Gynocracy vs. Guynocracy

Talk about anything under the sun or stars - but keep it civil. This is where we really get to know each other. Everyone is welcome, and invited!

In a single gender world...

All male civilization is better and I'd prefer to live there
3
21%
All male civilization is better but I'd prefer the opposite
0
No votes
All female civilization is better and I'd prefer to live there
8
57%
All female civilization is better but I'd prefer the opposite
3
21%
 
Total votes: 14

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2513
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Gynocracy vs. Guynocracy

Postby neo-dragon » Sun Aug 01, 2010 3:27 am

Consider two opposite scenarios; one in which every male human is wiped off the face of the Earth leaving only women, and the inverse where only men remain.

Which would be the better civilization for humanity? “Better” being defined however you’d like, whether it be more peaceful, happier populace, more efficiently run, all of these things and more, etc.

Also, which would be better for you personally? That is to say, which world would you rather live in assuming that you alone are special and survive either way?

Explain your choice.
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
mr_thebrain
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:22 pm
Title: The same thing we do every night...
First Joined: 0- 7-2000
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Postby mr_thebrain » Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:03 am

ok
don't get me wrong, i love women. i love women a LOT, and if it were a sexy world, i would want nothing more than to be the only male in a all woman world. or if i HAD to be a girl then a really lucky lesbian.

but

DON'T let them fool you! do not give in to their jive that a world without men would be a world without war...

a world completely consisting of women as we know them would be the craziest most catty world ever! we would be at war with every country but we wouldn't tell the other county we hated them.

no just no.

i would sleep better in a world of men. all the bad things we do are mostly due to women anyway (mostly unintentionally)

no if it were a sex world- women all the way, but if it was a world to actually live in... man. sorry.
Ubernaustrum

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Postby jotabe » Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:33 am

As intoxicated by the environmental testosterone as i find myself currently, i try to picture myself in an all male world:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9qAqwIW704
I rather not exist than go back to that.


Also, Evil is an abstract! :3
Image

User avatar
Satya
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1046
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:00 pm
Title: Pvt. Brony
First Joined: 04 Jan 2002

Postby Satya » Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:27 am

What about:

Ginocracy, a world run by drunks?

Or Goyocracy, a world run by Jews? Wait, never mind.
Discord ID: AJ#0001

User avatar
BonitoDeMadrid
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 780
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:21 am
Title: Bonzo was Framed
Location: The exact center of the earth

Postby BonitoDeMadrid » Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:11 am

Or Goyocracy, a world run by Jews? Wait, never mind.
I take offense to that! (funny name, though, except that it means exactly the opposite).

Anyway, I'd actually prefer an all-woman world (in both scenarios; the one in which I do survive, and the one in which I don't). Though women are sometimes highly illogical, they do tend to be a LOT more calm than men (normally..) and would not start as many wars.



'cause they'll be in the kitchen all day. jk
Who controls the British crown? Who keeps the metric system down?
We do! We do!
Who leaves Atlantis off the maps? Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do! We do!
Who holds back the electric car? Who makes Steve Gutenberg a star?
We do! We do!
Who robs cavefish of their sight? Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do, we do!

User avatar
Janus%TheDoorman
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 563
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 8:05 am
Title: The Original Two-Face
Location: New Jersey

Postby Janus%TheDoorman » Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:17 am

What about:

Ginocracy, a world run by drunks?

Or Goyocracy, a world run by Jews? Wait, never mind.
Image

Either way, I think the all-female civ wins out. Without women the only guys who would be motivated to do anything would be the ones you'd really rather see in a small, padded room.
"But at any rate, the point is that God is what nobody admits to being, and everybody really is."
-Alan Watts

User avatar
Graff^
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1213
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:56 pm
Title: Carrot hamburgler
Location: Salem, New York
Contact:

Postby Graff^ » Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:31 am

I chose an all female civilization would be better but I'd rather live in the opposite. I agree if it was just us males we'd still be gnawing on bones and stuff. but there were tons of male scientists who made our world today. So I'm indecisive
Where does friendship end and love begin?

User avatar
Satya
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1046
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:00 pm
Title: Pvt. Brony
First Joined: 04 Jan 2002

Postby Satya » Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:06 am

Or Goyocracy, a world run by Jews? Wait, never mind.
I take offense to that! (funny name, though, except that it means exactly the opposite).
No, it doesn't. In practice, some may use it to mean the opposite, to refer derogatively/pejoratively to Gentiles/non-Jews, but in reality it's first and original usage is to the Hebrews/Jews themselves ("a people", see terms such as goy gadol, 'a great people', the term for Abraham's descendants.) That it acquired other meanings through the ages doesn't really change that. See words like "vanity', which originally refer to something that is 'meaningless' or 'empty' but now usually (and almost exclusively) implies narcissism.
Discord ID: AJ#0001

Psudo
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 10:03 am
Contact:

Postby Psudo » Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:17 am

I can't imagine there'd be much difference between the two civilizations.

First, in either case, the survivors would be moved in great numbers to try to fill the void left by the absence of the other sex. There'd be a widespread personality shift toward what the survivors remembered as normal, so you probably wouldn't see much of that sexually-correlated personality trait dominance.

Second, everyone would be dead in a generation (unless someone quickly invented cloning, in which case virtually everyone would be dead in a generation). I have a hard time imagining one dead civilization being preferable to another.

Also, just curious, what happens to intersex individuals?

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Postby jotabe » Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:23 am

Well, a female civilization wouldn't be dead in one generation. Cloning is now possible, and with a bit of effort we could even get to the point of mating ovule with ovule. The other way around is much difficult: an all male civ would need to develop, also, artificial ovules and artificial wombs.
Image

User avatar
starlooker
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3823
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:19 pm
Title: Dr. Mom
First Joined: 28 Oct 2002
Location: Home. With cats who have names.
Contact:

Postby starlooker » Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:13 pm

*shrugs*

In my response, I'm just going to ignore the logistical problems and the whole question regarding which civilization would be better and just answer the part about which civilization would be better for me on a personal level.

Offhand I'd rather live in an all-female world. I tend to get along better, friendship-wise, with women than men. In particular, I get along really well with women who say they don't usually get along with women.

Don't get me wrong, I like men on a personal level, too, but it's pretty easy for me to befriend nearly any woman and enjoy her company. I tend to get along, friendship-wise, with a particular subset of men. Also, being the only woman in an all-male world would just be uncomfortable and awkward.

On the other hand, actually, I'd probably rather be in an all-male world because that way D and I both survive. Although -- yick. If you look at it on a personal level rather than a theoretical level it's like, "Wait. I have to choose between my mom vs. my dad's survival? My male cousins vs. my female cousins?" In which case, I have to note they are both absolutely terrible disasters and then I don't feel like playing anymore.
There's another home somewhere,
There's another glimpse of sky...
There's another way to lean
into the wind, unafraid.
There's another life out there...

~~Mary Chapin Carpenter

User avatar
locke
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 3040
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:07 pm
Contact:

Postby locke » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:09 pm

what's the worst that would happen in an all guy world? no one would do their laundry and everyone's dishes would pile up? There might be some minor squabbling, but no reason for major wars because all the women (motivation) are gone.

what's the worst that would happen in an all woman world? armageddon. Someone would get offended that someone else hadn't informed them of something minor but like totally meant that they weren't friends like they thought and eventually it escalates into women killing off all the other women, but with the caveat that the women wouldn't tell any of the women they were attacking why they were mad at the other women because the other women already knew or should know and if they didn't know that's just more of a reason to be mad at them.
So, Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

User avatar
Mich
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2937
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:58 am
Title: T.U.R.T.L.E. Power
First Joined: 02 Apr 2002
Location: Land o' Ports
Contact:

Postby Mich » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:30 pm

Seriously? No reference to Y: The Last Man yet? Then I shall make it, and it is done.

But seriously, with the "cloning of females easier" aside, I bet either would fare approximately equally. In both societies, I'm betting the male and female roles would balance out, with approximately half of the males taking on the female roles in an all-male society and the reverse in an all-female society. And I don't mean that domestically, with half of the males "going to the kitchen," I mean that in almost every way possible: being the emotional half of arguments, the nurturing half, etc.

Humans are adaptive, right? They would adapt either way to approximately have a similar civilization that we have today.

Just my "thought it over for two-minutes" opinion.
Shell the unshellable, crawl the uncrawlible.

Row--row.

User avatar
Graff^
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1213
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:56 pm
Title: Carrot hamburgler
Location: Salem, New York
Contact:

Postby Graff^ » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:39 pm

Well to seriously consider this to completely evolve into an all one gender home we need more time without the other gender. So the other gender must be reduced to basically breeding units. With no more respect given than a hamburger or a nickel.
Where does friendship end and love begin?

User avatar
starlooker
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3823
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:19 pm
Title: Dr. Mom
First Joined: 28 Oct 2002
Location: Home. With cats who have names.
Contact:

Postby starlooker » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:40 pm

what's the worst that would happen in an all guy world? no one would do their laundry and everyone's dishes would pile up? There might be some minor squabbling, but no reason for major wars because all the women (motivation) are gone.
:roll:

Only if all the testosterone disappeared with the women.
what's the worst that would happen in an all woman world? armageddon. Someone would get offended that someone else hadn't informed them of something minor but like totally meant that they weren't friends like they thought and eventually it escalates into women killing off all the other women, but with the caveat that the women wouldn't tell any of the women they were attacking why they were mad at the other women because the other women already knew or should know and if they didn't know that's just more of a reason to be mad at them
The women with that mentality are likely going to A) be in seventh-eighth grade or B) be held in institutions while the rest of us move forward with the business of civilization. Anyhow, the whole point of cattiness is that it doesn't escalate into something authorities have any jurisdiction to step in on, be they teachers in the schoolyard or the HR managers or law enforcement. If it escalates that far, you're doing it wrong. Someone who is good at being catty can always claim total innocence and not understand why you're offended, it's not like she said you were fat or anything. It was a compliment, for heaven's sake! All she said was that those new clothes suit your natural apple body shape and it's nice that designers are taking plus size women more into account these days. God, don't be so touchy.
There's another home somewhere,
There's another glimpse of sky...
There's another way to lean
into the wind, unafraid.
There's another life out there...

~~Mary Chapin Carpenter

Psudo
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 10:03 am
Contact:

Postby Psudo » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:50 pm

The demagoguery spewing from Locke is enough to make his name ironic.
Well, a female civilization wouldn't be dead in one generation. Cloning is now possible, and with a bit of effort we could even get to the point of mating ovule with ovule.
Even that wouldn't be necessary if, say, 0.1% of men survived, though it might be pursued anyway. Still, it adds a measure of effort to the reproductive process that would probably lead to a very large scale reduction in population that first generation.

I think the radical population decrease would be the defining social alteration, no the new unisex population.

Actually... wasn't there an Anime about a female-only universe where a woman unexpectedly had a son and named him Adam?

User avatar
neo-dragon
Commander
Commander
Posts: 2513
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:26 pm
Title: Huey Revolutionary
Location: Canada

Postby neo-dragon » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:56 pm

Seriously? No reference to Y: The Last Man yet?
That's actually what got me thinking about this. I haven't read it, but I hear good things.

I voted that an all female society would be better, and I would rather live there.

I know, I'm a traitor to my own kind. Seriously though, I think that when you get right down to it males are more violent and destructive than females. In fact, I believe that women have a stabilizing effect on men. It may be due to evolution, psychology, social pressure, or some combination of the above but men seem to be conditioned to be caring and protective towards women. Whether it be our mothers, sisters, daughters, or wives it doesn't really matter. Not to mention the pent up sexual frustration that would result from the absence of females. Yeah, I know the ladies would have to deal with that too, but I suspect that men would deal with it in less healthy and ultimately destructive ways.

I realize this is all based on my own opinions and I can't back it up with any evidence, but I have a strong feeling that a male civilization would tear itself apart whereas women would learn to cope.

As for the potential survival of the species, it should be obvious that women have a better chance of finding some way to reproduce on their own. They would just need a way to clone sperm cells or even modify eggs to perform a similar function. Men would not only have to find a way to reproduce ova, we'd also have to find wombs. We'd probably have to try to engineer animals that would accept human embryos and allow them to develop to term. I doubt we'd pull that off in the one generation that we'd have left.

For all of these reasons I'd also rather live in an all female society. Plus, well, being the last man on Earth would have some benefits. 8) :D
"Deep in the human unconscious is a pervasive need for a logical universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step beyond logic."
- Frank Herbert's 'Dune'

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Postby jotabe » Sun Aug 01, 2010 2:03 pm

For all of these reasons I'd also rather live in an all female society. Plus, well, being the last man on Earth would have some benefits. 8) :D
Well, for the purpouses of this exercise, i was assuming i wouldn't exist either, in a female society XD And really, a world without women... is that even worth living? >.> lol
Image

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Postby Rei » Mon Aug 02, 2010 12:53 am

I'm... really not sure.

I mean, I get along with women much better, generally. But the world would be entirely imbalanced and that would be bad! But if things wouldn't end in complete disaster either way, then going with completely personal selfishness of my own comfort, I would prefer all women and find it better.

Also, a while ago I read the first volume of Y: THE LAST MAN and it was quite good. I need to read the rest of it yet, though.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

User avatar
Wil
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1369
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:07 pm
Title: Not the mama!
Location: 36° 11' 39" N, 115° 13' 19" W
Contact:

Postby Wil » Mon Aug 02, 2010 1:00 am

Men are better at warring, women are better at making decisions. Or so I believe. So did Native Americans, as for the most part the women of the tribe made the important decisions and they let the men carry out any decisions the women made.

In any case, our society would look entirely different had it been formed by only men or only women. I can't say what would be better. I enjoy the company of, enjoy talking and opening up to, and get along better with women more, but I'm not sure if that's because I'm attracted to women or because I find them to be generally less prone to acting stupid. Probably both.

Psudo
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 10:03 am
Contact:

Postby Psudo » Mon Aug 02, 2010 12:04 pm

I propose a reality show experiment. Fill two isolated islands with enough people, segregated by gender, to allow some personal anonymity, some cultural diversity and conflict, and require government. Then don't provide the government and see who handles themselves better for a couple years.

Of course, you couldn't actually do any of that for legal liability reasons, but it would settle the question nicely.

User avatar
Dr. Mobius
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 2517
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 12:11 pm
Title: Stayin' Alive
First Joined: 17 Aug 2002
Location: Evansville, IN
Contact:

Postby Dr. Mobius » Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:28 pm

I choose neither. Regardless of which half of the species you exterminate, your little experiment is going to fail in about 80-100 years due to a lack of new test subjects. Although if I had to choose, I'd go with an all-male world simply because I wouldn't be here for the other one.

Unless of course you devise a way for humans to reproduce asexually, in which case you'd probably equip this new super-human race with the best attributes of both genders, rendering the battle of the sexes null and void.
The enemy's fly is down.
Image

User avatar
Janus%TheDoorman
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 563
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 8:05 am
Title: The Original Two-Face
Location: New Jersey

Postby Janus%TheDoorman » Mon Aug 02, 2010 2:49 pm

I don't think it would take a couple years. Take 20 people of each gender, and let them live their lives as normal over a four week period. Before the game begins, have each group draft a constitution with whatever laws they choose, and penalties for breaking those laws, methods of enforcement, etc.

Then, and only then, after the constitution has been ratified, disburse among each group 5 red tokens, 7 yellow tokens, 8 blue tokens, one colored token to each participant, and a randomly distributed allotment of 100 white tokens. Each person must, at the end of each day, return their tokens to a safekeeping spot. A person must return a full set of three colored tokens to their spot at least seven times. If they fail to do so, they are considered dead at the end of the four weeks.

At the end, the group with more survivors wins, and each survivor is given $20K US, and the group is collectively given $1M US, and each white token in their possession at that time is worth $1K US.

Obviously at the beginning they could arrange a socialist constitution where maximum efficient use of the tokens ensures victory theoretically, and spreads out the white tokens to $5K for each participant, but their no guarantee that say, the people at the end of the list won't steal and whatnot to ensure their survival, and then the people who feel they'd be able to out negotiate and out compete in a free market might object to essentially ensuring their payout is as low as possible

Hell, scale down the dollar amounts and you could just as easily do this in a civics class between any two groups.
"But at any rate, the point is that God is what nobody admits to being, and everybody really is."
-Alan Watts

User avatar
mr_thebrain
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:22 pm
Title: The same thing we do every night...
First Joined: 0- 7-2000
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Postby mr_thebrain » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:25 pm

women are better at making decisions.
have you ever met a woman?
Ubernaustrum

User avatar
Satya
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1046
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:00 pm
Title: Pvt. Brony
First Joined: 04 Jan 2002

Postby Satya » Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:05 pm

women are better at making decisions.
have you ever met a woman?
Remember who you're asking.
Discord ID: AJ#0001

Psudo
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 10:03 am
Contact:

Postby Psudo » Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:07 am

I don't think it would take a couple years. Take 20 people of each gender, and let them live their lives as normal over a four week period.
The first couple weeks would be pure culture shock. Useful for reality show ratings, not so useful for determining long-term livability.

I suppose it does show whether one side or other is prone to quick self-destruction, which would be useful information. But it's not the whole answer.
women are better at making decisions.
have you ever met a woman?
Trying to generalize about women world-wide based on the couple thousand women you actually know on some level is quite likely to give you a false reading, especially since most of them are going to be culturally biased toward whatever culture you're from. If you're going to generalize in that manner, you should at least try to generalize about women from very populous cultures; Chinese, Muslim, Indian. What would these women do without their male counterparts?

Personally, I think they'd remain largely docile and obedient as their habits (and burqas) bid them. The social pressure demanding it would be gone, but so would those against whom they could direct rebellion. The exceptionally aggressive women would rule (which probably means the west would be entrenched as the global center of power), and the rest would largely be content to be ruled. They would more easily operate an orderly society than a global population of lonely men fanatically blaming each other; I know I get cranky when my lovely wife is away, and I expect that's a fairly universal reaction.

User avatar
Syphon the Sun
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2215
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 8:59 pm
Title: Ozymandias

Postby Syphon the Sun » Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:26 pm

For all of these reasons I'd also rather live in an all female society. Plus, well, being the last man on Earth would have some benefits.
Good luck fighting off the bears.
Step softly; a dream lies buried here.

User avatar
Eaquae Legit
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 5185
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:30 pm
Title: Age quod agis
First Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Location: ^ Geez, read the sign.
Contact:

Postby Eaquae Legit » Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:44 pm

Personally, I think they'd remain largely docile and obedient as their habits (and burqas) bid them. The social pressure demanding it would be gone, but so would those against whom they could direct rebellion. The exceptionally aggressive women would rule (which probably means the west would be entrenched as the global center of power), and the rest would largely be content to be ruled. They would more easily operate an orderly society than a global population of lonely men fanatically blaming each other; I know I get cranky when my lovely wife is away, and I expect that's a fairly universal reaction.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Just how many Indian women do you know?
"Only for today, I will devote 10 minutes of my time to some good reading, remembering that just as food is necessary to the life of the body, so good reading is necessary to the life of the soul." -- Pope John XXIII

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Postby Rei » Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:19 pm

^ I'm with that. You really, really cannot make sweeping generalisations about what men or women are like without being wildly wrong. Sometimes more wildly than others.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

Psudo
Soldier
Soldier
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 10:03 am
Contact:

Postby Psudo » Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:56 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol: Just how many Indian women do you know?
That was my original point; universal generalizations don't fit.

I listed Indian women as a populous subgroup, but my generalization is more about Chinese and Muslim women, especially in more backwards and rural areas. I've seen enough about Bollywood to expect Indian women to be more like western women, but I didn't make that clear.

But it doesn't matter; any generalization of that kind is going to be wrong for at least a few million people. There's probably a Muslim woman somewhere that could be the next Margret Thatcher if the opportunity came along, invalidating the stereotype of the burqa-clad repressive. Our generalizations are restricted by the trivial amount of experience one lifetime can contain.

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Postby Rei » Wed Aug 04, 2010 3:33 am

You DO realise that most Muslim women don't wear the burqa, yes? And that those who do are not all wearing it because they're being forced to?

While I've not seen the burqa in Canada, I have seen women wearing the niqab when I was at university, as well as the hijab and other variants. And I am quite sure that especially in a North American university at least a few of them, and probably most of them, were not wearing it due to being oppressed.

(You've touched on a pet peeve of mine: making--arguably popular--assumptions about why someone may do something that does not immediately make sense to another person.)
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

User avatar
Eaquae Legit
Speaker for the Dead
Speaker for the Dead
Posts: 5185
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:30 pm
Title: Age quod agis
First Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Location: ^ Geez, read the sign.
Contact:

Postby Eaquae Legit » Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:32 am

Where as I was simply stating that women from the east can be just as pushy and loudmouthed as any westerner, or possibly worse. Forget Bollywood models, keep your eye on the Aunties!
"Only for today, I will devote 10 minutes of my time to some good reading, remembering that just as food is necessary to the life of the body, so good reading is necessary to the life of the soul." -- Pope John XXIII

User avatar
jotabe
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 2105
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59 am
Title: Leekmaster Kirbyfu

Postby jotabe » Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:03 am

You DO realise that most Muslim women don't wear the burqa, yes? And that those who do are not all wearing it because they're being forced to?
That's like saying that in the past, most women weren't forced to forfeit their education and adopt "female" jobs like housewife.
It still doesn't mean it wasn't a form of oppresion.
Image

User avatar
Rei
Commander
Commander
Posts: 3068
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:31 pm
Title: Fides quaerens intellectum
First Joined: 24 Nov 2003
Location: Between the lines

Postby Rei » Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:23 pm

Oh I agree that it has been and is currently used to oppress. But just because a thing may be and is used to oppress does not mean that it is by nature oppressive and that in all situations it is being used to that end.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait point.
~Blaise Pascal


私は。。。誰?

Dernhelm

User avatar
mr_thebrain
Toon Leader
Toon Leader
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:22 pm
Title: The same thing we do every night...
First Joined: 0- 7-2000
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Postby mr_thebrain » Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:14 pm

i cant tell if psudo is being deadpan* or seriously has no sense of humor....


*deadpan does not work well with text.
Ubernaustrum


Return to “Milagre Town Square”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests