Well a “battle of the sexes” is what brought the question up in the first place. Although that was pretty much joking and not hateful. Every once in a while I enjoy a “quit thinking with your penis”, “how’d you get out of the kitchen?” ribbing.
Don’t put words in my replies. I was trying to point out that writing a story about, say, men disappearing and women ruling the world seems almost obvious since it is quite clear that it is currently run by men. It’s flipping a situation on its head. People wonder about it all the time, ‘What if the world were run by women?’
Whereas eliminating homosexuals from existence in a story is pretty much just choosing a group that’s already pretty victimized and, well, already eliminated (e.g. stoned to death, forced to lie) in some countries.
Here’s what you said before:
Just so we’re clear, are you saying that men run the world and virtually enslave women in many countries including the U.S. until rather recently?
If you say so. But it seems to me that if you wanted to flip the situation on its head, you would write a story about a world run by women without having to “disappear” the men to make it happen. Women ruling a man-free world - or a world in which men have been emasculated by authorial fiat - is not “flipping the situation on its head”.
Your quote - which brazil84 has quoted in the previous post, so I shan’t reiterate it - read to me as an argument against the offensiveness of writing a story about the elimination of men. This was being compared to the offensiveness of a putative story about the elimination of homosexuals (or Jews, or blacks, or what you will) - stories which no-one would deny would be evidence of despicable bigotry on the part of the author. Your quote seemed to imply that because homosexuals are innocent of “enslaving” straights, while men are guilty of enslaving women, homosexuals deserve to be protected from such bigotry while men are fair game for it. Now possibly I was barking up the wrong tree, but I don’t believe it was such a stretch, at that.
And this is intended to refute my supposition that what you meant was “Well, men are fair game”? :dubious:
If this is some sort of shocking revelation to anyone, don’t venture into the Jena 6 thread.
Again, I didn’t intend to make this a case of ‘all men deserve ito die,’ but whatever. I love to find out what I really meant. Haven’t read the sci-fi stories in question (though am interested in the biology), so at this point I’m pretty much just defending anyone’s right to write a story about men disappearing/dying out without being labeled a man hater. And I don’t imagine a homophobic author would write about all homsoexuals disappearing and have the moral be that it takes all kinds, whereas it seems not one of these stories paints an absolute utopian picture of male-free existence.
I don’t understand that. Are you saying yes? What do the Jena 6 have to do with this? They are men, so they take part in running the world? 
This thread was not yet in The Pit when I made my comment about **brazil84’s ** “cognitive functions.”
Now I don’t have to pretend to be nice about his hundreds of threadshitting, hijacking, brainless posts.
No, implying that the same people who doubt the prevailing white-on-black racism in America also tend to express doubts over women’s subjugation. But I could be inferring incorrectly. And I wouldn’t want to do that. Also, I’m not sure it’s automatically misandrist (or misogynist) to hypothesize that the only world in which women might rule is one where men have died out, if only because of body size/strength.
(Ugh. Debating over something I’ve never read before mentioned in a thread started from a espectable view point. No wonder I rarely venture into the Pit).
Don’t see why. Gorillas are way bigger and stronger than we are, and they don’t rule. One would hypothesise that a world in which women might rule would be one in which some subculture flirted with the notion, and proceed to out-compete all other cultures in the world, through the superiority of women’s empathy, cooperation, or whatever other virtues women possess that men do not. In other words, a world in which gynocracy is for the good of all. If you can’t imagine such a world, it’s not for me to fill in for your lack of imagination. 
It’s not your fault, it’s whoever pointed that big phucking gun at your head. :dubious:
Seriously? Seriously? No one made me come in here, you’re right, and I will now use my wonderful free will to leave. I’m going to need a good or even great debate to wash my mind out.
Totally off-topic, but I always wondered how “femininists” would react if some people (mostly men, but some women) started going around preaching about masculinism and saying it meant both sexes should be equal.
Something tells me the howls of the offended would never stop.
Well, just as you like. It’s true that in GD you can flounce out of a thread and not have people say things like “Heat, kitchen” or “Door, ass”, at least not without earning the justified wrath of the Mods, but I don’t believe you come out of the situation with any more respect, at that, 'cos no-one can stop people thinking it.
Indeed, it’s not as if you’d been subjected to undue Pittery in this thread. I mean, I’ve seen some name-calling going on, but not at you, and the worst of it, I thought, while this thread was still over in GQ.
Also you’ll find even (or especially) in GD that responding to one single sentence and ignoring the rest of a post won’t be viewed as shit-hot debating technique either. You might have thought that the part about gorillas was the key plank of my argument, but I would have thought that the context tended to suggest otherwise. Even among humans, leadership isn’t automatically correlated with size and strength - neither Napoleon nor Hitler were exactly giants, and while I wouldn’t hold either up as ornaments to the human condition, it can’t be denied that they dominated their respective societies extremely effectively.
I still find myself left with my supposition that when a woman writes a story about a world without men, it’s not because she wants to write a story about a flipping of the usual gender roles, but because she wants to write a story about a world without men. As I said above (and as you chose to ignore), you could find another way to write about a world in which women ruled - and if the claims for feminism were to be taken seriously, it would be a world in which both genders were equally happy and fulfilled.
I’m just trying to figure out what you are saying.
Are you saying that men run the world and virtually enslave women in many countries including the U.S. until rather recently?
It’s a simple yes or no question.
And by the way, I agree that there is a lot of racism in the United States among whites (and blacks too).