Question for lkanneg

[Galt]

It means that there should be no restrictions or penalties imposed upon what people may or may not do, be, own or otherwise interact in any way with solely based upon their gender.

In other words, the feminist philosophy of "ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you".  (With apologies to JFK).

In other words, feminists want unrestricted freedom to do as men, but with the usual restrictions and expectations on men.

No, it's not even funny anymore.  Hillary Clinton is bossing people around, women are more than 50% of the voters, so slowly women should also be held responsible.

If you want a friggin' society, then you finally have to come out from mother's skirt, or the skirt of judges and chivalrist law-makers, as the case may be.

Either you are a stupid girl, or a person on this planet.  Unfortunately, feminists want both: Stupid, unknowing girl when it suits them, and sentient being on this planet when it suits them.

I certainly don't want to generalize to all women (and it would violate the rules of this board), but I have seen that type of behavior myself among many women I have known.  Manipulation.

[lkanneg]

When I was a young girl, I used to read the paper.  Jobs were classified into:

HELP WANTED - MALE
HELP WANTED - FEMALE

When I was a teen, I decided I wanted to be what we called a "disc jockey".  And, trust me, I had the skills.  But I was female and, at the time, women in radio were few and far between.  But I decided I would go for it anyway.

I went to the broadcasting school, and the director of admissions was shocked.   He had only glanced at my last name when he looked over his appointments for the day, and did not expect to see a 17 year old girl show up.   But after he listened to me, he was very impressed and why?  Because he knew I could do the job.  And I was accepted into the school - and he was actually excited about the possibilities.

Had it been against the law for you to do so, though, none of that would've mattered.  And that's my point.

Men are inherently fair creatures - more so, IMHO, than many women.

LOL, I haven't noticed that--I haven't noticed *any* brand or flavor of human being showing a stronger fairness streak than any other.  

Most will give someone a chance as long as she or he doesn't expect special privileges or exceptions.  Did those who were dead set against women in formerly men-only jobs need a gentle push to become more open-minded?  Yes.

Do you define legal action as a gentle push?

And the fault doesn't lie with them, it lies with US.  Too many women are self-entitled, self-absorbed lazy bitches who want everything handed to them on a silver Vera Wang platter (which, of course, someone ELSE paid for).  Don't get me wrong - many are not BUT my perception is that the number of selfish women who will lie and manipulate when they don't get their way is growing.....

Nah.  I think the number of selfish, self-entitled, self-absorbed lazy bitches has been pretty much constant throughout history.  

[lkanneg]

It almost seems...like men really can't *bear* the thought that a woman can meet the same physical and mental standards for a job.

Some men, perhaps. But not the majority.

I hope that's true.

I suspect that is the most dishonest statement you have ever made here thus far, lkanneg. Men can bear the thought, but can the women who feel like you bear the thought of rejection when they cannot meet the required physical expectation?

Sure.  It's *my* failing then, that I can either fix, or accept.  Not someone else's stupid prejudices stopping me from reaching my potential.  Much easier to cope with the former.  But perhaps that's just the way it is for me.  Perhaps others feel differently.

[lkanneg]

One aspect of this issue that seems to be missing from the dialog:

The political ramifications and the "optics" involved with women in combat situations.

The political elite and military commanders are not living in a vacuum here folks.  They know, like everyone else here, that images of dead and dismembered women from the "battlefield" will instantly kill a large measure of support from the American public, regardless of the merits of the actual campaign.  

 :roll:

[Double Jeopardy]

It almost seems...like men really can't *bear* the thought that a woman can meet the same physical and mental standards for a job.

Some men, perhaps. But not the majority.

I hope that's true.

I suspect that is the most dishonest statement you have ever made here thus far, lkanneg. Men can bear the thought, but can the women who feel like you bear the thought of rejection when they cannot meet the required physical expectation?

Sure.  It's *my* failing then, that I can either fix, or accept.  Not someone else's stupid prejudices stopping me from reaching my potential.  Much easier to cope with the former.  But perhaps that's just the way it is for me.  Perhaps others feel differently.

errrmmm...no, it has nothing to do with prejiduces, lkanneg, you still fail to accept and thus will not fix rather spill out cries of prejiduce and foul play. You either make it or you don't. I fail to see why it becomes somebody's prejiduce when you fail to meet the mark physically or mentally and not make the team, the fire squad or the police force. The male Barney phifes of the world don't get a free pass, they're told NO. And I agree, why not you?

[Galt]

Nah.  I think the number of selfish, self-entitled, self-absorbed lazy bitches has been pretty much constant throughout history.  

It's promoted today with the "you go girl" brand of feminism and empowerment.  And money from the government.  Just check out the budget of the Department of Education (which should be abolished).

[Double Jeopardy]

One aspect of this issue that seems to be missing from the dialog:

The political ramifications and the "optics" involved with women in combat situations.

The political elite and military commanders are not living in a vacuum here folks.  They know, like everyone else here, that images of dead and dismembered women from the "battlefield" will instantly kill a large measure of support from the American public, regardless of the merits of the actual campaign.  

 :roll:

I concur, this is true regardless of rolling eyeballs and rants otherwise. And this is a double edged sword that gets the attention of feminists, chivilrous men and alike. Sometimes the truth is just too hard to bare on those who cannot accept it. Most of the conflict lies within and not with others, though taking it out on others is easiest. At least that has been my observation of feminist mannerisms.

[Double Jeopardy]

LOL, I haven't noticed that--I haven't noticed *any* brand or flavor of human being showing a stronger fairness streak than any other.  

Chivalry plays a large part in opening ones eyes to the obvious of which you conveniently ignore, lkanneg. Take a look around, that is more than fair.

[lkanneg]

It almost seems...like men really can't *bear* the thought that a woman can meet the same physical and mental standards for a job.

Some men, perhaps. But not the majority.

I hope that's true.

I suspect that is the most dishonest statement you have ever made here thus far, lkanneg. Men can bear the thought, but can the women who feel like you bear the thought of rejection when they cannot meet the required physical expectation?

Sure.  It's *my* failing then, that I can either fix, or accept.  Not someone else's stupid prejudices stopping me from reaching my potential.  Much easier to cope with the former.  But perhaps that's just the way it is for me.  Perhaps others feel differently.

errrmmm...no, it has nothing to do with prejiduces, lkanneg, you still fail to accept and thus will not fix rather spill out cries of prejiduce and foul play. You either make it or you don't. I fail to see why it becomes somebody's prejiduce when you fail to meet the mark physically or mentally and not make the team, the fire squad or the police force. The male Barney phifes of the world don't get a free pass, they're told NO. And I agree, why not you?

 When I fail to meet the mark...the MALE mark...physically or mentally in any test or evaluation in my lifetime...I'll re-examine the situation.  Hasn't happened yet, which probably explains a lot about my impatience with the cries of, "But women CAN'T...!"  

Helpful clearing-up point:  It is prejudice to refuse to even let a woman attempt to pass an entrance exam because she's female.  It isn't prejudice when a woman fails an entrance exam because she's too weak, slow or stupid to pass it.

[lkanneg]

PS

Be scared of anything larger and stronger than you that hates you.  Be very scared.

If I'd taken that advice, I'd have a sorry life.  

Be a *little* afraid.  It sharpens the senses and the self-preservation instinct.  But only a little.

[Double Jeopardy]

Show me where women are refused to take an entrance exam, lkanneg. Spinning the situation with "male mark" is ridiculous, entrance exams are male to the weaker male too, the standard is the standard fr EVERYONE, period. Trouble is, when he is told NO, he has to go away. When you get told no, you can cry foul play and then the liberal poop hits the perverbial fan....the bar then is lowered, you get the job anyway....and still we read about how badly women have it as a class.


It is boring, very very boring. Almost as annoying as a child who asks the "Why mommy why, why? why?"...and you know the kid isn't half interested in "why" at all.

[Mr. Nickle]

Helpful clearing-up point: It is prejudice to refuse to even let a woman attempt to pass an entrance exam because she's female. It isn't prejudice when a woman fails an entrance exam because she's too weak, slow or stupid to pass it.

And what is it when standards are lowered to make sure the women who are too weak, slow or stupid can pass it?

[lkanneg]

Helpful clearing-up point: It is prejudice to refuse to even let a woman attempt to pass an entrance exam because she's female. It isn't prejudice when a woman fails an entrance exam because she's too weak, slow or stupid to pass it.

And what is it when standards are lowered to make sure the women who are too weak, slow or stupid can pass it?

Wrong.

[Mr. Nickle]

BINGO!

But that's what feminism has brought us. But you as a feminist deny it.

[lkanneg]

Show me where women are refused to take an entrance exam, lkanneg.

In the Army women cannot serve in the following: infantry, armor, cannon field artillery and short range air defense artillery.
In the Navy women are excluded from Submarine Warfare, Special Warfare (SEAL) and ratings particular to submarine service such as fire control technician, missile technician, and one aspect of sonar technician.
The Marine Corps assignments closed to women are infantry, armor, field artillery, security force guard protecting nuclear material, and several positions related to armored, amphibious, assault units and fleet antiterrorism security teams.
Air Force positions closed or restricted are Combat Control, Special Operations Forces, Rotary Aircraft, TAC Pararescue, and Weather assignments with infantry or Special Forces.