Women make less because men work longer hours, duhhh...

[Montegriffo]

If you say so...

[clubgop]

If you say so...

In other words:

[DrYouth]

I think women like Milspecs really need to stop this bullshit gamesmanship, just stop in their tracks for once in their lives and seriously consider a simple question: regardless of what you think about the legitimacy of feminism, what exactly are we supposed to do as a society if the majority of women would not only be happier living traditional roles as mothers in the home, but are absolutely miserable with the lives feminism has foisted upon them?

You do not begin to be the person who could answer what makes women happy. You can’t even accept when women clearly tell you what makes them happy. You are behaving like a person who insists that someone else likes chocolate when she is telling you that she doesn’t.

Because you want someone to give up her life to make you happy doesn’t mean she is obligated to do so. The person who does that is usually called Mommy, and grown men don’t want to be married to their mommies.

Milspecs quoted your words when you say that the majority of women would be happier living traditional roles as women.
Apparently you are making a reference to article that you linked to? Is that what you are on about?
But you don't specify that in your words in this post.

If in fact that is the case.... it is on you to refer to the section in the link that confirms this...
I haven't read the article... and I don't have time to...
If you want to make an appeal to the arguments in the article it is ON YOU to parse that link for the bits that confirm your statement.
That is honest debate.
Linking to an article doesn't do your work for you.

Calling Milspecs a liar here is both lazy and childish.
You can do a lot better and your argument in this post is better than the follow up you have delivered on it.
Do some work. You're not winning this debate but not because you don't have some reasonably good ground to stand on.

[Speaker to Animals]

Fuck you.

She deleted the reference to an essay written by a woman, quoted my commentary on the woman's essay as if I had written the essay (lies), and then declared a man cannot possibly opine on what makes women happy (sexist and obviously false).

Nobody who wants to debate honestly is going to see this dishonest behavior, and people like you gas lighting everybody about it, and choose to participate.

This is a major problem with this forum. None of you actually read or engaged with the argument, choosing instead to lie (milspecs) and personally attack the person making it (you).

[DrYouth]

I think women like Milspecs really need to stop this bullshit gamesmanship, just stop in their tracks for once in their lives and seriously consider a simple question: regardless of what you think about the legitimacy of feminism, what exactly are we supposed to do as a society if the majority of women would not only be happier living traditional roles as mothers in the home, but are absolutely miserable with the lives feminism has foisted upon them?

Why not engage with the argument?
It's actually an interesting argument.

What if women are actually miserable with the lives that feminism has laid out for them?
What if the workaday world is actually not as romantic as the feminists suggested it would be?

What if many women would be happier choosing traditional roles as mothers... what if that is now actually a difficult choice to make?

I guess it's a matter of understanding the implications of having the freedom to make choices.

The fight was to give women a choice rather than to have them submit to their roles.

We have a tendency to think that more choices make people happier... but choices are stressful... and yet which one of us would want to have less freedom to have choices?
I don't think many women would want to roll back to the time when they had less choices...
but still it might have been simpler and easier in some ways.... not necessarily better.
Some of us were happier as children... with less choices... but then we grew up and sometimes yearn for that time when choices were made for us.

[DBTrek]

I’m not sure why Dr. Y is impressed with this adolescent version of “argument” whereby people cite hole-in-the-wall sources that agree with their confirmation bias and then call everyone else “liars”. It’s pretty sophomoric. Especially when interlaced with random outbursts of “fuck you” and “you gonna be sorry now, I’ll never defend you again!”

Some serious Jr. High shit going on in here. But it reinforces my point a thousand times over - there is no payoff to engaging traumatized people with rational argument. All you get in return is pages of the hyper-emotional bullshit we’ve all witnessed here.

/shrug

[MilSpecs]

All spot on, Doc, and much more interesting than STA’s rage. (I obviously edited for brevity and addressed his comments and beliefs, not the woman who wrote the editorial - which I read in its entirety.)

[Speaker to Animals]

There was nothing adolescent about my argument. None of you chose to engage with it because you have nothing yourselves. It's literally just a few people lying and gas lighting the forum like this. If my argument was "adolescent", then you'd be able to just refute it directly without engaging in lies and ad hominem. But you don't do that. Because you can't do that. Because you have no ability to contradict the basic facts I listed. So instead we get MHF liberals and DB (whatever they fuck he has become) insulting me and trying desperately to bury an argument they cannot refute.

It's really sad. This is why lurkers don't contribute. Who the hell wants to take the time to write out an an argument in good faith only for people to laughingly proclaim they never bothered to read the linked article while deliberately distorting the article (they later admitted they never read), lying about what you wrote, and then gas lighting you for three pages about what they are doing?

Pretty much nobody. Which is why lurkers come along and yet we get no new posters.


Why not actually refute the argument if you think it so adolescent (another fallacy is to just dismiss an argument as "unworthy" of being refuted so you don't, probably because you can't).

The only thing you people actually can do is insult others who have arguments and shut down actual discussion. That's all you did here. None of you read the article, or really even what I posted, and yet you have all these opinions about how it's all "adolescent". Maybe check the mirror some time.. just saying.

[DrYouth]

So what is your response to my above post.

Did I address the question adequately?

I'm curious about your response.

[Speaker to Animals]

Here are some simple facts.

(1) The wage gap is a myth.

Using the statistic that women make 78 cents on the dollar as evidence of rampant discrimination has been debunked over and over again. That statistic doesn’t take into account a lot of choices that women and men make—education, years of experience and hours worked—that influence earnings. If we want to have a fruitful discussion about a gender wage gap, we should have it after the comparison is adjusted for those factors. In a 2013 Slate article, Hanna Rosin, author of The End of Men, for example, wrote:

The official Bureau of Labor Department statistics show that the median earnings of full-time female workers is 77 percent of the median earnings of full-time male workers. But that is very different than “77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men.” The latter gives the impression that a man and a woman standing next to each other doing the same job for the same number of hours get paid different salaries. That’s not at all the case. “Full time” officially means 35 hours, but men work more hours than women. That’s the first problem: We could be comparing men working 40 hours to women working 35.

Women’s groups and politicians, including Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, continue to tell women they are making almost a quarter less than men and use this statistic to call for legislation enacting further government intervention in employer and employee relationships, such as the Paycheck Fairness Act.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karinagnes ... 39cd512596

(2) Since the adoption of feminism as the ruling ideology of this country in the 1970s, women's happiness has been on a steady decline. Every year. Without pause.

In light of International Women’s Day, I wanted to re-visit these findings and check in with all of you about women, happiness, and all that has been achieved since 1972, the first year the United States General Social Survey (GSS) began asking men and women, “How happy are you?”

The study reported several findings:

1. Women in the United States have become less happy, both absolutely and relative to men;

2. The decline in women’s happiness is a trend seen across groups – both working and stay-at-home moms, for those married and divorced, the young and old, and across the education spectrum; and

3. These same trends appeared across industrialized countries for which there are sufficient happiness data.

What’s driving these results? The study poses several questions. Do women now feel more comfortable being honest about their real happiness levels? Has an increase in opportunity created a commensurate increase in what is required for women to declare, “I’m happy?” Have the changes created as a result of the women’s movement actually decreased women’s happiness?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... -declining

She writes lots of questions there with obvious answers. A fundamental premise of feminism, I am told, is that women should be happier if we adopt these policies. Yet, regardless of causality for women's declining happiness (though we all know it is because of feminism, but whatever), feminism has at least not improved women's happiness one bit. In fact, women were much happier before feminism convinced them they needed to be just like men in order to be happy and women pursued those goals.



My question remains: what exactly are we supposed to do as a society if the goals of the ruling ideology we adopted result in women becoming increasingly miserable? If feminism is making women less happy, then should we not consider the possibility that the assumptions (at the very least) of this ideology are totally wrong??

So what is your response to my above post.

Did I address the question adequately?

I'm curious about your response.

I am completely uninterested in engaging with you until you start being honest for a change. You are still sitting here defending milspecs when she obviously lied and behave dishonestly. That makes you dishonest and you obviously have no intention of discussing anything openly and charitably.