• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

An example of Feminazi in action

MaggieD said:
If men only realized how their lives changed for the worse when women decided to get careers and our economy obliged by making it pretty much necessary for two-worker families.

Young men will never "get it" -- they don't know any different. They just assume they'll have someone working to help increase their standard of living, and they're glad for it.

Some day, the circle will reverse.
Click to expand...
We'll go back to paying the boys a living wage for a family of four while most of the girls work just long enough, for mush less money, to find a husband if they didn't in college or weren't married fresh out of high school? Not a chance. Staying at home barefoot and pregnant made some women happy, and most others a little nuts. You're dreaming of a Leave it to Beaver America that had only a short run and wasn't that great for millions of both men and women. Don't dream of those 'happy days", that's all it was, a dream.
 
GottaGo said:
That, and those who just must use the latest and greatest buzz words when speaking or writing.....

Classic American English has been around for a bit... use it!
Click to expand...

"With that being said..."

"At the end of the day..."
 
TiredOfLife said:
The "standards" were written for men. You don't have to be a power-lifter to put out fires and save lives now do you?
Click to expand...

You do have to have set amount of strength to put out fires yes. Gear is +60lbs. Carrying unconsious people, holding back high pressure hose, etc. It's alot of work.
You don't have to be a powerlifter but most men can't do that job (I couldn't) Why should min the requirement change for gender? They both do the same job.
 
Josie said:
I think of the word "feminazi" when a man holds open a door for her and she refuses to go in saying "I can open my own door, you know!" Oy.
Click to expand...

And how many times has that happened? I open doors all the time, for both sexes, and never heard it once.
 
TiredOfLife said:
And how many times has that happened? I open doors all the time, for both sexes, and never heard it once.
Click to expand...

Its never happened to me since I'm not a man. I've heard several men tell that same story.
 
Torrent said:
You do have to have set amount of strength to put out fires yes. Gear is +60lbs. Carrying unconsious people, holding back high pressure hose, etc. It's alot of work.
You don't have to be a powerlifter but most men can't do that job (I couldn't) Why should min the requirement change for gender? They both do the same job.
Click to expand...
Because there is no such thing as a job "only" a man can do. We are humans, we invent tools and other methods to accomplish our goals. If the guy inside the burning building weighs 300 pounds neither sex is going to get the fatboy out alone. If you need to make a lift fast and it has to be human, you keep the crews mixed sexes, which is a good idea anyway because women are less likely to do something truly stupid trying to be a hero. They can both rescue children from burning buildings and honestly, that's the only reason you should run into one.
 
Josie said:
Its never happened to me since I'm not a man. I've heard several men tell that same story.
Click to expand...

I think the several men are Rush Limbaugh fans, and lying.
 
TiredOfLife said:
We'll go back to paying the boys a living wage for a family of four while most of the girls work just long enough, for mush less money, to find a husband if they didn't in college or weren't married fresh out of high school? Not a chance. Staying at home barefoot and pregnant made some women happy, and most others a little nuts. You're dreaming of a Leave it to Beaver America that had only a short run and wasn't that great for millions of both men and women. Don't dream of those 'happy days", that's all it was, a dream.
Click to expand...

The "barefoot and pregnant" part of your post tells me you don't get it.

Men and women have lost more than's been gained by two-income families being the norm.

There are real joys for moms and stay-at-home motherhood. Real benefits to husbands. And real benefits to children.

As a Realtor, I've seen more broken-hearted/broken-spirited moms working their asses off and out of the home ten hours a day than I'd care to count. They come home from work exhausted to their two little rug-rats ready to suck the virtual life right out of them for the rest of the evening. They pick up the kids at daycare by 6 PM, stop at the grocery store, come home and start dinner, do dishes, bath the kids, maybe read them a story, go to bed exhausted, and get up in the morning to start the whole thing all over again. It's sad to watch.
 
GottaGo said:
That, and those who just must use the latest and greatest buzz words when speaking or writing.....

Classic American English has been around for a bit... use it!
Click to expand...

Oh man I hate buzz words and phrases.

"That color just pops!"

"You're gonna rock it!"

"I gotta bring my A game!"

etc, etc, etc.
 
GottaGo said:
That, and those who just must use the latest and greatest buzz words when speaking or writing.....

Classic American English has been around for a bit... use it!
Click to expand...

:shock:.....
yo2.gif
.....



but.gif


 
TiredOfLife said:
Because there is no such thing as a job "only" a man can do. We are humans, we invent tools and other methods to accomplish our goals. If the guy inside the burning building weighs 300 pounds neither sex is going to get the fatboy out alone. If you need to make a lift fast and it has to be human, you keep the crews mixed sexes, which is a good idea anyway because women are less likely to do something truly stupid trying to be a hero. They can both rescue children from burning buildings and honestly, that's the only reason you should run into one.
Click to expand...

Did not say only the male gender could do the job. Just that the physical requirement are the same for anyone reguardless of gender. Same reason you don't have blind Air Traffic Control. There are jobs that require a min amount of strength. Just as there are jobs that require min amount of knowlage. Anyone can do it but they need to be able to meet them. I think that changeing the requirement for one group just so you can be 'fair' is one of the Femnazi things that tick me off.
 
MMC said:
:shock:.....
yo2.gif
.....



but.gif


Click to expand...


Case in point.

Speaking a regional dialect of a language is different than rearranging the existing language to make one's self seem 'special'.

I did laugh at the 'jive' video, however..... :mrgreen:
 
Torrent said:
Did not say only the male gender could do the job. Just that the physical requirement are the same for anyone reguardless of gender. Same reason you don't have blind Air Traffic Control. There are jobs that require a min amount of strength. Just as there are jobs that require min amount of knowlage. Anyone can do it but they need to be able to meet them. I think that changeing the requirement for one group just so you can be 'fair' is one of the Femnazi things that tick me off.
Click to expand...
The standards were written for men. They didn't even think about women at the time, and women aren't men now are they? You don't have to meet the same standards when the standards were written to exclude people in the first place. It's the hero fireman nonsense that is the problem, not the standards. No one should expect a stranger to risk their life by rushing into a burning building to try and save you, and the standards have to adjust for the tradeoffs of the sexes working together, He lifts more, she lifts for longer. He's faster on the run, she's able to keep track of more things at once. He's taller and might get stuck while she's smaller and can tunnel through. Just because we set the standard doesn't mean we set it correctly, especially when it was for men and there were no women to account for. Changing that is appropriate, not unfair. It's unfair, and stupid, not to.

If I had to fight a war with only women I could, I just wouldn't design weapons that you needed GI Joe on steroids to carry into battle.
 
Torrent said:
I like Glenn Beck alot more then Rush.

And have had been told not do what used to be considered polite. (Holding Doors for people, asking if some needs a hand, etc)
Click to expand...
Told by whom? I would strongly suggest that you not listen to them, or Beck either. That is one paranoid cultist. That's not a good thing at all. Considering the total nonsense he calls a "religion", you should try reading a book instead.
 
GottaGo said:
Case in point.

Speaking a regional dialect of a language is different than rearranging the existing language to make one's self seem 'special'.

I did laugh at the 'jive' video, however..... :mrgreen:
Click to expand...



tongue20.gif
.....
includeme.gif





giggling.gif
 
TiredOfLife said:
The standards were written for men. They didn't even think about women at the time, and women aren't men now are they? You don't have to meet the same standards when the standards were written to exclude people in the first place. It's the hero fireman nonsense that is the problem, not the standards. No one should expect a stranger to risk their life by rushing into a burning building to try and save you, and the standards have to adjust for the tradeoffs of the sexes working together, He lifts more, she lifts for longer. He's faster on the run, she's able to keep track of more things at once. He's taller and might get stuck while she's smaller and can tunnel through. Just because we set the standard doesn't mean we set it correctly, especially when it was for men and there were no women to account for. Changing that is appropriate, not unfair. It's unfair, and stupid, not to.

If I had to fight a war with only women I could, I just wouldn't design weapons that you needed GI Joe on steroids to carry into battle.
Click to expand...

Again you keep changing the point to "The standards are sexest becuse the job used to be Male Only". But that's a load of fluff. the standards excludes anyone that can't Do the Job includeing weaker Males. Yes people with different abilities could do a job differently but that not always the case.
And if the requirements are for good enough to let one group in shouldn't a weaker male that makes the standards of a female but fails the male standards get a shot at the job also? He could do the job as well as she could. If you think the standard unnessarly unfair change the standard. Not one standard for some then another for others.
 
TiredOfLife said:
Told by whom? I would strongly suggest that you not listen to them, or Beck either. That is one paranoid cultist. That's not a good thing at all. Considering the total nonsense he calls a "religion", you should try reading a book instead.
Click to expand...

I was told by coworker that If i held the door for her she would hit me.

GB is just a political commentator if you don't like him that fine, don't listen to him, but you don't need to demonize him.
I don't like our President but I don't think hes Evil he's just on the otherside of the argument from me.
I also read alot.
 
TiredOfLife said:
I think the several men are Rush Limbaugh fans, and lying.
Click to expand...

Or there actually are women in this world who hate it when men do anything nice to them because they feel like it makes them inferior. :shrug:
 
Torrent said:
Again you keep changing the point to "The standards are sexest becuse the job used to be Male Only". But that's a load of fluff. the standards excludes anyone that can't Do the Job includeing weaker Males. Yes people with different abilities could do a job differently but that not always the case.
And if the requirements are for good enough to let one group in shouldn't a weaker male that makes the standards of a female but fails the male standards get a shot at the job also? He could do the job as well as she could. If you think the standard unnessarly unfair change the standard. Not one standard for some then another for others.
Click to expand...
You need to get to reality. We don't have just One Standard for all people. Not in sports, not in the military, not in the real world where men and women are actually known to be "different". It's why we have Mens golf, Womens gymnastics, Mixed tennis. You can't be male and do the uneven parallel bars, you'd break a hip. No women will beat a top male tennis player, they have 20% more upper body strength and they run faster. You are failing to acknowledge reality because you somehow think the panties are being given a break? They aren't, their sex is simply being fairly accounted for.

One standard says we all pee standing up but that's not true now is it? On the other hand, sitting down does have equality when another function is necessary. Two standards because reality requires them. Get with the program my man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom