What are you nattering on about? No one has done anything to prevent you from posting.
Unlike you, I have made no comments about any poster’s intelligence or personality, so your claim of “personal attack” is ludicrous. Nothing I have posted could be reasonably construed as an effort to shut down debate and I have not posted as a Moderator at any time in this thread. It would appear, then, that you are attempting to pretend that I am abusing an authority I have not even wielded in order to force my silence. bad form.
If you think I have acted inappropriately as a Moderator, go open a thread in the ATMB forum. Such comments are not appropriate, here–not even when they are as ridiculous as yours.
:rolleyes:
Your insertion of “oppression” into the discussion of LinusK’s silly claim is utter nonsense, but I have never taken action against a poster for making ridiculous posts.
Your posts are beginning to look like a poor rip-off of Dennis in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, but you are really not being repressed.
As they were in WWII, when women became loggers and miners.
Most of the jobs on that list aren’t rocket science. They can be learned at a basic level on the job or as an apprentice.
I just spent some time as a project manager on a large historic renovation. They had female carpenters, electricians and plumbers on staff (and me). But many of those jobs are not women friendly - and I don’t mean we are in danger of breaking a nail or a leg. There is a lot of harassment of women in most of those fields. They are often union, and the trade unions are often a good ole boy network. I’ve also had the fun of doing project management in a trucking company and am currently working with electrical linemen. They are environments were you have to be willing to put up with being slapped on the ass if you want to do your job. They are also positions where - even for project managers - there is a definite preference for hiring men - they fit into the culture better and are less of a lawsuit risk because they don’t get slapped on the ass.
(The historic renovation was a very female friendly job site - the job foreman was a great younger guy who didn’t tolerate that shit).
Want women to do those jobs, hire women and treat them with respect instead of objects. Honestly, my feeling from those environments is that they’d rather not have women around in 90% of those environments and only hire women when that is their only choice. In a down economy, they usually have choice.
As for feminists - my take on feminism is that I’m a feminist so that women can have choices to do what THEY want - if that is to be a truck driver, they should be a truck driver, if that is be a stay at home mom, or a kindergarten teacher, or a plumber, or a lawyer, or an astronaut - they should get to pursue that - without judging. I’m not a feminist so we can sit around and say “more women should be _______” - because if more women don’t WANT to be _______, that’s sort of contrary to the idea that the individual woman should get to choose her career and not be pigeonholed because she is female.
I would suspect naval crews are cross-trained far better than civilians, because losing big chunks of people in a battle is not a remote possibility.
If all the men vanished the remaining women would be in trouble in the short run, If all the women vanished the remaining men would be in trouble in the short term. Hell, if a random 50% of people would vanish the survivors would be in trouble. In all cases others could be trained, but it would have to be done as things were falling apart.
But the worst on the list is
Refuse and recyclable material collectors
in my town the truck does most of the work. Does LinusK think women can’t drive trucks?
You are insisting on being silenced when no one has silenced you. You are being openly invited to continue speaking and are using that invitation to assert that pepole won’t let you speak.
No, thank you for quoting your earlier post yourself, as this made it even easier to see how flimsy your denials are.
He didn’t even imply that no women do them. He explicitly said that a world without men is a world without truckers, farmers, etc. I probably shouldn’t be surprised that someone has already agreed with **LinusK **on this point:
[ol]
[li]Both the kindergarten teachers in my district are men.[/li][li]Ooh! Sexism AND racism. (Is anyone surprised?)[/li][li]We would not need editors for a magazine no one would read.[/li][/ol]
Well, first of all, thanks for quoting what I said. I’ve had a lot of trouble with people misquoting me, and then attacking me for something I never said. I didn’t accuse you of doing that, but it makes it easier on everyone, if you quote whatever you’re commenting on.
As I said earlier I don’t think what Schumer did was rape. However, I do think that many feminists would think it was rape, if the genders were reversed.
From Schumer’s speech:
Schumer asks: “Is it still considered getting head if the guy falls asleep every three seconds?”
But if a man had asked, “Is it still considered rape if the girl falls asleep every three seconds?” I think the answer - from the same audience - would have been “YES”.
Do you see the hypocrisy here? The same movement that insists that sex with someone who is drunk is rape, applauds a woman for telling a story about having sex with someone who was drunk.
One last thing: you describe Schumer waiting for an “opportunity to get out of the situation without trouble.” But there is literally nothing in Shumer’s own story about “waiting to get out of the situation without trouble.”
She does spend a lot of time mocking him for his disgustingness and general sexual inadequacy. She does say she has to wake him up to get him moving again. And she says he was forced to crawl across the floor to change the music for her. But not once does she say she was afraid of him.
LinusK, you don’t seem to understand how mass movements and activism works.
Every mass movement has its extreme wing, and these are the ones who get the most press. Even your female anti-feminist heroes know this:
And BTW, most of the things these women are saying today is nothing “revelatory”.
Are you familiar with The Manipulated Man by Esther Vilar? It was published in 1971. The basic premise is women are stupid, but they manipulate men into being their slaves. Sound familiar?
Ms Vilar got herself a lot of publicity back then, and that was before the reach and power of the internet and social media. Karen Straughan et al have basically lifted her ideas and arguments whole cloth.
Your point about how active she is in the incident is fair enough. I missed the line about waking him up. That means she wasn’t just waiting for it to be over.
I think it is very easy for a woman to feel she must help the man in the situation do whatever he wants to do or else things might get ugly. But for the sake of argument, I won’t insist that that applies here.
You listed several places where people (I’ll assume for the sake of argument that you’re right that they’re all feminists speaking qua feminist) made incorrect statements like “you can’t consent if you’ve been drinking.” I think the right thing to say here is if anyone found themselves to make a statement like that, and also found themselves inclined not to call Schumer a rapist, then they’d need to do some thinking about whether it’s really true that “you can’t consent if you’ve been drinking.” (And ideally they’d come to the correct, totally-compatible-with-feminism conclusion that this statement is, indeed, not correct. It is far too broad.)
You asked me if I see hypocrisy here. Frankly I could not care any less than I do about the question of who is hypocritical or whatever–in my experience, everyone is hypocritical, if all it takes to be a hypocrite is to fail to apply principles you have articulated. What I care much more about is helping people to accurately articulate their views by helping them think through the implications and apply them to real-life cases.
If I were forced to “spot the hypocrite,” then since to my mind hypocrisy is an attribute of individual people rather than of theories or doctrines, I would need to go look at individual people and find out if there are individual people who will, even on reflection, insist (for example) that no one can consent to sex after drinking and also insist that sober women who have sex with inebriated men are not rapists.
That “on reflection” bit is important. Without it, we just have run-of-the-mill failure to think implications through, which is correctible, often without anyone needing to be combative about anything.
Well, hypothetically, if men disappeared overnight, these are not jobs you could just pick up and start doing the next day. You can’t, for example, just start repairing or installing high-voltage electrical lines and equipment without (I assume) some pretty extensive training. Modern commercial fishing isn’t just baiting a hook: a factory/trawler is a huge, high-tech machine. It drops a 100+ ft nets to just above the bottom of the sea, and pulls up (if they’re successful) 100+ tons of fish at a time. What I did - being a lowly factory worker - didn’t require much in the way of training or experience (other than: “don’t put your hand there, if you want to keep it”) but many of the other jobs did: finding the fish in the first place, for example, or fixing things that went wrong. Construction is not only physically dangerous, but requires a wide range of skills. Watching them - from the comfort of my air-conditioned office - makes me appreciate not only the incredible amount of organization and precise engineering that goes into making a building like that, but also my privilege in being able to do non-physical labor in the comfort of an air-conditioned office in the first place.
Anyway, the point is that despite being low-status, blue-collar jobs, many of those same jobs require not just strength, stamina and a high tolerance for risk of injury and death; but a large skill-set, and tons of experience.
tomndebb: I’m going to choose to not engage with you, because of the combination of the tone of your post, and your moderator status. I’ve seen too many examples (not necessarily on this board) of moderators abusing their privileges to respond to posts like this one, from a moderator.
It doesn’t matter. So long as a hypothetical person both has the power to revoke someone else’s posting privileges, and a high degree of emotional investment in a particular point of view, engaging with such a person would be irrational, unless or until one was willing to have his or her posting privileges revoked.
He was right – it was just silly for you to assert that the lights and toilets would cease to work if it men disappeared. Hopefully you’re self-aware enough to recognize that yes, sometimes you might actually say something dumb.
tomndebb wouldn’t be a moderator any more if he wasn’t able to separate his personal beliefs from his moderation. He hasn’t shown any signs or plans for doing anything against you as a poster.
This board encourages moderators to post in the forums, and that’s a good thing – it keeps them involved. Great Debates is about strong opinions and feelings, and I see nothing wrong with a moderator posting strong opinions and feelings on any particular issue, when posting as a regular poster and not a moderator.
Really? Was tomndebb posting as a moderator when he claimed that I requested my own link be broken? He didn’t state anywhere in that post that he was posting as a moderator, but where the hell did he get that info?
(What he posted was false anyway: I requested a spoiler box be added to bring it into compliance with the double-click rule due to the use of “motherfucker,” in case that was NSFW. I never requested the link be disabled.)
So is that why you believe that women are incapable of being truckers, farmers, engineers, etc., because you think that women lack the physical and mental abilities required to perform these jobs?