Jump to content

Womens tears are making politics - and society - more feminine.


Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

I'll tell you what, I really need to work now. I haven't done anything this morning, and money is money at the end, because if there's NO money, people like you can recruit me and tell me that society is the reason why I'm having problems.

What if I were to tell you that you can actually work and make money while also accepting that we can improve society?

43 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

You know what is coming, because of your last reply, you lost the debate by accusing me of BIAS in this debate, when, the truth is:

  • I caught you manipulating about communism and government. 

My dude, like I said, I'm not a communist either. But you're wrong about communism because you're getting all your talking-points from the Right. Communism is a stateless and classless society where everyone shares the means of production. The Soviet Union and East Germany were not communist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_communism

What you're describing it this:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism

And also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I disagree.  I think feminism has gone too far and left us with a lost generation of young men, a totally dysfunctional military, and workplaces that make allowances for women that they don’t make for men.  Can a man have a meltdown in the office and be taken seriously by colleagues the next day, if he manages to keep his job?

Wokeism is turning education, businesses, and government organizations into obsessive compulsive apology parades that don’t do much of anything of any real value.  China and Russia know this.  We bought into the myth that one gender should be exalted and another deplored.  The result is a lot of confused people trying to look progressive and saying things that they don’t believe or understand in order to sound like they’re using right-speak.  One third of my organization’s communications are basically hand-wringing over feminism, Geoge Floyd, and LGBTQ2I+ gender identity stuff, as though Canada is the US and our PM is Gavin Newsome.  I guess that’s somewhat true now.

Can the situation change?  I hope so or we might as well subsume our government within China’s.  

The realities that you lay out are the product of technology, the internet, greater economic fortunes, and therefore a more comfortable, easier existence. Do you honestly think that technology is going to cease moving forward? Is it going to become less important in the lives of the current population? If so.. can you give some actual data to back up this seemingly preposterous belief?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

So it started with my stating this reality is here to stay and will continue.

What reality? Quota systems that allow less capable people to get jobs they're not very good at?

18 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

I am of the opinion that this is inevitable

You are of the opinion WHAT is inevitable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, I am Groot said:

What reality? Quota systems that allow less capable people to get jobs they're not very good at?

You are of the opinion WHAT is inevitable?

The reality that women are going to be more involved in politics and in daily life than in the past. 

I am of the opinion that this current reality (where women are more involved in politics and they sway political races more) is not going to stop and inevitably will continue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Sure he can.  I've seen lots of dudes flip a switch and keep their jobs, or better yet, remain in charge.  The difference is that when a man shouts someone down at the office, that's just him being angry, whereas for whatever reason the woman is having a "meltdown".  

Uh, have you ever been in an office? BTW, you changed the comparison from a man crying to a man yelling, while the woman is still crying. Men shouting at anyone is now called toxic masculinity. It's not tolerated in large offices. Women managers routinely shout at and belittle people without much hostility coming from above. All the most toxic managers and directors I've known have been women. Because they get away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

The reality that women are going to be more involved in politics and in daily life than in the past. 

I don't have an issue with women being involved in things. My issue is with quotas designed to advantage them over more capable men.

1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

I am of the opinion that this current reality (where women are more involved in politics and they sway political races more) is not going to stop and inevitably will continue. 

Well, sooner or later someone is going to have to get hard-hearted about a political system that, as it stands, is being set up by female voters as everyone's mommy to wash everyone's tears away with money. Or else the system will break down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The worst manager that I ever dealt with was a man. Not even close. It was at a Wal-mart in Boise, ID. Our job was unloading trucks. On a given day, we unloaded 4,000 pieces of loose freight. No shrink wrapped pallets where the product was organized by size or anything like that. And we had four hours to do it... With a crew of 4 to 6 people... you have to be moving. Especially considering that you had only one person in the truck throwing stuff on to the belt. The other 3 to 5 would arrange by SKU and then put it away in storage. Well, our lovely manager was always giving us the "we need more sense of urgency" talk. I always wanted to tell him that I burned more calories walking in the door than he did all day. He never realized how lucky he was to have a crew of minimum wage (or very close to it) workers who would/could unload 4.000 pieces of loose freight in 4 hours. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

I don't have an issue with women being involved in things. My issue is with quotas designed to advantage them over more capable men.

Well, sooner or later someone is going to have to get hard-hearted about a political system that, as it stands, is being set up by female voters as everyone's mommy to wash everyone's tears away with money. Or else the system will break down.

Your prediction in the second paragraph is why I say that you are a doomsday theorist. In short, you think that it is all going to crumble and dissolve into chaos simply because women are in politics and their votes are more influential now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, impartialobserver said:

Your prediction in the second paragraph is why I say that you are a doomsday theorist. In short, you think that it is all going to crumble and dissolve into chaos simply because women are in politics and their votes are more influential now. 

Ever take an economics course? There's only so high you can build up the debt mountain before it collapses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

I have a Phd in Economics so yes I have. However, the topic was women in politics not debt. What next... you will bring up the chemical composition of vinyl flooring..

If you don't understand why women in politics is related to debt you either know nothing about women in politics or got your Phd from a crackerjack box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

If you don't understand why women in politics is related to debt you either know nothing about women in politics or got your Phd from a crackerjack box.

And you think that only women vote for spending bills which increase the public debt.. Wow, what episode of the twilight zone are you on? I work with mostly male politicians... you would be floored if you heard what I do. 

Edited by impartialobserver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

And you think that only women vote for spending bills which increase the public debt.. Wow, what episode of the twilight zone are you on? I work with mostly male politicians... you would be floored if you heard what I do. 

Yes, yes, you're a god walking among us. I'm sure everyone is quite impressed.

I never use 'only' to describe political choices, but the reason women support left wing parties far more than men do is overwhelmingly due to their wanting big spending government to 'help' everyone with everything.

Edited by I am Groot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Uh, have you ever been in an office? BTW, you changed the comparison from a man crying to a man yelling, while the woman is still crying.

The difference is irrelevant.  Both are adults not being able to control their emotions.  

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Men shouting at anyone is now called toxic masculinity. It's not tolerated in large offices. Women managers routinely shout at and belittle people without much hostility coming from above. All the most toxic managers and directors I've known have been women. Because they get away with it.

That's just a self-serving testimonial though, isn't it?  I've had toxic male and toxic female managers, and the worst was a man.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

Yes, yes, you're a god walking among us. I'm sure everyone is quite impressed.

I never use 'only' to describe political choices, but the reason women support left wing parties far more than men do is overwhelmingly due to their wanting big spending government to 'help' everyone with everything.

You should really get to know your male politicians. See them away from the camera. What do they all have in common? they want to be a hero, a savior, etc. This is why they almost never vote against spending bills. They do not want to be the one that costs anyone a job. It does not matter if the job should not exist at all to begin with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

The realities that you lay out are the product of technology, the internet, greater economic fortunes, and therefore a more comfortable, easier existence. Do you honestly think that technology is going to cease moving forward? Is it going to become less important in the lives of the current population? If so.. can you give some actual data to back up this seemingly preposterous belief?

I think we’ve already turned over too many switches to algorithms and AI.  We set up processes for measuring and responding to data that can never tell the whole story and wonder why we feel so constrained by these limitations.  Tech can be used to create dystopian surveillance states, automated drone law enforcement, and social credit systems just as it can be used to liberate us from work and develop cures for diseases.  Don’t throw your hands up so easily and accept whatever happens unless you’re prepared to accept the worst possible outcomes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I think we’ve already turned over too many switches to algorithms and AI.  We set up processes for measuring and responding to data that can never tell the whole story and wonder why we feel so constrained by these limitations.  Tech can be used to create dystopian surveillance states, automated drone law enforcement, and social credit systems just as it can be used to liberate us from work and develop cures for diseases.  Don’t throw your hands up so easily and accept whatever happens unless you’re prepared to accept the worst possible outcomes.  

You act like I have complete control. That is funny. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

You should really get to know your male politicians. See them away from the camera. What do they all have in common? they want to be a hero, a savior, etc. This is why they almost never vote against spending bills. They do not want to be the one that costs anyone a job. It does not matter if the job should not exist at all to begin with. 

Conservatives tend to be rather more immune to those sentiments. 

And we're speaking of male v female voters, not politicians studying polls.

Edited by I am Groot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Conservatives tend to be rather more immune to those sentiments. 

 

True.  And this tends to lead to that well known cycle - the Liberals spend us into ruin to appeal to the people as 'saviors' and 'givers' and 'nurturers',  and then the people freak out when they realize what's happening to the economy and they hire the conservatives who are willing to reduce spending, say "no" to special interest groups, and be the 'bad guy' till things improve. Once things get better again (eventually) then the liberals come back and say "wow - those guys never give you anything, hire us and we'll be your hero's again and give you all you want'.

And thus the cycle repeats.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

I do have control over myself and my thoughts. However, this idea that I have control over society as a whole.. Ha, you are funny. 

Of course your influence is limited, but one has to believe in the possibility of influencing society in order for any political commentary to have any value.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Of course your influence is limited, but one has to believe in the possibility of influencing society in order for any political commentary to have any value.

Ok, you seem a bit rational. So my influence is limited. So seems rational to focus on those i can influence. .. friends/family instead of thinking of myself as some all-powerful force that changes society. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2023 at 4:36 PM, Contrarian said:

 While some may argue that these regimes were not "true" communism, it is worth questioning why so many attempts to create a communist society have resulted in similar outcomes of authoritarianism, economic instability, and human rights violations. Uhmmm????

The cases you're referring to aren't about people who tried and failed to create communism. It's not that the Bolsheviks tried to build communism but they failed and ended up with authoritarianism. The Bolsheviks were tankies from the start. They never even won a national election to come to power, they were tyrants.

Communism probably is impossible on a large scale. But you're not arguing against communism, you're arguing against state capitalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

Your claims are somewhat naive. History has shown that attempts at communism have always resulted in authoritarianism, economic instability, and human rights violations. The Bolsheviks were not "tankies from the start" and committed countless atrocities.

How exactly did the Bolsheviks attempt communism? They didn't expand democracy, they didn't try to eliminate the government, their system was closer to the system of czarist Russia than it was to communism.

2 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

I submit to the AntiFa court of law: 

  • Additionally, while the Bolsheviks did establish an authoritarian government, they initially sought to create a truly communist society based on Marxist principles. It was only later, after years of war, famine, and political strife, that the Soviet government became increasingly repressive and authoritarian.

Absolutely not. First of all, the Soviet Union was never democratic. They didn't establish an authoritarian government after failing to establish communism, rather they didn't even try communism.

Secondly, it actually became less authoritarian as time went on. That's not to say the Soviet Union was ever good, but the worst period was under Stalin. The following decades were a lot more liberal, especially under Gorbachev.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,752
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Dorai
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Venandi earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • DUI_Offender went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...