Women & Respect

[MilSpecs]

Inside the heart of a marriage, all kinds of non-testosterone-based control is going on: every marriage is different. The OP argument is that the workplace is dominated by male status hierarchy, and women pushing into the front of the line using State violence causes resentment & chaos.

Agreed that control is done differently in marriage, although frankly we fit into a traditional paradigm. We are all a product of our cultures and times, at least to some extent. That said, why do you put forward as the only solution that male status hierarchy should rule in the workplace? There are multiple ways to overcome that. The workplace used to be dominated by white people and that's not true anymore, so change can happen. It has to happen - there is no rule by birthright anymore, and even the biggest guys in 7th grade gym have learned to play well with others.

[Martin Hash]

It's much subtler than that. Dominance is not through physical strength, it is a result of competence mixed with ambition & agression. Men of all races participate, and occasionally people with 2 x-chromosomes.

Here's a scenario: a low-status male who is very competent is often temporarily elevated to an ally position by a high-status male but their status doesn't change.

[Speaker to Animals]

Inside the heart of a marriage, all kinds of non-testosterone-based control is going on: every marriage is different. The OP argument is that the workplace is dominated by male status hierarchy, and women pushing into the front of the line using State violence causes resentment & chaos.

Agreed that control is done differently in marriage, although frankly we fit into a traditional paradigm. We are all a product of our cultures and times, at least to some extent. That said, why do you put forward as the only solution that male status hierarchy should rule in the workplace? There are multiple ways to overcome that. The workplace used to be dominated by white people and that's not true anymore, so change can happen. It has to happen - there is no rule by birthright anymore, and even the biggest guys in 7th grade gym have learned to play well with others.

You missed the point. His point was that such positions should NOT be birthrights, and yet some women think they should be entitled to those positions simply because they are women (see recent election for glaring example).

[Okeefenokee]

Speaking of which. I think they're to kill her,

The ‘Hillary for mayor’ story proves that we learn nothing

The bigger problem is that the return of Clinton fan fiction, so soon, seems impossibly cruel. I'd bet that no one has been told as many times that she should be president, and has not become president, as Hillary Clinton. Few, if any, have tried for the job and learned, in the media, that they never should have tried, because — oops — they were terrible at running for it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... ca5a7b14c6

[MilSpecs]

It's much subtler than that. Dominance is not through physical strength, it is a result of competence mixed with ambition & agression. Men of all races participate, and occasionally people with 2 x-chromosomes.

We're coming at it from two different angles: you're explaining what dominance is in men and I'm saying that type of dominance is no longer the societal default. One way of being is not superior to another - in reality, different ways of being are complementary. Further, most people can deal with different types of people. It's necessary in order for success in all spheres of life. We don't live in the times where physical aggression was the most important trait, nor fecundity, nor many other things that have become anachronistic, including the paramount importance of gender. It's just not as important as it used to be. We're developing into something else, something that you and I will not live to see, and even if we did we wouldn't fit into it.

[MilSpecs]

Inside the heart of a marriage, all kinds of non-testosterone-based control is going on: every marriage is different. The OP argument is that the workplace is dominated by male status hierarchy, and women pushing into the front of the line using State violence causes resentment & chaos.

Agreed that control is done differently in marriage, although frankly we fit into a traditional paradigm. We are all a product of our cultures and times, at least to some extent. That said, why do you put forward as the only solution that male status hierarchy should rule in the workplace? There are multiple ways to overcome that. The workplace used to be dominated by white people and that's not true anymore, so change can happen. It has to happen - there is no rule by birthright anymore, and even the biggest guys in 7th grade gym have learned to play well with others.

You missed the point. His point was that such positions should NOT be birthrights, and yet some women think they should be entitled to those positions simply because they are women (see recent election for glaring example).

Huh? People rise through the ranks in their workplaces for a variety of reasons. Women get positions for the same reasons men do: they're good at what they do, or they have good connections, or they're just in the right place at the right time. You just have to compete against more people now. That is the reality that everyone has to deal with.

[Speaker to Animals]

Don't pretend to be naive.

[MilSpecs]

Don't pretend to be naive.

Don't pretend to be ignorant of history.

[Speaker to Animals]

Don't pretend to be naive.

Don't pretend to be ignorant of history.

So men should face systemic injustices, and women should just be given positions of authority on account of vagina, because history?? That's the attitude that was called out in the OP. That's a huge problem.

The men having their children stolen from them, and being enslaved to ex-wives, didn't have anything to do with history.

[MilSpecs]

So men should face systemic injustices, and women should just be given positions of authority on account of vagina, because history?? That's the attitude that was called out in the OP. That's a huge problem.

The men having their children stolen from them, and being enslaved to ex-wives, didn't have anything to do with history.

Clinton ran for president and she was clearly a credible candidate regardless of whether she was a good candidate.

No one is being handed anything, not anymore than some people have always been handed things.

Your child was stolen from you and you don't have a lot of money because you have to pay what you believe is an unfair amount of child support. I understand and empathize with the unfairness of your situation. Yet you are unable to understand and empathize with the women - your mother's cohort - who not only suffered themselves, just as you do, but also had to watch their children suffer. What do you think things used to be like? I ask that as a serious question: what do you think marriage and divorce was like before your generation went through it?