Sexual Equality

All sexes should have the equal right to have there post displayed.

All sexes should have the equal right to know the difference between “there” and “their” (and, while we’re at it, “they’re”).

And while I’m picking nits, why say “all sexes”? There are only two of them. Better to say “both sexes”. Unless, of course, you’re leaving your statement open to include any new sexes that we may one day genetically engineer or evolve.

Now there’s a novel debate topic: Should genetically engineered sexes (that currently don’t exist) have equal rights?

Just because science has only ever observed two distinct sexes, it doesn’t mean that there aren’t many more; you can’t prove that they don’t exist, therefore they definitely do. :wink:

I wonder if the OP was going to be about things being ‘equal, but different’? - my feeling is that the term ‘equity’ is far more useful; indeed strict equality isn’t always desirable - take public toilet facilities, for example - I think most women and men are happy that they don’t have to use the same public toilet facilities, but it is important that the level of functionality of the facilities is entirely adequate in both cases.
In fact ‘adequacy’ means different things to different genders; I’m failing to think of a reason why tampon dispensers would be useful in a male toilet facility and yet if they were omitted in a female toilet facility, then the overall level of adequacy might be considered lower than the male facility that was in all other ways equivalent.

[hijack]

Well, as long as we’re nitpicking…while there isn’t exactly persecution of hermaphrodites and other occasion folks who are not necessarily defineable physically, mentally, or socially as male or female, they do exist. “All sexes” is, therefore, at least as grammatically appropriate as “both sexes”, and perhaps more appropriate when it comes to a very in-depth discussion of gender roles and equality.

From your friendly neighborhood hermaphrodite activist. :wink:

[/hijack]

"There (their) post? Only one post? They have to work together and can’t post individually? Or should they be granted the right to compete on an equal basis to have the one very best post displayed?

An excellent point, especially regarding toliet facilities. Not only should they remain separate, but they should be available in a number that should process males and females at the same rate. As it is, female lines are always longer.

It’s not that I am concerned for my own discomfort, of course. I don’t mind assuming the pretzel stance for twenty minutes while I wait. But I’m just trying to be considerate of my husband who is standing outside counting ceiling tiles and absentmindedly whistling The Lady Is a Tramp.

Zoe,

My wife and I often went to boxing matches when we lived in Las Vegas. The audience was usually about 90% male. Between each bout the crowd would leave the auditorium (usually the casino’s convention / exhibit hall) en masse and use the “facilities”.

Wife would be in-and-out with zero waiting and all the guys would be lined up 20 deep even though the facilities were sized to accomodate the usual convention crowds.

She loved it. Sometimes she’d even cruise the men’s line and tease the guys about having to wait. She’s pretty fierce.

“Revenge is sweet”.

On a related note, I half-recall a mini-controversy a few years ago about some revised architechural best practices (or was it a state building code?) which decreed that toilet facilities for buildings handling crowds shuld be designed with 30 or 40% more stalls for the women vs men. The idea was to achieve similar throughput for each group.

The ideas seems sensible to me, but the controversy had all the usual suspects taking all the usual strident positions.

I have no clue what ever became of the best practice or building code or whatever it was. Anyone know?