Butthurt white guys, an Asian virgin and an angry lesbian walk into a bar...

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Himeo

Himeo

Vyemm Raider
3,263
2,802
Women who don't sleep around before their wedding have happier marriages - but men can play the field without worry, study finds
Daily Mail
Women who have several sexual partners before getting married have less happy marriages - but men do no harm by playing the field,a study has found.

According to new research by the National Marriage Project, more than half of married women who had only ever slept with their future husband felt highly satisfied in their marriage.

But that percentage dropped to 42 per cent once the woman had had pre-marital sex with at least two partners. It dropped to 22 per cent for those with ten or more partners.

But, for men, the number of partners a man they appeared to have no bearing on how satisfied they felt within a marriage.
Click to expand...
If feminism is about women acting like men, is feminism making women unhappy?
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Himeo_sl said:
Women who don't sleep around before their wedding have happier marriages - but men can play the field without worry, study finds
Daily Mail


If feminism is about women acting like men, is feminism making women unhappy?
Click to expand...
My first interpretation was that a woman was more likely to be satisfied with her partner if she had no frame of reference. The more people she's slept with, the more she realizes there are "good" and "bad" lovers.
Men, on the other hand, are pretty content if they're getting any sex at all.

That's how I interpreted it, anyway.
 
Agraza

Agraza

Registered Hutt
6,890
521
Tanoomba_sl said:
That doesn't change my point at all.
Was that story illustrative of sexism workingagainsta woman?
Click to expand...
Yes, actually it was. The central point of the inequality of the situation is that the girl is not considered capable of being responsible for her actions. This has been my point the entire time. How is it possible you teach english, and is that wise?

If they're not responsible for mistakes, then they're not responsible for success. They become the property of men, who are responsible for all the actions of the woman. You don't get one side without the other.

And I don't even think what she did was a mistake. Her mother does, and apparently doesn't think she raised her daughter to be capable of making decisions for herself. If that is truly the case, then the blame for her interactions with the boy rest with the parents of the daughter for allowing it.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Agraza_sl said:
Yes, actually it was. The central point of the inequality of the situation is that the girl is not considered capable of being responsible for her actions. This has been my point the entire time. How is it possible you teach english, and is that wise?

If they're not responsible for mistakes, then they're not responsible for success. They become the property of men, who are responsible for all the actions of the woman. You don't get one side without the other.

And I don't even think what she did was a mistake. Her mother does, and apparently doesn't think she raised her daughter to be capable of making decisions for herself. If that is truly the case, then the blame for her interactions with the boy rest with the parents of the daughter for allowing it.
Click to expand...
Dude, I hear you. IN PRINCIPLE, the teenage girl is being treated like a second-class citizen who can not be held responsible for her actions. IN PRINCIPLE, this goes against what feminism stands for. But IN PRACTICE, this is a story about a girl who didn't get charged with possession and manufacturing of child pornography, who didn't get a criminal record, and who didn't have police officers take pictures of her genitals against her will for "evidence".

Of course you're right, if you want equality you have to take the bad with the good. Of course, any self-respecting feminist would have to admit that sexism played a role in this story, just like any self-respecting feminist would agree that courts shouldn't automatically favor the mother in child custody cases, that courts shouldn't find a suspected rapist guilty based on the word of the accuser alone, that guys shouldn't automatically be expected to pay on the first date, etc. But don't stand there with your "ooh" face, index finger on your bottom lip, gazing skyward and wondering aloud "Hmmmm...why is itthat I haven't heard any feminists get upset about this girl being denied culpability for her own actions?" You know damn well why and it's a stupid question to ask. Again, WE ALL are selective about the stories we choose to be vocal about. To try to highlight this as a flaw of one particular group is ridiculous.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
fanaskin_sl said:
it is, the studies I saw correlate women's happiness has been shrinking since feminism took root., I linked it previously in this thread.
Click to expand...
manfeels-park-13-correlation-vs-causation.png
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,943
138,374
I like how the first thought that woman had was to wash away any thought of personal influence while on the other hand her "cause" would constantly berate culture as the cause of her own woes. Culture and nurture is the #1 influence in the world except when it may perhaps cast a negative light on my own possible unintended consequences of my actions.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,943
138,374
"You, you are why i'm not a feminist." is what the guy should have said in the next panel.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
3 response posts in ten minutes? That's the hallmark of one who has been butthurt!
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
fanaskin_sl said:
it only took you one post to ditch the correlation =/= causation concept.
Click to expand...
I didn't ditch anything. I don't have to prove, explain or justify that correlation does not equal causation. It is a given.

If you think otherwise, the onus is on you.
 
Arbitrary

Arbitrary

Tranny Chaser
29,021
79,767
Too often when I see someone bring up that correlation does not equal causation it looks to me though the person is warding themselves versus evil. Throwing a pinch of proverbial salt over their shoulder. Phew, safe!

Correlations are not without value, not even close. It's just that causation is a very, very high standard and sometimes even impossible to establish. It is true that you need to be careful with correlations as they invite spurious comparisons but they are absolutely useful things and statistically relevant.
 
Lithose

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,036
Tanoomba_sl said:
I didn't ditch anything. I don't have to prove, explain or justify that correlation does not equal causation. It is a given.

If you think otherwise, the onus is on you.
Click to expand...
He's saying that quick posting only correlates to butthurt--there is no statistical causation. Hence you abandoned your need for causal evidence in one post.
 
Agraza

Agraza

Registered Hutt
6,890
521
Women's happiness could be related to very many things. Iirc, divorce rates have gone up, women have to participate in the workplace more seriously, take care of more bills at home, are expected to have a political opinion, etc. Now that women compete with men for more and more jobs, there are fewer men with a superior economic situation that women look for in a mate, so they're likely far less satisfied with men as well. Being involved with society is messy and depressing.

That doesn't mean that feminism wasn't a just fight, but that the rewards have been bittersweet. It reminds me of the communist vanguard party and Paris leading all of France into a republic. A select elite in both Russia and France demanded change, and the rural landscape was, generally, neither party to it nor desirous of it. France did alright, but they were already very productive and educated by the world's standards. Russia fought tooth and nail to subjugate and incorporate the commons, and never quite managed it.

There is a similar vanguard party among feminists, and they claim to represent everyone that's not at the front with them, and that's not the case. Some women (go look in Utah) find a lot of comfort in traditional gender roles, and until feminists accept that they don't represent every woman on every issue, there are going to be significant issues with the message they're attempting to convey.

OZIBnp8.jpg
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,943
138,374
while on this topic, this is the intrinsic problem with behaviorism, they don't look to explain anything except by observation which to them is using statistics to provide causation. behaviorism is a good tool to figure out how to more consistently manipulate peoples behavior it's a terrible tool for coming up with intelligible explanations.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE CONCEPT
OF CAUSALITY IN BEHAVIORISTIC PSYCHOLOGY
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,943
138,374
Agraza_sl said:
There is a similar vanguard party among feminists, and they claim to represent everyone that's not at the front with them, and that's not the case. Some women (go look in Utah) find a lot of comfort in traditional gender roles, and until feminists accept that they don't represent every woman on every issue, there are going to be significant issues with the message they're attempting to convey.
Click to expand...
the big problem they have is the problem with all universal ideologies which include communism or radical Islam, they don't take a persons current state of mind as reality, they believe in the concept of false consciousness and when you take a position based on the concept that the people you are trying to "help" don't have to agree with you there's a logical loophole that can occur. At this point you are in a position to do whatever it takes in the knowledge that you are fighting for their fictionalized almost platonic form version of the self and not the actual present self. this is especially egregious when your universal ideology is seen as pure or just or unbiased, the more righteous you view your cause the more you're willing to leverage this righteousness vs your own actions. In the most extreme cases as can be seen in communism or radical Islam this thought process has for example lead to mass murder.
 
Agraza

Agraza

Registered Hutt
6,890
521
I don't exactly follow, but I get the gist of it. I'm not familiar with this concept though. I'm a little skeptical.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,943
138,374
marxist version
False consciousness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the islamic version
Jahiliyyah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One western academic has compared the idea of contemporary Jahiliyya in some radical Islamic circles to the secular Marxist idea of false consciousness[13] - in each case the masses being unaware they are not following their true consciousness by rising up to overthrow the capitalist system and replacing it with socialism (in the case of Marxism); or overthrow the secular state and replace it with the true Islam of strict sharia law (in the case of Qutbism).
Click to expand...
as it relates to:
2.) the paradox of positive liberty
Positive and Negative Liberty (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.