Working Women Equal Pay CNN Debate Question

[feministsAreCorrupt]

If women are paid less for the same work, why hire men? I don't know of any Fortune500 companies with a majority of women. Are all of their Boards and CEOs brain-dead because they don't see the competitive opportunity in hiring a workforce that is exclusively women?

[dopebozoish]

HEEEYYY, lazy bitches! what ur gonna be 1/2 hour late? what u have drama and cant come to work? How about you get off ur ass, quit taking 2 hour lunches and do some fucking work! and get ur ass to work on time, and facebook is not work!!!!- Get off the fucking internet!

[cupcake749]

@dopebozoish shut up

[skilletfreako]

@dopebozoish says that lazy asshole who sits on the internet commenting on videos. GET A FREAKIN LIFE>

[JDubs878]

When women start working the same dangerous jobs as men do, then comeback and talk to me about eqaul wages.

[Hzqi]

@JDubs878

There's more to it than that, but you know how many times I've explained this little detail? You know I've actually discussed it at times, until they were stumped with no reply. They might have been doing some actual thinking, but I wouldn't presume.

Isn't it funny how prejudiced presumption is. On their high-horses about "EQUAL WORK". Yeah? Says who that it is? Did they ever pause to wonder WHY? Why that is, there ARE so many single mothers? Strike one OUCH for logic.

[salim4403]

in some of the underdeveloped countries women still live with te old ideas inspired to them by their grand mothers. they do not believe in birth controle they believe just in sex and children.the standard of living for them is not important.educationd for them is just a period in school. they stop learning and reading as soon as they get married. there is a cycling of he same mentality. there is a development of the underdevelopment.

[Hzqi]

Political correctness can prompt people to curtail the harsher sounding evidentiallities, but *shrug* "oh well".

It's not like you're calling for regulation on the Master Race. Nothing like it. The opposite in fact. At times it's as much a point of compassion. Like people in contries that can't feed themselves or the kids they have, and they're having more. And here's you, having none. For fuck's sake someone send them some condoms and a hacky sack.

It's suffering breeding suffering.

[Hzqi]

This business of ideological rhetoric bypassing the screening of investigative rigour, is more threatening than the antics of religious types. Because they aren't seen as on the fringe, but are ratified by slavish cohorts in the seats.

The same way that creationists want to bypass the mechnism of academic peers review via paper submission, these radicals concoct "anti-theories" based on shallow interpretation and speculative bias. The basic assumption can be completely wrong without rigour.

[Hzqi]

But don't refer to a gist. How? Where? Why? Specify. Do some ideologists have any idea how much rigour and repeated rigour scientists have to overcome to get an idea into a theory stage?

It's all grey.

It's not implausible that discriminations of many kinds in many places occur to many different kinds of people. But the construct has to withstand logic. And one of parameters of that logic is motive. What's in it for them? Slaves knew about discrimination. It was good for business.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Agreed, discrimination does happen and most of us have been discriminated against in the past, due to societies conformities. That is why I disagree with the term feminism, for feminism is only focused on the inequalities towards women , which is an inequality in itself. If feminism was truely for equality, than all human oppression would be focused upon.

[Hzqi]

I've made that point with feminists in the past. After rationally sitting down and talking, and working out that I'm not the enemy, they've tried to insist that I'm "feminist". I reject the notion, because I feel it infers a divisive sway of compassion. I used to identify as humanist. But these days I refer as sentientist, because I think any conscious entity has a right to humane treatment, by those creatures (humans, and others, you'd be surprised) with a capacity for higher understanding.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"But these days I refer as sentientist, because I think any conscious entity has a right to humane treatment, by those creatures (humans, and others, you'd be surprised) with a capacity for higher understanding. "

Agreed, I think it is the human ego, (and usually an imbalanced one at that) to have dilusions of grandeur or superiority complexes, which create the attitude that humans are the only concious creatures on earth.

[Hzqi]

I don't go for processes of indoctrination, but something that I think would be good for kids to see in general, is that video of the child that fell into the Gorilla compound. Everyone fretted for his welfare, and the gorilla came over and comforted him while looking aroudn for someone to come to his aid.

Obviously it's not a sweeping animal tendency (there are none), but to deny anything other than human the regard of awareness is, I'd concur, a species relative ego.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"Obviously it's not a sweeping animal tendency (there are none), but to deny anything other than human the regard of awareness is, I'd concur, a species relative ego"

Agreed, I feel, just like humans other animals can be paternal in nature towards other species. On youtube there is a hippo that tried to save a baby antelope? from an alligator.

[Hzqi]

That obviously illustrates the way that discriminatino can function. The most base form of it though, relates to the "foot in the door". Because capitalism and evolution are the same thing. If you don't capitalize on your most effective (human) resource someone else will follow the proof and your weakness and pounce. It's simply not capitalistic to discriminate the "way" many feminists are claiming happens. It would be market suicide.

It's demonstrable that discrimination CAN happen.

[Hzqi]

Nobody should be judged by a collective, no matter the track record of the collective. But that's human nature, AND the modern society which works with numbers, not people. They follow the advice of numbers. The bigger question again though, is WHY? What is that at the base, that could be done to change peoples perceptions about aboriginies? It's auto-exacerbating, because they see no reason to respect or believe in themselves. Because they see no "opportunity". It's a mutual hinderance.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"Nobody should be judged by a collective, no matter the track record of the collective. But that's human nature"

You took the words right out my mouth. Society needs to learn acknowledgement instead of judgement. Society would then learn and understand the problems and actions of humanity, with solutions rather than retaliations, to deal with problems that arise due to human nature.

[Hzqi]

This is another aside, but in a market of free enterprize, it's good to remember that if someone doesn't give you a chance, you can give yoruself a chance. Here in Australia, there IS a stigma against hiring aboriginies. But it doesn't mean the stigma is unwarranted. It's persepective. Is there a statistical likelihood that the wrong thing will be done by them if they "take a chance" on hiring an indiginous? If it is, should individuals be judged by their collective?

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Here in Canada, the government  has created reserve land and gives tax payers money to the Status indiginous. Personaly I am against this and affirmative action, for I believe that as humans we are in this together, and once again the tax payouts and small land reserves will only institutionalize and create segregative perspectives. There by weakening and making indiginous peoples more dependent on corporate products and societies tax money.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

" Is there a statistical likelihood that the wrong thing will be done by them if they "take a chance" on hiring an indiginous? "

If the individual is a good worker and trust worthy, it really shouldn't matter if they are indiginous or not, yet that is my opinion. Yet if a collective would go to extremes, due to my decision, then I would never set up shop in the first place.

[Hzqi]

Digressions.

Talking about the rich earning less, the most obnoxious thing I've ever heard of regarding that, were the bosses of failed US financial giants recieving their "Golden Handshakes" with taxpayer bailout money.

As for the women's "wage gap". All the talk of it is divisive. If it's true, they need to make a proper case of it, not just point to "discrepencies" as proof. They don't address the causality. A law that protects the earning rights of ALL is unifying, and just.

[Hzqi]

Saying that Black Women are paid less than White Men is a pointless, reductive soundbite. The most important question at the centre of the universe. WHY? Do I encourage the betterment of various demographics? Sure. Do I endorse myopic and cumbersome regulation to stifle the opportunities of others, just to accoutn for a "discrepency"? Nay.

Do I complain that the starting blocks of the 100m final is 90% black men? Do black men complain about their absence from swimming finals?

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"Do I complain that the starting blocks of the 100m final is 90% black men? Do black men complain about their absence from swimming finals? "

There is of course a scientific explanation for this. Since the exodus from Africa, some of thoughs who stayed in Africa just happen to carry the genes in which formed the better mechanics for running than any other human, yet not every human with black skin has the genetics in which help them to be the fastest runners.

[Hzqi]

I could turn around tomorrow and the starting blocks will be a majority white. The point is when people get huffy about the "what" without questioning the "why". Rather interestingly, the American slave traders bolstered the genetic strength of African American males, through selective breeding of the strongest and healthiest, to be workers for them.

At least they got something out of their oppression. Black American men have very responsive musculature.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"At least they got something out of their oppression. Black American men have very responsive musculature. "

That is right, its called fast twitch muscle fibre. Also notice how the people from Kenya specifically dominate in long distances.

[Hzqi]

Like the way that the literacy gap between boys and girls disappears among home-schooled children. And so does the University entry gap. The interesting thing is, though. That whereas the entry gap disappears, a far higher proportion of them still drop out, because as an aggregate experience, community level college is very unwelcoming of males.

People spend too long waiting for the state to "fix" things they've broken. If you know where they fail, don't let them fail your kids. If avoidable.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"People spend too long waiting for the state to "fix" things they've broken. If you know where they fail, don't let them fail your kids. If avoidable."

My wife and I decided on no children.

[Hzqi]

It's one of the great mysteries of the universe, that if you speak to enough people, the more philosophical and rational (the ones that would make better parents) are the ones more frequently opting out of parenthood, or for smaller scale families.

As condescending as it sounds, it's like higher consciouness is a defect in the gene pool. How do you compete with the parental proliferation of those that have no care for or qualm of consequence?

I wish smart people would breed more.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"As condescending as it sounds, it's like higher consciouness is a defect in the gene pool. How do you compete with the parental proliferation of those that have no care for or qualm of consequence?"

I fully agree and still find myself a bit frustarated at some people who have more than 3 children. As humans we could stop the over population of the planet if we just had 1 child. Then we could cut the population in half in under a century.

[Hzqi]

@LIONOFTHEBRAVE

The population doesn't need reducing. But it's a worry if it keeps increasing.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

@Hzqi That all depends on where you reside on this planet. For instance Japan and India have terrible problems with over population. Yet here is Canada, we have tonnes of space.

[Hzqi]

And on that level, males are confronted with a multitude of lures to sway their priorities. Fashion trends both attracting and hostile towards them (Boys are stupid, throw rocks). The need to compare to other males who have surmounted the challenge of appealing to women. It's not just an innate compulsion, but they learn their cultural worth depends upon it. Noone who makes excuses for their role in ailing boys school performance addresses any other the surrounding factors that commentate.

[Hzqi]

The trouble with people is, that history teaches us that they most effectively bond in crisis.

Consider this for giving. Did you know that Bill Gates has given over $50,000,000,000 away? And his charities feverishly continue apace.

And one of his targets is the inequity of how boys are treated in school. Go Bill.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

I did not know that about Bill Gates. I do agree that there is an inequity within the school system. Males learn differently than females, and to top it all off males are left to deal with the latest slutty fashion trends and phermone congested hallways while trying to concentrate on thier calculus exam.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Both free enterprise and capitalism, need a responsible consumer. This would force the hand of the corporations to stop creating garbage and wasteful or environmentally unfriendly technology and start creating better products for more affordable prices. The problem is not just the corporation, yet society aswell, for we have the power to boycott the product. Computers and wastefull technology, should be on the list, although I ask myself what Bill Gates is doing to help change this?

[Hzqi]

I think you're very wise to make the connection between fashion and distraction. Very few people speak for what affects males. Even with subtlety. It's much a bewilderness for them trying to find a balanced perspective. They come to understand that they're meant to be the "pursuer" and that the females are more the "reciever" or "chooser". Surveyed women put forward this view. So it's they who feel compelled to do the "impressing". Whereas women often feel comfortable let attention "come".

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Also the 50 billion dollars Bill Gates obtained came from the consumers, he just redirected it, maybe because he is a good man, or maybe for tax purposes.

[Hzqi]

Of course it came from consumers. Where else would it come from. Some people are good at finding a way to get people to pay them for what they offer. But, he could have been like the owners of Walmart and given tantmount to nothing. He still has a huge accumulated wealth, but I'm sure those who benifit from his $75 million maleria program, are happy consumers paid him.

He offers a product or service, and people pay for it. Dubious or not.

[Hzqi]

To me, it's important to make a distinction between the modern mentallity of capitalism and noble tenets of free-enterprize, and the twain are muddled. People have the right to be the beneficiary of their efforts. But it's merely reiterating that it's in the best interests of even the most capitalistic to have a socialistic safeguard against poverty. I don't agree with the idea of state owned capital, but I do endorse the idea of a more collective minded spirit. A rivial of community harmony.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

I see your point about the confusion of free enterprise and capitalism, I also agree that humans should be able to gain from thier efforts. Yet we need to balance how much people are recieving for thier efforts. For instance the rich could make alot less, while the poor classes could make a little more. Keep the socialist factor of welfare, yet make all welfare recipients volunteer for community services. Most importantly, keep an elder council filled with concience.

[Hzqi]

I think what you're referring to is the distribution factor. There's only so much cake to divide. But of course, the cake varies. The better run the society, the more cake there is, the less detrimental the distrimbutino factor is. That comes largely back to human conduct. It's been speculated, how long it would take to revert back to your "pyramid" if all the wealth of the world was suddenly and evenly redistributed.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"It's been speculated, how long it would take to revert back to your "pyramid" if all the wealth of the world was suddenly and evenly redistributed. "

I am almost sure that a failsafe would have to be implimented by an elder council of sorts, that would keep morality in check. There by allowing free trade to exist without greed. Yet as we both know, there is no stopping the seed of greed from respawning. Which is why we need a failsafe. The U.N. was a similar idea, yet it is also corrupt.

[Hzqi]

I've often tried to convince MRAs, that more effective than rebuking the claims and demands of gender feminists, is to forward the claims of equity feminists. It's like connecting yourself to the voices of your cause, on the inside. Don't beat them, join them. And promote their other selves. Christina Hoff Sommers and Erin Pizzey are champions among women.

Whether I agree with all they say, there will to be contrarian at the expense of standing among their peers shows calibre of integrity.

[Hzqi]

Radicals erect a rallying platform with a heady concoction of targetted shaming and vilification, persistent enough to stick, so as that most fear to confron it, winning an unchecked carte blanche to ingrain rhetoric as legislative gospel.

[Hzqi]

If it is true that it is the way his lobbyists say -who always make an emotive case in the guise of a technical one, of vague and uncorroborated statistics- then A: They've never properly demonstrated that it's there at all. Let alone aptly demostrated that it's as bad as they say. Let alone addressed at all, the counter-proponents to their position, let alone successfully refuted them.

A little appeasement, can be a destructive thing.

[Hzqi]

As a subject reversion-

I know as well as anyone, the bad blood that can be fostered by "competition". If it's not out of control, that can be part of it's charm. It's fun to see an ego cut down. Or alternatively, it's remarkable to see astromonical claims put into place (Ali?).

Asode from that though, it's a split manner of beauty. Most people, do a thing because they love it. They also love to see those who have refined it to a great art. And those that have, love to pit themselves.

[Hzqi]

As long as it's kept in generally good spirit, competition is fine. To condemn it for it's more negative self is a "Baby and the bathwater" mentallity- which is fine too, if that's how people feel, but they're goign to be disappointed if they expect competition itself, to simply evanesce- A little keen perception can readily discriminate between the contest of pro and con.

I do however agree, that egomaniacal pissing contests are a source of global suffering- as are empowered, unchecked egos.

[Hzqi]

Interesting thing though, is that whereas the ego can translate into the will to control- Another thing that can cause grief is somewhat opposite... The will to please. That's my percieved weakness of Obama. So far as I see, he isn't egotistical, but he is deferential to some sectors. I believe his will is good, but his will to do good, can blind him to the veracity of his recipients. His stalwart conviction to the cause of "Equal Pay" shows no sense of considerate rigour.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"That's my percieved weakness of Obama."

I too percieved a weakness in Obama. It is his outlook on racial issues, yet this weakness is not his alone. His inaugeration speech proved this. He was actually labeling humans with broad terms like "white" "brown" and "black". As a matter of fact the term race is thought to be invalid by most modern day geneticists.

[Hzqi]

The intent of the greater good is best attained with perspective, in my rationale. People who have never considered the depths of themselves, will also unearth a revelatory scale of priorities when they are subjected to crisis. If there were two people trapped on the side of a cliff, and you only had one rope, would you rescue your friend, or the stranger first?

Expecting the race to entirely disregard gain and status is not only unrealistic, it's unnecessary. Harmony is still possible.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"Expecting the race to entirely disregard gain and status is not only unrealistic, it's unnecessary. Harmony is still possible."

It could be also said that status only exists to appease the ego.

[Hzqi]

If the acquisition of weath gets out of control (which it has done), and a few have all the having, and the rest have or the nothing, there's a neat trick the masses can pull to rebalance the field.

Remember that the economy doesn't really exist. It's nothing more than a symbol, and an agreement. If everyone walked away from the market, rich people can't eat money.

I think parent's would do well to raise their children how to survive independent of the civil construct, before initiating.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Human greed destroys every system of government and history is proof of this. You even said yourself, capitalism can't exist with too much poverty, because who would be there to buy and pay taxes to the people who have monopolized the planet. Lets face it, as long as human are human, no system of government will work.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"I think parent's would do well to raise their children how to survive independent of the civil construct, before initiating."

Agreed, and to also add, I believe schools should teach how to live independently and learn more natural skills to survival. Skills like plant study, how to create natural energy etc, etc. I also agree that competition can cause progress, yet to a degree, for at some point it can also cause war. So where do we draw the line?

[Hzqi]

A "capitalist sell-out"? You're presuming about an outlook I've never even inferred. When have I ever said "possession = success". I'm more interested in rights than personal definitions. The free market is a basic right. If you work hard, and work smart to acquire wealth, good luck to you. Do I encourage the virtue of altruism? Sure. But there is no validatable law that states people have to be charitable. Just just. Walmart underpaying and manipulating staff is a whole other matter.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

The entire system to capitalism is built on greed.The rich can live rich, just as long as the poor are being good little cogs and sprockets. Your only debate is that I live in a passive fairy tale land. Well at least I am not selfish enough to step on other people in order to climb status ladder, of CAPITALISM. Capitalism is a pyramid scam, The rich on top and the poor supporting the rich at the bottom, that is capitalism and you only deny it because it has works for you.

[Hzqi]

The pyramidal nature of capitalism is the causality of human nature. It's a question of rights. Do people have the right to "have" what they "earn"? Do they then have the right to pass on what they earn (inherited wealth)? The free market is a human right. But so is- OPPORTUNITY. That's why regulations are designed to keep a market COMPETITIVE. A distinction must be made bewteen free market and capitalism. The problem with pure capitalism, is that it crushes opportunity with accumulated might.

[Hzqi]

That pyramid being the combination of the competencies of the people (inherent and inherited) and the means and resources they possess. It's a fundamentally understood factor of pure capitalism that it eventually gravitates towards monopolies, through success reaching bullying capacity, and through mergers and acquisitions. Which is the whole point of competitive market regulations. To give viability to small business.

I happen to like Unicorns, and I appreciate the goodwill of your vision.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

"The problem with pure capitalism, is that it crushes opportunity with accumulated might. "

I agree, yet would also like to add that capitalism can not exist without the lower class and the less fortunate to opportunity.

[Hzqi]

Which is where the great juggling act of politics emerges. What the best course to the "right" might be. People have a right to free enterprize, but when that enterprize becomes a colossus, others have the same right. And it's hard to know what the best solution is to predatory businesses. Regulation? Subsidising the victims against market bullying? (How to even identify and allocate?) Consumer incentive (somehow) to support small business?

[Hzqi]

The fundamental tenet of capitalism is that profit is good. Therefore, poverty isn't good for capitalism, because there is nothing to supply the liquid market. Capitalism loves a social base, as it keeps the supply and demand fuelled by functional contributors.

If the market was free, then assets would decline when they decline, not be fixed by oversight and regulation. The lending market that crash is ALREADY regulated heavily. You're blaming they who made the punch, not they who spiked it.

[Hzqi]

The only place for socialism in a supposedly democratic society, is as a welfare platform. Because any advanced student of social science understand that the free-market is most productive, when it stands literally upon, a socialistic platform. Because it acts as a safety-net, that prevents people from descending into status which is neither prosperity -which feeds itself- nor civil -poverty leads to anti-social behaviour as a survival resort. I think the beef you have is semantic.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

I think you are a capitalist sell out. You climb the status ladder in order to have more, because you were taught that having more means you are more successful. Imagine a society where people actually contributed to each other, and I am not talking about welfare. I am talking about humans striving to be better in the name of scientific and technological advancment. Capitalism thrives on poverty, in order so someone else can be filthy rich beyond thier needs. By the way, I am not on welfare.

[Hzqi]

You talk from a land of unicorns and fairy floss trampolines. There is a proportion of human endeavour that chases the greater good. But you imagine that the whole of society will define itself that way. Excising any sense of personal gain. Won't EVER happen.

You keep attributing all of these woes to capitalism, failing to recognize that it's not even pure capitalism that was at the wheel when the car ditched.

I'm not acclaiming it, but you're wrongly crediting it.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

When will you humans learn we are always competing with ourselves in the end.

[Hzqi]

By the way, would you even allow boys the opportunity to develop naturally, before you commence foisting your paradoxically forceful passivity upon them?

Again. Idealogues such as yourself, seeking to undermine natural development in pursuit of your pristine vision, are the anvil around the necks of young boys trying to learn (those and psycho banshees that hate males). And then you complain that they grow up wrong, lose their mind and rape people.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

No one is trying to tell people not to be human, yet humans could use more self controle and more understanding of thier own ego. Teaching this would only help all humans not just males. As for humans losing controle, well that is an individual matter aswell, because last I checked both men and women can be sexual abusers. Good job at derailing the debate.

[Hzqi]

Your reductionist outlook does a spiffing job making things artificially holistic. The thing isn't the thing, it's the thing made of the thing. That's the thing. The same way that blind fanatical patriotism can be a problem. The complete lack of patriotism in countries, can be very problematic, conversely. Take Australia for example. In the interests of propping up immediate fiscal performance, they're contemplating selling vast industrial reserves to foreign interest, that'd never reciprocate.

[Hzqi]

Whereas some countries take an active interest in trying to patriotically preserve local interest, like when France helped stabalize Delphine software through rough times and foreign buyout. Other countries are happy for the decline of workplace opportunity and the incompatible global dollar to see to the selling out of local interest, to the point where some (unpatriotic) countries, are barely going to be in any possession of themselves.

Patriotism is like any device that is dual-wieldable

[Hzqi]

Politics can be the artform of juggling the grand paradox. It's the smokescreens of regulatory bodies that can worsen things like the callapse caused by the lending market. Obama's "bail-out" policies are an anti-capitalistic theory. But that doesn't make them good. In fact, american markets, have swayed far from capitalistic theory, because of the propensity of price-fixing to secure market value for inflation. People like to see assets valuate, not devalue. Which is manufacturing an economy.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

" People like to see assets valuate, not devalue. Which is manufacturing an economy"

Agreed, yet that is not going to be the saving factor for the next generation. Inflation rates are just too high. This year there was a 35% increase in Canada, on property seisures due to costs of living and job loss. If capitaism is working so well than why is Canada in a depression? Must of been all those socialist working class people, right?.

[Hzqi]

cont...

That isn't patriotic. It's idiotic. Your outlook on some of these issues is reductively exclusionary.

You could make the same debate about just about any human endeavour. "Hey, this is my band". "Band? Pfft, why must you segregate your creative efforts from the community by encapsulating yourself within the constraints of a band? What, yuo think you're better than the rest of humanity? Huh, mister artsy farts? A fetish for the collective can be as unnerving as a frenzied jingo.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

You have taken my comments to a rediculous degree, therefore evading the validity of my point. Is the band playing to be one better than the rest, or are they just playing for the love of music? Please, quit dumbing my words down, so you may use your thesaurus to elude the true meaning of my point.

[Hzqi]

No, i get the true meaning of your point, perfectly. Your attitude is extreme. It's not even "partial", it's outright exclusionist. You don't say "we should keep our focus on the better spirit of this concept". You say "this concept can be corrupted by fanaticism, amputate it". That, is the attitude of radicalism. The kind of which is bred into marxist feminism, which doesn't even grasp it's own socialistic tenets.

Patriotism is Jingoism, like a lizard is a crocodile.

Relative only...

[Hzqi]

Patriotism can drive people to great things, just like family pride can drive a person to honor the good. I'm sure you'd see any association with human conflict as inherently invalid, but that's just unrealistic. There will always be thhose of bad character and ill-intent. Those who take pride in the image of their country, balk when their country is doing the wrong thing. This is a positive motivating factor. Some people say drugs promote theft. Well, boil that down...

PROPERTY promotes it.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Patriotism, has helped fuel the ego of man, to become one better than the rest, to divide and create imaginary borders, so if you are considering that to be great, then we have a differece of opinion. Humans are born, so ready to label and segregagte themselves amongst each other, if that makes you happy then so be it.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

I know religous people and fanatically religous people, they are all still religous and religion is still a problem. You say you understand yet you really missed the point entirely.

[Hzqi]

**women** should *not*

How dare you pick on my typo.

I demand you now go and pick on some other woman's typo. I demand equality damnit. EQUALITY NoW.

[Hzqi]

Very few women drive taxis, and you should care about the ratio, because the ratios are always made the point. Feminists insanely claimed, that women were the aggressor in just 14% of DV cases. That was adequate enough for them to dismiss it oturight, even after they were MADE to address it. Yet, that is nothing compared to the minority of women that are soldiers, and they demand the media refer to the "Brave men AND women". They want all the heroes, all the victims, and none of the perps. BS.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Your ratio's are perfect examples of how if blindly studied, you would never realize that the ratio's themselves are designed to create segregative thinking. Its no different than racial statistics, yet this time its about gender.

[Hzqi]

What are you telling me for?

Try telling the feminists that. I only answer to the relentless bullshit about statistics they wheel out. And they don't even have the courtesy to not MAKE SHIT UP. Let's say they lived in reality for a second and it was only 14% of men who suffered DV. What about them? Isn't everybody entitled to EQUAL PROTECTION under the law?

When will feminists work out that unequal results, is NOT automatically the result of unequal treatment?

[Hzqi]

As for racial statistics, I have a bone to pick.

I'm sick and tired of seeing a black monopoly on the starting blocks of the 100M final at the Olympics. I DEMAND EQUALITY! It should be evenly dvided between red, white, yellow and black. And half of each colour should be women! How dare you suggest that women should be allowed to compete against the men.

Fair is fair. That goes for the finals too. Women should be competing against men. Those finals had BETTER be half women. The medals too.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Racial statistics are invalid and inaccurate. Its partially genetics, body mechanics and hard work, yet that does not mean every human with dark skin is going to make it on the podium, simply because they have dark skin. You mentioned the olympics, which is yet another prime example of humans getting thier brainless flag waving pride out ,to blindly divide the planet with imaginary political and cultural borders, waving flags high to celebrate a unity of segregation.!?

[Hzqi]

I don't have much time to reply right now, except to say- Your general attitude towards the Olympics is a precision symbol of the attitude that assists in the destruction of the male in the classroom. Namby pamby "togetherness" lecturing, without comprehending a natural driving element of boys. Competition.

The Olympics is unity through competition. Not unity through segregation.

And brainless patriotism is brainless. Not patriotism. Embracing each other's "flags" is "divisive"? Puhlease.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

I would really like to know how my way of thinking is destroying all males in the class room, simply because I believe in one planet, one people. Since you obviously can't recognize the flaw in patriotism, I will state it to you. Patriotism fuels the human ego's desire to segregate, seperate, and become a pack better than the rest. It is no better than a dog territorially pissing yet its a human instead. Territorial pissing is very much instinctive and therefore void of free thought.Continued...

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Continued. You also stated that "Embracing each others flag is divisive?pulease"

We obviously are on different levels of thinking here.You can't recognize the paradox in humans dividing each other only to come together to embrace each others flags in the name of competition and to be "one better than the rest", or in this case the alpha pack, which produces and can afford the best athleats. Are you sure you were not talking about the "festival of nations": )?

[Hzqi]

It's called fun, and it sounds like you wouldn't understand. And then there is the nature of "Sportsmanship". Your kind of attitude is one of many, fuelling the decline of young boys in the classroom. The class environment has been feminized to be both more "passive", and "non-competitive". Competition fuels young boys, and they wind up in bewildered misery in these gynocentric institutions of dull proceedure.

In fact, competition fuels progress, period.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

I also understand fun, and good sportsmanship, for good sportsmanship is where people put thier ego aside to play a game that they love and enjoy, regardless of who wins.

You also stated "In fact, competition fuels progress, period."

No, not period. Look at the capitalist competive market, and how the competitive nature is the reason humans are neck deep in garbage, poverty, yet to you that is progress right? I also know lots of females who are competitive so what is your segregative point?

[Hzqi]

No, period. Competition fuels progress... Period. Take the barriers of Howard Hughes for example, and the anti-free market policies egregiously proclaiming that "one company can do it better". Competition is what makes companies "Do it better". your entire outlook rings of socialism. You also display a lack of comprehension of the capitalist dynamic. The competing market is not the reason people are neck deep in poverty. Or economic crisis. Bad management and policy is.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Like I said before, we have a huge difference in opinion on what we consider to be progress, so quit acting bull headed with me. Earth is under so much economic stress and is only getting worse, all in the name of your "progress". READ "A SHORT HISTORY OF PROGRESS" by Ronald Wright, then you will finally understand what I am talking about. If my entire outlook rings of socialism then why do I see communist countries wasting and dying in the name of progress, no different than capitalism? WHY?

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

correction, "why do we see socialist countries....wasting and dying in the name of progress, no different than capitalism."

[Hzqi]

The condition you are describing is not patriotism. It is jingoism. Patriotism, but charged with the bias of fanatical zeal. When your country is doing wrong, it is patriotic to oppose it's policies, which is why it's utterly sinister when Orwellian icons like the Bush admin, take advantage of terms like "Patriot act" and "Patriot missile". The word isn't the problem. Inferrential misuse, is the problem. When people get hysterical about defending the image of their country against all criticism.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

No, I mean patriotism, and the cons of which patriotism brings. Like you said jingoism is just an extreme of this.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Hzqi, Just because I want equal pay among humans, does not mean I am a feminist , nor does it mean that I stand for neo radical femist values. I am against the oppression of all humans, not just one gender.

[Hzqi]

No, I am nothing lke the male version of a feminist. Feminists undermine equality, and demand special treament. I demand fair treatment for all. And yes, this is a common unspoken phenom in the workplace, but I don't care if it's resolved, that men are more lumbered under equal title.

The point is that feminists constantly bypass Null Hypothesis, and presume that discrimination is the only presumable reason for the uneven result.

They have NEVER proven it through rigourous deduction.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

I too demand fair treatment, yet that still has nothing to do with my origional statement. I understand there are man hating feminists out for world domination, and screaming bloody murder while crying wolf the whole way, yet I have met many hard working women and men and see no need for division if the individual is capable. I am only trying to make a point for individuality. You are for segregative thinking and therefore part of the problem. You want to bring yet one more division in society.

[Hzqi]

All these so called gap claims are from zany ultra-leftist wingnut outfits. You do realise it's illegal right? That the law already exists. And that it's completely irrational in todays market, because you could just hire all the "cheap people" to make a killing. Except, well YOU CAN'T. Have you researched the individual comparatives, or just the overview bullshit that throws up the sketchy figures? Seen how much more corporate women in NY make? DISCRIMINATION! (Well, Affirmative action anyway)

[ToriJean]

Agreed..

[muskussliebe]

Wow so many men deserve to be hung, and that's the truth hateful worthless bastards. Paying the person, whom gave you birth less, are you kidding me? Fuck males, abort them all, we can save up sperm, and make sperm banks, to continue the human race. Get rid of these retards! jk maybe, well not all men are half wits I think

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Humans suck in general, why be so gender biased? Women and men suffer and these comments only help the divide. I have lost my job because of my gender, I have lost oppertunity because of my gender.Comments like this ridicule me because of my gender. Today there are jerks in the world, women and men alike. The rich controle, through division and corruption. In your struggle for equality you have become your own worst enemy.Radical neo femanists are no better than their male counterpart.peace

[funcuz]

Well, now that you have the right to abort , I hope you've exercised it. I'm not religious really but I'm willing to pray that you have no offspring and never will.

[ninjanerd8]

Use your head before you let it explode. Why hasn't a single company hired only women and saved a ton of money? They can't because it's actually against the law to pay someone less for the same job because of their gender. You can, however, pay someone more if they work more. The average man works 3 more hours per week than the average woman. That's a fact. Maybe you should try to look for them. They make it easier to make smart decisions.

[foryoutohear]

Dr.Warren Farrell has a great book on why women earn less. It's simple, it's the CHOICES WOMEN make that dictates their earnings.Your income shouldn't be "GIVEN" to yo just because you are a woman. No man is paid just because he is a man. Women need to "sack up" and start EARNING their wages instead of merely begging for them.Can you name ANY fortune 500 women? If you can then you have proven that it IS possible to earn whatever you want. The key here is the word "EARN" GOT IT?

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

The key word should of been increase salary and wages, but you sound like a person who doesn,t understand what life is like to EARN 10 times less than what you have worked for.

[Hzqi]

And you sound like a person that doesn't have the intellectual fortitude to comprehend the deeper causality of women's lower earnings.

Even their choices going INTO college, are going to affect their wages coming out. Ever notice that more than 85% of primary school teachers are women? In spite of the shitty wage? Because women are more influenced by PERSONAL SATISFACTION when choosing their career. Men would rather get a trade, and risk death to make a killing. Want to batch CEMENT?

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Maniacmike420 Humans are equal why divide them with statistcal evidence of gender.Isn,t that the problem to begin with, the division of humans.

[foryoutohear]

No one is WORTH one dime more than what they actually get paid!!!!

[Hzqi]

And by the way, I'm really sick to fucking death of a gender that marginalizes itself, complaining about not getting what they've EARNED, when they represent 3 FUCKING % of the occupational deaths.

Go jump off something high. Have the male experience.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Hzqi, that is why there is a thing called danger pay, people that do dangerous jobs should be paid more, but that is not the issue here. The issue is that men and women who do the same jobs, should receve the same pay, period. So why don't you go and attack someone that is at your stunted level of cognitive comprehension, instead of telling me to jump off something high.

[Hzqi]

Well I've worked dangerous jobs, so I'm sure you presume you're teaching me something. How about you? How about Taxi Drivers? They have the highest death rate. Danger pay?

If two people do the same task, society should be completely blind to their gender. Interesting though, the number of times I've been lumbered with the heavy work, in lieu of the women who are being paid THE SAME. Ouch, there's a dirty little matter the feminists don't like to discuss.

[LIONOFTHEBRAVE]

Yes, I have worked dangerous jobs and recieved no danger pay. Last I checked, women and men drove taxi's, I could care less about the ratio. If there is a job where you were made to do more grunt work because of your gender then you were obviously treated unfairly, yet that still does not change the fact that women and men should be paid equally.I am not a feminist, nor am I a masculinist, like yourself. Your the male version of what a feminist is, I am for equality.

[Hzqi]

The tendency for equally titled men, to be lumbered with unequal tasks. I've copped that one, several jobs past.

The views are always broad. What studies do you have that factor in danger pay, AND career preference/lifestyle choice? Has it ever even crossed your mind that there ISN'T a discrimination gap? Did you work from the NULL HYPOTHESIS, or did you just assume like a classic faith based feminist?

Did it factor in men's longer hours? The proving ground of that to promotion?

[Hzqi]

I have a better idea. All the men that do the work that women won't, need to put their tools down for a week.

Then the feminist wingnuts will be too busy frantically trying to find a man to perform some menial bullshit that they've always thought was beneath them, and they'll shut the fuck up about their delusional wage gap for ten minutes.

[UnderseaCaveman]

The market rewards RISK-TAKING....women are on average more risk-averse than women. Partially due to socialization, and party just from "mental hard-wiring".

So, after discrimination by gender is completely removed... there will still be a wage difference to the bio-pychological risk-aversion difference.

[youloseilol]

wemon get paid less becasue they didn't get good jobs its not mans fault that you didn't geta premotion its not male superiority its just less ambitious wemon.

[incubusrsnnglyp]

you are a dumb fagot.

[youloseilol]

how can you say its a mans fault he has a better job? who actualy hires people because of sex? when you hire people you look for the person who can get the job done. if you dont asurt yourself and make yourself look better then its not our fault you get the worse job.

[7clardycat7]

I don't think it's men's fualt but I do believe it has to do with sexism. And it's not women's fault either.Just because they don't look like they can't do the job, dosn't mean they can't, and also some men are sexest.And actually, we are living in a world where men ARE superier, not that I want it to be that way, if you just realize that it for a second.

[youloseilol]

we live in a world of equal oprotunity NOT equality. if you try jsut as hard then you get the same amount if your hiring somone you are looking for the person who can do they job the best and charge the least i personally dont even put gender on my employee aplication.

[edit77]

I agree with you..

I hate man..

[incubusrsnnglyp]

woah hey dont hate all men, trust me there are more good ones, that are not stupit fagots. learn how to fight, and be well educated never depend on a man

[olgasoccerbroadgu]

The best college girls on cam @ CAMSUNIVERSITY . COM !

[h20Enthusiast]

women get alimony and child support. They get huge tax benefits. Men in the same position have to fight more to get the same. That isn't equal either. I agree it should be equal. Don't cry about fairness unless there will be a draft for women as well.

[zippoflintmeister]

This is a separate issue though because it is not based on two people making a marital agreement or an agreement to have children. It is based on equal pay. If women got equal pay, alimony wouldn't be an issue as they could support themselves, have you thought of that.

[h20Enthusiast]

When is the last time you had anything other than a verbal agreement (wont stand up in court) to have children? I am saying that you shouldn't get your cake and eat it too.

The reason women get alimony and get paid less lies in the perception men have of women, not a law that isn't already in place.

[zippoflintmeister]

The tax thing is untrue, lets not even discuss that because it's contrived nonsense. Likewise alimony wouldn't be an issue if women earned more. Judges often decide in favor of women because the average income baseline is higher for males over females. So pay women more and they become equal and the judges will make decisions for more men.

[zippoflintmeister]

I mean child support rather than alimony. I was reduntand and repeated that twice.

[h20Enthusiast]

No biggie I got ya.

[h20Enthusiast]

no it is not nonsense.

Having children gets you a big tax return. I just had a son. I claimed him. I got back more than I paid in. Plain and simple. Women on welfare do the same thing, while collecting alimony, child support, wick, etc etc etc etc. Some of them live better than I DO !

[zippoflintmeister]

War is also a separaate issue and well, there are women in Iraq unless you've had your head in the sand and haven't noticed. Also, there is no draft as it is now voluntary to join the service.

[h20Enthusiast]

Wrong...every male have to sign up for the selective service at age 18.

Women do not.

Just because there isn't a draft doesn't men don't have to register for it.