more subtle and convoluted it gets. Sometimes it's "just" a friendly, but condescending attitude.. not as bad as other things, but still not good enough.

by ppprop 13y ago

athesyn 13y ago

Maybe he doesn't live in a modern liberal society. I doubt it though.

pessimizer 13y ago
Any particular point to object to, or just a general speculation about who I am?
- athesyn 13y ago
  I don't care about arguments with feminists. I'm not a white male or a white woman so those terminologies don't apply to me. It takes time for sexism, racism to work its way out of the system but most of what you said are ridiculous visceral lies.
  - pessimizer 13y ago
    I don't care about arguments with athesyn. Care to point out a ridiculous visceral lie, or was it enough just to tell feminists just what you think of them?

pessimizer 13y ago

1. Men run everything. 2. Men often don't think of women as human. 3. Women are under attack by men. I don't think these points are controversial. 1. Women are 50% of the workforce, but 4.5% of fortune 1000 CEO positions. 2. Women didn't get the right to vote in America until 50 years after black people, who were officially only partially human. 3. Is a characterization.

ps4fanboy 13y ago
keep in mind the common man hasnt been able to vote much longer than that either, before that it was just the aristocracy in power.
- pessimizer 13y ago
  Much longer than since 1920? That's just not true.
  - ps4fanboy 13y ago
    Here is a history lesson, this one is the UK. In 1800, the right to vote was based on wealth and gender (male). Less that 3 adults out of every 100 could vote. Since then, there have been some significant changes to the voting regulations: 1832 Reform Act. Extended the right to vote to certain leaseholders and householders. 5 adults out of every 100 could vote. 1867 Second Reform Act. Further extension of the voting regulations in counties and boroughs. 13 adults out of every 100 could vote, but still based on wealth. 1872 Secret Ballot Act. Introduced voting by secret ballot. 1884 Representation of the People Act. Any male occupying land or property with an annual rateable value of £10 could vote. 24 adults out of every 100 could vote. 1918 Representation of the People Act. All males over the age of 21 were given the vote. Women over 30 got the vote. Women could sit in the House of Commons as MPs. 75 adults out of every 100 could vote. 1928 Representation of the People Act. Uniform voting rights were extended to all men and women over the age of 21. 99 adults out of every 100 could vote. 1969 Representation of the People Act. The voting age was reduced to all men and women over the age of 18. 1985 Representation of the People Act. Voters who, at the time of an election, are abroad, either working or on holiday, may apply for a postal vote. 2000 Representation of the People Act. Introduced changes to electoral registration and extended postal vote provisions. In terms of the US you will probably find something similar that for the most part it was land owners only who could vote.
    - pessimizer 13y ago
      Except in the US, it was 1870 when everybody but women got the vote.

PavlovsCat 13y ago

As a guy, I wonder how one can miss this. I certainly had and have my fair share of WTF moments... at some point I even vowed to make a documentary with a hidden cam about the shit some men say about women behind their back, who act completely different to their faces, but I never got around to it. And frankly, I think some women don't really want to know. Stockholm syndrome comes to mind. So my heart jumps for joy about the strong women who do point (and cuss) this stuff out. I wouldn't know how to prove it to anyone else, but maybe they can prove the opposite to me... ?

Tehnix 13y ago
"the shit some men say about women behind their back" or the shit men say about other men or the shit women say about men or the shit women say about women ... I hardly think it's inherent to men only to vent their frustrations or thoughts about a person, regardless of gender, to another person/group. And in the case of male speaking about females, I suspect (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're in general referring to sexually-undertoned comments about their appearances? I don't think anything will be able to take that away, since we are, as men, by nature (unless you're homosexual of course, but I'd say it's fair to call that a minority) attracted to women and vice verse...
- PavlovsCat 13y ago
  FWIW I didn't downvote you, and upvoted you to undo that a little. If people disagree, let them use words instead of buttons, geez... > I hardly think it's inherent to men only to vent their frustrations or thoughts about a person Or their disrespect, for that matter. What gets me the most is the difference between "public face" and "bro face" I've seen with some, it can be quite the abyss. Sure it's just anecdotal, but my anecdotes are what they are. As a woman on reddit put it: some men are gorillas wearing men suits, and women, once burned, have to make super extra sure to confirm they're not dealing with one of those before making themselves vulnerable. I know to a degree this is true the other way around, too... like, I once had a SO who basically wanted to marry me, have kids, and sleep around behind my back (this is not speculation either, she basically ended up admitting as much), and I know another woman who stopped taking the pill because she wanted a baby from her SO, who didn't want one. Not cool at all, and that the child turned out great and they both love it, though they're not together anymore, doesn't change that. But still, for every one such story I know, I know 3 about things like cigarette burns or rape. Still anecdotal, sure, but those anecdotes do irk me. Ask women close to you about this. Hopefully they will tell you I am full of shit. But maybe, just maybe, they will relate some things to you that will make your toenails curl up. > And in the case of male speaking about females, I suspect (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're in general referring to sexually-undertoned comments about their appearances? No, I was thinking of more vicious things as that, more like something akin to racist jokes. Though reducing people to their sexuality sucks too, I guess that can go both ways. The power differential however, and the smugness and cruelty it results in for some men, doesn't, not really. > I don't think anything will be able to take that away, since we are, as men, by nature (unless you're homosexual of course, but I'd say it's fair to call that a minority) attracted to women and vice verse... I'm not talking about being attracted to, I'm talking about looking down upon, and seeking to control and use. And NEVER would I say "all men do this" -- but enough, too many men, did/do this around me, and the more intelligent a person is, the more subtle and convoluted it gets. Sometimes it's "just" a friendly, but condescending attitude.. not as bad as other things, but still not good enough.