100% our bodies/choice, 50% our responsibility (1 Viewer)

[Libertarian]

One of the biggest frauds our female controlled government and matriarchal society has foisted onto men is providing women with 100% choice, where women claim "Our Bodies, Our Choice" but conveniently they don't want 100% responsibility.

Well, anyone who flunked math class knows that 100% choice but only 50% responsibility doesn't add up.

Now people who want to continue female supremacy and hegemony neatly decide without mens input what mens choices will be:

1. Choose to not have sex
2. If you choose to, then accept 50% responsbility


Now here is what women get:

1. To choose to not have sex
2. If they choose to, then they get only 50% responsibility for what is 100% their choice
3. 100% choice after choosing #1.


Men don't get any item 3.

Now one of the hoaxs they use to perpetuate this is to outrageously claim that having a child birth doesn't affect the man.They even keep a straight face when saying thigs.

But the obvious is if a woman can commandeer a mans body for 18 years against his will and force him into indetured servitude, that DOES affect hos body, yes he does not have any say other then what the RadFems dole out as scraps: 50% responsbility, 0% choice, but women get 50% responsbility, 100% choice.

Now for fun so viewers can see how women desperately need to hold onto their privilege and power, lets watch them try to justify this.

 

[Bluefire]

What it should be:

Responsibility
-------------
Female - 50%
Male - 50%

Choice
-------
Female - 45%
Male - 45%
Doctor - 10% trump card (if its needed to save a woman's life, he can trump the man and retrieve his 45%, but when he does so he looses his 10% and therefore it is an even 45%/45%, with there being a total of 90%.).

Of course, I'm being silly with the choice percentages, but of course you get the idea. An abortion should be, in most cases, joint responsibility and choice.

 

[Libertarian]

Bluefire, I completely agree, unfortunately, since our government is controlled by women via their superior electoral power and thus they get all politiicans to do their bidding, they have managed to pass laws that are flagrantly unfair against men, all the while claiming they are the victims and need even more exclusive protection.

 

[Schweddy]

I agree that men should be required before an abortion can take place. There is another thread here that has good arguments for/against this.

 

[shuamort]

since our government is controlled by women via their superior electoral power ...

That's an interesting thought.

Out of curiousity, I had some research done and found the statistics from the 2004 federal election:

Male: 58,455,000 (56.3% voted)
Female: 67,281,000 (60.1% voted)

53% of the voters were women. According to this, females make up 51.3% of the population.

Take into consideration, the majority of the prison population is maleat about 90% (and having a felony on one's record in some states disqualifies one from voting), that women live longer on average than men, and you'll probably start to see a gap in gender equality when it comes to voting.

I'm honestly not going anywhere with this data, I just saw libertarian's statement and did some research about it and thought that I'd show what I found.

 

[Libertarian]

In addition to the particualr voting stats you show, there is some anecdotal evidence to support my claims of a female controlled government.

George Bush Sr signed into the law the 14th Amendent Equal Protection clause violating Federal Violence Against Women Protection Act since majorly gutted by the Supremes. He said "we need to stop this war on women" ignoring the reality that males are 6 times more likely to be the victims of a violent crime.

Politicians all the tiem stump for "women's rights", for "women's equality" for "womens reproductive rights", etc, etc......

If a male politician stumped for male equality, for fathers custody equality, for male reproductive choice equality, for equality in the draft, for male lifespan equality, to stop the crisis in self esteem in boys, for solving the issue of "boys-shortchanged in schools", etc, etc, it would be POLITICAL SUICIDE

 

[flip2]

Not to mention anti-woman.

Don't you love being labeled a male, shovanistic pig?

 

[Libertarian]

Not to mention anti-woman.

Don't you love being labeled a male, shovanistic pig?

Oh, how I used to tweak the vaginal supremacists at the RadFems boards when I would premempt their scripted leftist lexicon and call them misandristic, female chauvanists.

 

[Naughty Nurse]

Oh, how I used to tweak the vaginal supremacists at the RadFems boards when I would premempt their scripted leftist lexicon

Hmmm, everyone has a script except you?

 

[Libertarian]

naugthynurse, do you deny that a poltiican stumping on a male equality rights platform would be deasd on arrival?

Yes or no?

 

[shuamort]

naugthynurse, do you deny that a poltiican stumping on a male equality rights platform would be deasd on arrival?

Yes or no?

He/she would be DOA with that, it's all about tactics. A politician would do much better on a "equal rights platform".

 

[Naughty Nurse]

He/she would be DOA with that, it's all about tactics. A politician would do much better on a "equal rights platform".

Absolutely. Well said.

"Libertarian" - when you constantly state that anyone who has opinions different to your own is talking from some kind of scripted agenda, then that starts to sound like a, erm, script.

 

[Libertarian]

Well, I could take a script right out of their playbook and say; "If the shoe fits" but that would be too "camp".....



One of the things I repeatedly see from supporters of ideas that can't withstand muster is a host of debate tactics and sayings. They are highly repetitious, whereas my opening posts are substantial and I clearly state my opinions, post link, copy over text, etc.

Part of their script is to engage me in defending myself from ad hominems and trying to steer them back on topic. That is how they steer away from the topic.

One liberal agenda tactic that suprisingly I have not seen here yet is I have been called just about every scripted epithet BUT the nazi thing.....that page must have fallen out of their agenda copy.....lol

Getting back right on topic, you will notice that really no recipients of female power and female only privilege here wants to open themselves up to critical review and scrutiny and actually try to argue against my opening argument. It would expose them too much.

But you have to understand, part of the exercise is to show fence sitters how my debate opponants operate in avoiding issues and using ad hominems. It speaks reems of the viability of their position.

 

[Naughty Nurse]

Well, I could take a script right out of their playbook and say; "If the shoe fits" but that would be too "camp".....

And you wouldn't want people thinking your anything less than a homophobic, woman hating, gun carrying heterosexual, right?

 

[Urethra Franklin]

Careful Naughty, he's flirting with you.
That closet door's opening, slowly but surely.

 

[Libertarian]

He/she would be DOA with that, it's all about tactics. A politician would do much better on a "equal rights platform".

Agreed, BUT........for clarifications sake, surely you aren't suggesting that a male politician could run a sucessful election campaign on an equal rights platform and never mention gender.....

Or better yet, if they suggested equal rights for woman AND men......do you agree that liberal reporters and the RadFems would crawl all up in their nut and demolish them on that? I think that would still be utter and complete suicide...

 

[shuamort]

Agreed, BUT........for clarifications sake, surely you aren't suggesting that a male politician could run a sucessful election campaign on an equal rights platform and never mention gender.....

Or better yet, if they suggested equal rights for woman AND men......do you agree that liberal reporters and the RadFems would crawl all up in their nut and demolish them on that? I think that would still be utter and complete suicide...

It's already been done before actually (by a woman).

Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm: "For the Equal Rights Amendment"
delivered 10 Aug 1970, Washington, DC

Mr. Speaker, House Joint Resolution 264, before us today, which provides for equality under the law for both men and women, represents one of the most clear-cut opportunities we are likely to have to declare our faith in the principles that shaped our Constitution. It provides a legal basis for attack on the most subtle, most pervasive, and most institutionalized form of prejudice that exists. Discrimination against women, solely on the basis of their sex, is so widespread that is seems to many persons normal, natural and right.

_____________________________________________
Sex prejudice cuts both ways. Men are oppressed by the requirements of the Selective Service Act, by enforced legal guardianship of minors, and by alimony laws. Each sex, I believe, should be liable when necessary to serve and defend this country. Each has a responsibility for the support of children

.

There are also 211 co-sponsors of the 2001 bill:
H.J.RES.40
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women.

About 80% of the co-sponsors are men.

Now,that leaves two arguments. One, that men are actually out there campaigning for equal rights based on gender. Or Two, that the gynocracy is forcing these men's hands into giving equal rights.

 

[Quertol]

ABORTION = MURDER

 

[Schweddy]

I agree, but that is not the question at hand.

 

[26 X World Champs]

If a male politician stumped for male equality, for fathers custody equality,

Newsflash....men, overall, do not get custody because they do not seek it...Those who do seek it, today, have a far, far better chance of getting it than anytime in our history.

for male reproductive choice equality

What does this mean? You seriously believe that anyone, no less a man has a right to tell a woman what she can do with her body? The flipside would be that a woman then gets to tell a man that he must have a vasectomy?

for equality in the draft

Uhmm....maybe you missed this, but the draft ended in 1973...so what are you talking about? What's really funny about your argument is that you also believe that women do not have the right to certain jobs based on physical ability, yet you're now asking for women to be front line soldiers? Therefore, based on your crazy logic women are cool to be soldiers but not cool to be construction workers? Is that what you're saying?

for male lifespan equality

So, praytell Mr. Science, how does one achieve this medical miracle? Do you kill people after they reach 73? Can't you come up with something better than this one, for it is too, too absurd.

to stop the crisis in self esteem in boys

What does this mean? Are you afraid of women? Do you feel threatened by them? I sure don't, nor does my son or my 6 nephews who are as old as 25 and as young as 4. Maybe it's YOU whose causing a crisis in your home, for I sure don't see it anywhere else? You really sound like a *****, though I don't think that is your intention. :2bigcry:

for solving the issue of "boys-shortchanged in schools"

I'm really slow, but what do you mean? My son and daughter go to the same high school, and neither is short-changed. Gender it seems is in the eye of the beholder, and you seem to be saying that if women are treated equally in things that really matter (not the bullshit stuff you just listed) men will be turned into what? What are you afraid of?

It is truly remarkable that anyone would believe that women are treated more fairly in the business world than men....

 

[Libertarian]

Newsflash....men, overall, do not get custody because they do not seek it...Those who do seek it, today, have a far, far better chance of getting it than anytime in our history.

Straw argument. The issue is not whether they have a better chance. The issue is they DON"T HAVE AN EQUAL CHANCE. Yoru statement is decpetive and misleading. It is like asking negroes in the 50s to be quiet because in the 50 you have so much better of a chance at not being lynched.

As to the male reproductive rights inequality, there is a thread I started where I gutted the argument you made.

Uhmm....maybe you missed this, but the draft ended in 1973...so what are you talking about?

Selective Service, are you happy now? I think it was rather obvious....

What's really funny about your argument is that you also believe that women do not have the right to certain jobs based on physical ability

Flagrant straw argument. Find text from me that says that....we'll all hold our breath.

yet you're now asking for women to be front line soldiers?

another straw argument

Therefore, based on your crazy logic women are cool to be soldiers but not cool to be construction workers? Is that what you're saying?

it is what you are saying apparently....

So, praytell Mr. Science, how does one achieve this medical miracle? Do you kill people after they reach 73? Can't you come up with something better than this one, for it is too, too absurd.

straw argument

Do you know why men don't live as long as women?
I wrote; to stop the crisis in self esteem in boys

What does this mean?

You clearly are not well read and do not stay up to date on current events. Type in American Association of University Women, and Girls shortchanged in schools and Girls-Crisis in self esteem.

When your done, you should get it.

Are you afraid of women? Do you feel threatened by them? I sure don't, nor does my son or my 6 nephews who are as old as 25 and as young as 4. Maybe it's YOU whose causing a crisis in your home, for I sure don't see it anywhere else?

Bus driver to Rosa Parks after telling her to sit in the back of the bus and she complains about the inequality: Are you afraid of whites? Do you feel threatened by them? I sure don't, nor does my son or my 6 nephews who are as old as 25 and as young as 4. Maybe it's YOU hose causing negroes to have to sit in the back of the bus with your demands. I sure don't see a a problem with coloreds sitting in the back."

 

[26 X World Champs]

Bus driver to Rosa Parks after telling her to sit in the back of the bus and she complains about the inequality: Are you afraid of whites? Do you feel threatened by them? I sure don't, nor does my son or my 6 nephews who are as old as 25 and as young as 4. Maybe it's YOU hose causing negroes to have to sit in the back of the bus with your demands. I sure don't see a a problem with coloreds sitting in the back."

It's truly amazing that you're comparing Rosa Parks to men being treated unequally to women. You, my friend, are the STRAW MAN!

 

[Libertarian]

I equate being treated as a second class citizen soley because of race and gender as equally heinous....you apprently do not. Rosa Parks fought for racial equality, I am fighting for gender equality, which threatens womens hegemonic stranglehold on power, wealth and privilege and therefore people like me must be stopped just like negro rights crusaders like martin Luther King had to be stopped.