|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted February 15, 2019 02:59 PM |
|
|
blob2 said:
JollyJoker said:
So you have no gender pay gap in Poland,
Yes, and we're progressively working on it. Like your countries do.
Ah, so there is no equality yet, you admit?
Quote:
JollyJoker said:
and you do not have one of the strongest abortion laws in Europe allowing abortion only in case of rape, danger for mother or handicaps of the child - and the last point is supposed to be removed in a toughening of the law?
While I don't have any clear opinion on this subtle matter it is also a very hard subject to discuss. There is no clear answer for the right "choice" (protection of life as a value vs. reality/science) even if you think there is, because your laws tell that. Besides those weren't regulated yet because our ruling party has strong ties to the church which still has strong influence here and always "buys" a few votes. It's politics.
Yes, it's the politics of female oppression.
Quote:
JollyJoker said:
If that's the look of equal rights in one of the most "tolerant" countries of the worls, as you assure - then how does it look elsewhere in the world?
I'm not telling you we are the "most tolerant" country. We are far from it. I'm telling you we have a long tradition of living in harmony with other nations so we know something on the subject whereas SJW America has a history of murdering the locals for land or building their wealth on slavery and exploitation of other nations which it does to this day (just watch the news if you do like them so). Or your country which is still, however you like to avoid the subject by dubbing our "Polish concentration camps", seen as being the perpetrators of one of the biggest tragedy in the history of human civilization. So lay off a bit before we start to throw names.
That's all completely irrelevant. The only interesting thing when history is concerned, is the fact that ALL countries have a history of unequal rights for men and women.
Quote:
JollyJoker said:
Your perspective is seriously warped.
So is yours.
At least you don't deny it.
Quote:
JollyJoker said:
I'm taking serious offense from your notion, that a man must have identity issues or be under influence of a woman, when they side with them on gender issues. This is class struggle rhetoric. How could one not sympathize with the cause of ones mother, wife and daughter, I ask you?
That is also something I'm wondering, because for me it is normal behavior to protect the rights of women whose blood, sweat and tears take a great part in making our civilization better. But there is a slight difference between sympathizing with one side and a full-blown offensive against the other side. That's when I see "issues".
I see issues with people who are assuring a side of their sympathies and then side with the other and find excuses for them.
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 03:15 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
I really wonder what kind of a problem you guys have to concede equal rights to women?
Absolutely none. But you are rewriting history if you pretend that, in the middle of all the oppression, women were not physically safer then men in the old ages...
____________
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 03:26 PM |
|
|
|
@Blob2. Didn't the Polish government try to completely BAN abortion in 2016? And aren't they trying to make abortion even more difficult this year also?
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 03:27 PM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 15:54, 15 Feb 2019.
|
JollyJoker said:
Ah, so there is no equality yet, you admit?
Well daa? Yes there's is always this % that makes the inequality. Not only for women. Good luck finding the equilibrium: https://eige.europa.eu/rdc/eige-publications/gender-equality-index-2017-germany
JollyJoker said:
Yes, it's the politics of female oppression.
I wonder how many women disagree with laws that give less abortion rights? And how many feel oppressed with them. Besides are you a woman to make this kind of calls? Did you nurture a baby in your belly?
JollyJoker said:
That's all completely irrelevant. The only interesting thing when history is concerned, is the fact that ALL countries have a history of unequal rights for men and women.
Ah so it's irrelevant now? The good ol' case of "it's not proving my point"... f* how history shaped each countries culture.
JollyJoker said:
I see issues with people who are assuring a side of their sympathies and then side with the other and find excuses for them.
This is called giving justice to both sides or trying to understand each point of view. Which is something you or other SJW's are clearly not doing.
Minion said:
@Blob2. Didn't the Polish government try to completely BAN abortion in 2016? And aren't they trying to make abortion even more difficult this year also?
Current Polish government does not represent mine and many of my countrymen points of view. There are many people not ok with the current state of affairs, we have a lot of chaos in my country, and a lot of mutual accusations. So keep that in mind. Next elections I will once again try to keep them from winning, but I cannot guarantee the success. Does each and every British stand behind Brexit? No, but it will happen. Does everyone stand behind Trumps Wall? No but it might happen. Does everyone love the prospect of more immigrants in Germany? I wonder if AfD gained a 12,6% of votes (giving them third place) although they were pretty much non-existent in Bundestag before.
You guys tend to use Democracy as a key-word that solves everything, even though things are always more complex.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 03:30 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 18:59, 15 Feb 2019.
|
bloodsucker said:
JollyJoker said:
I really wonder what kind of a problem you guys have to concede equal rights to women?
Absolutely none. But you are rewriting history if you pretend that, in the middle of all the oppression, women were not physically safer then men in the old ages...
Why? Because they werent soldiers, maybe to a little extent, but you know how most of those armies operated, right? They put a city under siege, they wait till the people indoors are out of food, morale, energy. Then they plunder the city, taking kids for slave trade, raping women, sometimes killing them, too. It is not like wars were dealt with the Geneva Convention back then.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 03:52 PM |
|
|
Yes, women would often still be raped and sometimes even sold to slavery but let's not pretend the heaviest toll wasn't paid by men. One can't say they were oppressed and had no access to certain professions and then pretend he doesn't see that was done to protect their physical integrity, because they could bare children.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 03:59 PM |
|
|
I'd guess that when you compare the numbers of those men who died actually DEFENDING their homes against ("evil") ATTACKERS (which don't count, obviously) with the numbers of women dying in childbed, dying after being raped by victorious attackers, dying by being murdered by men, I'm quite sure the numbers will be higher.
If you count the female babies who have been killed in countries like India as well ...
Soldiering has been a voluntary profession most of the times...
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 04:24 PM |
|
|
bloodsucker said:
Yes, women would often still be raped and sometimes even sold to slavery but let's not pretend the heaviest toll wasn't paid by men. One can't say they were oppressed and had no access to certain professions and then pretend he doesn't see that was done to protect their physical integrity, because they could bare children.
Which would sometimes have worked and sometimes not, but the thing isn't the "job sharing", the thing is the unequal rights coming from it.
See, it's logical that in earliest times, when humans were organized in clans (and life expectancy was 30 years or so), men did the "protection" and food gathering, the hunting, while women stayed "in camp" with the children, probably with a guard as well. Makes sense.
But sometime along the line that has led to the guards running the show, telling the rest not only what to do to stay safe, but WHAT TO DO AND WHAT NOT TO DO IN GENERAL.
And THAT is the thing that went wrong. It's basically not so different from what you see in modern countries when the military arm gets too strong. Suddenly you've martial law, you've got curfews, you've got no rights anymore.
That's what happened here as well.
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 04:34 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
I'd guess that when you compare the numbers of those men who died actually DEFENDING their homes against ("evil") ATTACKERS (which don't count, obviously)
Nope, the ones that count are the women of the attackers, those were the ones who could have done differently (like, using women and children as meat shields*), the surrounded populations had very little to say about who was going to be slaughtered, raped or sold in to slavery.
*as they do in modern warfare.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 04:49 PM |
|
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 05:59 PM |
|
|
I'm still not sure I understand what you want to say.
The women of "attackers" - say, the Mongols - had not more say than those of the attacked. What are they supposed to have done?
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 06:44 PM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 18:45, 15 Feb 2019.
|
JollyJoker said:
The women of "attackers" - say, the Mongols - had not more say than those of the attacked. What are they supposed to have done?
Tell them that "white lives matter".
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 07:28 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
I'm still not sure I understand what you want to say.
Fair enough. I was saying that the attackers had the option to bring or not the women to help in a siege (but most of the times they wouldn't) while the surrounded couldn't choose who would be murdered or raped. But truth being said, the defenders could choose who would eat the last ball of rice or the last piece of bread and besides the saying about women and children being first, they often would not.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 07:49 PM |
|
|
If there was a siege, the attackers would OF COURSE have women with them - what do you think? Might not have been those of home and might not exactly been helpful with a siege, but still. Not to mention, that in a siege it's pretty meaningless what gender the attacker has.
And whatever you've heard about "women and children first" - if they would have left the last food for the women, what would that have gained? Nothing at all.
So this are just silly mind games.
@ blob
You lost me when you mentioned the history of my country or compare the situation of women in my country with that in yours. I never claimed something about the situation in Germany being better - I just reacted when you pointed out that things are great in Poland.
I also cannot understand the relevance of German nazi history with a view on womens rights. If anything, they killed the Jews without prejudice, men, women, children, equally, but that wouldn't be relevant either. Women are no national "phenomenon". They are half of the darn population, everywhere, with every "race", in every country, since the dawn of humankind.
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 08:48 PM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 20:55, 15 Feb 2019.
|
JollyJoker said:
@ blob
You lost me when you mentioned the history of my country or compare the situation of women in my country with that in yours. I never claimed something about the situation in Germany being better - I just reacted when you pointed out that things are great in Poland.
I'm not comparing the situation of women in my country and yours, especially in historic context (I will go back to this in a moment). I was pointing that you also have issues as statistics show so you need to sort them out first before anything.
Besides, if anything, you started the "comparisons" first:
Quote:
Only a few countries allow women to serve on an equal basis [in the military]. They include Australia, Canada, Germany, Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
So can Polish women pick a career in the military? And that's one example only.
JollyJoker said:
I also cannot understand the relevance of German nazi history with a view on womens rights. If anything, they killed the Jews without prejudice, men, women, children, equally, but that wouldn't be relevant either. Women are no national "phenomenon". They are half of the darn population, everywhere, with every "race", in every country, since the dawn of humankind.
You pointed out that my country has strict abortion laws so I described the situation to you. You also named my country intolerant or unequal on few occasions so I showed you that we actually have something to say in the matter even though we are also in the process of change. As a collective, German people of course are not directly in blame of what happened in the past. But don't go teaching others of what's good when you yourself have problems with your own history or society. You know, we as a nation, although jealous of you and angry on our shared history, looked up to you as an example of an orderly and succesful society. Not anymore though...
My notion to the history of your country comes from the fact that Western countries tend to describe themselves as the "enlightened ones" even though it was sometimes far from being enlightened. Your the ones teaching others your morality because it is the "right one", but what if it actually backfires? Will you take the blame then? I don't find feminism as a danger to our civilization in itself but I find it a part of a dangerous collective of social justice movements which are right now "looking for blood".
Our country also has some dark moments which I won't deny, but in this context I think the mentality of not mindlessly absorbing worldwide trends and being suspicious of them/keeping a distance is a safety valve that might keep us on our toes when things go awry. The current worldwide trend in Western countries is an overblown ideological war of people who are already in a relatively good spot but want more, while men, women, children or other minorities in some other countries are raped and killed on a daily basis, with no laws whatsover, and those places aren't even that far away.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 09:06 PM |
|
|
All that has nothing to do with gender equality, equal rights of men and women or oppression of women in the past. Nothing at all. You could just as well debate the price of rice.
You are trying to divert and distract with totally unconnected things. Not with me, though.
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 10:35 PM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 22:40, 15 Feb 2019.
|
JollyJoker said:
All that has nothing to do with gender equality, equal rights of men and women or oppression of women in the past. Nothing at all.
You're either a troll or a lost cause. Or both. I was answering to your previous posts, and you change the subject. How convinient.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 10:50 PM |
|
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted February 15, 2019 11:08 PM |
|
Edited by blob2 at 23:57, 15 Feb 2019.
|
JollyJoker said:
Whatever.
So let me get this straight. You ignore/discard what I have wrote, because you're currently narrowing it down to gender equality per se? Discarding the fact that so far our discussions have swayed in different directions to cover our view of political correctness and to somehow understand our mentality and what drives us to think that way, for instance understanding the equality "fight" vs modern social dynamics (like the SJW movement) included?
This is called negligence. Give me a call when you decide to grace me with your attention. Oh wait actually, whatever.
I'm done.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted February 16, 2019 03:56 PM |
|
|
Minion said:
So a single guy likes Trump and he is black.
It is not about Trump, blacks always voted democrat at 95% - free stuff dependency. Young blacks conservatives
Politics always polarized people, 50% cons, 50% dems (including minorities), it was that way under every president. But only minorities votes can get elected the dems, or if it starts to shift, is over for them.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
