Some of them, not all.Westaway said:Nah I'm pretty sure gender roles exist because of biology, not social pressure.
Well...male genital mutilation (or circumcision) is quite the male equivalent to female genital mutilation. With female circumcision, it literally fucks the girl's vagina for life, to the point that it hurts even being sexually penetrated (that's part of the point, for some sadistic reason). With men, while some would argue nerve endings are severed and the foreskin is a fairly important part of the penis, it's got a much lower chance of being botched or having long-term problems, and you can still get a good amount of girth and pleasure during sex. With women, it's a 100% failure, because female circumcision doesn't make the vagina any cleaner, any more religiously pure, or anything.renegade7 said:Male genital mutilation remains acceptable, in fact in some cases even desirable, in the US. Some traditional subcultures in the US even go so far as to perform the mutilation by BITING the foreskin off.
She can force a man to be a father without his consent? Whoa, how did she do that? Is it one of her wizard powers? Can she make me a father without my consent? How do I protect myself?wetnap said:It was terrible.Doclector said:SANITY! AT LONG LAST SANITY!
Seriously though, it's a good speech. Hopefully it goes somewhere.
Instead of spending her time talking about real sexism in the world, she just reinforced the idea that western feminists are entitled women who are just trying to find anything to complain about.
So she was called bossy by her brothers for wanting to direct a play, non context, perhaps she was bossy, and her bossy attitude got her the role as the bossy hermione character she got to play, seems like she got rewarded for it, to a tune of 30 million dollars. So complaining about how you were treated as a kid in one incident is simply bonkers, kids pick on one another, reading too much into it is absurd. Her other example..her female friends stopped playing sports because they didnt want to be athletic, yea? So what. Is that trivial thing really evidence of "sexism" or the fact that men and women have different interests. I highly doubt those same friends followed sports the same way many male sports fan do, and male sports fans do not necessarily play the sport themselves either, its not because they are worried about their bodies, its because they don't want to, or they are lazy. But if one wanted to use the feminist mindset, it must be misandry that stops those mens from playing sports when they get older, held back by society, forced to be content watching from the side lines....
She is part of the most privileged class in the world, white western wealthy attractive female. And she has the temerity to whine about supposed sexism in britain? It was laughable. She has more rights than men even, she gets to decide if a man becomes a father even against his consent, she can kill the child or force him to be a father, she has more right than a man. And that's just a start.
I enjoy both Rugby and Ballroom / Latin dancing. I have never been as terrified playing rubgy as I have been learning tango.The_Darkness said:YES.
A handful of quick examples:
Women are more open with their feelings. I wish it was more culturally acceptable for men to show weakness, or emotion or whatever.
Men are expected to be the ones who do the asking out. For the record - asking people out is terrifying.
I enjoy ballroom and latin dancing, writing fanfic, horse-riding, and I really don't enjoy most team sports (football, rugby, etc). All of those have earned me strange looks at times.
So... yes, gender stereotypes feel confining. And I say that as a guy. I also recognise that it's worse for women, and probably at a whole new level of horrible if you're somewhere in the middle.
Bullsh!tFox12 said:Oh, wait, you mean sex. If a man chooses to have consensual sex with a woman, then he can't complain about being "forced" to become a father, especially if it was unprotected. She didn't force him to have sex, it was a choice he made. He should also help provide for the child he made, atleast financially, if in no other way. I would argue the same should hold true for women, though my pro-life stance will probably earn me hate. Have all the sex you want, but a woman an't force you to be a father. It's called taking responsibility for your life.
This is a contradiction in terms. You either rule your emotions or they rule you.BloatedGuppy said:Both men and women should feel free to be sensitive. Both men and women should feel free to be strong.
I said in regards to creating life, you!Baffle said:You'll have to forgive me for being an idiot, but I'm confused on two points;V4Viewtiful said:A woman has a privilege and in some/many countries a man doesn't have, a right to decide "what ever enters me I want to come forth" in regards to creating life, excluding rape a man can't come in a woman's house, her mouth or between her legs without her say so.
Generally, if something enters me, I want it to come forth. Rarely does something enter me. In truth, food does so the most. And yes, I want it to come forth, for other wise I would be a giant of a man. A rotund fellow, the like of which you have never seen. A man so barrel-like, they might call me 'baffle the barrel' (if Baffle was my real name)."what ever enters me I want to come forth"
Ha! thanks for the laugh, you got me there.You are correct, this is absolutely the case, except the house example. That is being an unwanted guest, not a rapist.excluding rape a man can't come in a woman's house, her mouth or between her legs without her say so.
edit: screwed my quotes up because I'm a fool of a Took.
By not including women it's impliedLifeCharacter said:Where in Fox's post did it say that women take little to no responsibility for their sexual exploits? All I saw was that men should take responsibility for theirs. Is asking men to take responsibility for their actions to the slightest of degrees absolving women of all their responsibility now?V4Viewtiful said:Bullsh!tFox12 said:Oh, wait, you mean sex. If a man chooses to have consensual sex with a woman, then he can't complain about being "forced" to become a father, especially if it was unprotected. She didn't force him to have sex, it was a choice he made. He should also help provide for the child he made, atleast financially, if in no other way. I would argue the same should hold true for women, though my pro-life stance will probably earn me hate. Have all the sex you want, but a woman an't force you to be a father. It's called taking responsibility for your life.
That train of thought alone is a reason why women can never be equal, the fact that you would state that a woman bares little to no of the responsibility for her sexual exploits over a mans is tantamount to treating women like ignorant children.
You assume a man is sexually irressponsible for not covering it up but where are the people saying "why didn't you make him wear a condom?"
I'm honestly not sure what train of thought you're on, but you should probably get off and come back, because it's taking you away from the actual point being made.
Thank you for proving my point.LifeCharacter said:And they can... by not having sex. How simple!V4Viewtiful said:If a woman can chose not to be a mother any man can choose not to be a father.
If they do decide to have sex anyway, then no, they don't get to decide to just absolve themselves of responsibility. They acted, and now they have to live with it, and that means supporting their children. Because, and this is the important part, the government doesn't give a damn about the father or the mother; it cares about the child and making sure it is properly supported.
No because as a male masculinity does not literally equate to machismo or masculine pride. Nor do those that exhibit masculinity are held back by its definition to be good people.Do you feel that traditional definitions and expectations of masculinity are confining for you?
Oh yeah, that's true. too bad there are hoops that need to be jumped. And you know what. I'm not even asking or men to have the right to abort (lets be honest no man should have that right) but once the child is born, it belongs to both parties. And at that point there should bbe no tipping of the scalesLifeCharacter said:A woman can abort yes, because it's her body and she has the right to control it. The father, sadly enough, cannot do this because they lack the ability to get pregnant. Besides that, a man is entitled to taking custody of their child if the woman gives it up and imposing upon them if they so choose. Literally the only extra options available to women are available to them because they're the one's carrying the pregnancy around.V4Viewtiful said:Thank you for proving my point.
a woman can abort, give up or keep their children but by not giving a man at the least the right to not be a father, before birth or a year in, we've given women superior rights and that's not at all feminist if anything it's that stupid term Feminazism.
Sure (why not?), government's only care about money. That doesn't detract from the point that to get the supposed money they need the children to be supported, whether it be by the parents or by them. So in this regard, they still only care about the children.[/quote]Again, true. However in terms of upbringing, role models and actual neutering are distant seconds. If you reaad about the childcare system, abuse in single parent homes etc, the records are pretty abysmal and all that money they gain from childcare a fraction is spent on a child's mental, physical and economical well-beingThe government doesn't care about children, they don't care about you me, or any parent. They care about that mean green. Children and the things around them are heavily financed. are you even aware of just how much money a new born baby can generate till they're 18? Quarter of a million per head (if I included other stuff, it could clock up to more).
Women also need to take responsibility for their sexual activity, and they do, because it's impossible for them not to. Having an abortion is taking responsibility for their sexual activity. Giving birth and raising the child is taking responsibility. Giving birth and giving up the child to someone else is taking responsibility. [/quote]yes and no, You not wrong but when it comes to making the baby yeah it's both responsibility however women aren't forced to do either or, a man can be forced though and have been (and are continuing to be). If a man rears a child doesn't know but then is brought up by the authorities he has to pay, in spite of his lack of knowledge.And your rhetoric about "He doesn't want to be a father, don't have sex" crap, well what about the women? She did the same thing yet she's treated with the same expectation?
not really, most men don't take child support and women don't pay the same steep amount. Also if a man who pays Child support gets married to another woman both checks get cut but if a women with the child gets married to someone richer than the babies father or they make more than twice their income neither the pay is altered or stopped.If the father wants to take the child, the woman paying child support is taking responsibility.
It's one of those things, chefs are often male, but cooks are often female.MisterM2402 said:That's so weird, considering how many male TV chefs there are. Have they never heard of Gordon Ramsay?Ryotknife said:hmm, personally its not confining but a minor annoyance, at least nowadays. For example, i enjoy cooking. Cant tell you how many "you would make an excellent wife one day" comments i get.