Page 10 of 12 [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

MotherKnowsBest
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Nov 2009
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,196

25 Apr 2012, 2:12 pm

Can I wade in and give an example, even though I haven't read the preceeding pages to see if it's already been given?

In Sweden, feminist capital of the world, feminists campaigned for, and acheived, paternity leave for new dads equal to maternity leave for women. Both parents now get 6 months each.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

25 Apr 2012, 2:28 pm

MotherKnowsBest wrote:
Can I wade in and give an example, even though I haven't read the preceeding pages to see if it's already been given?

In Sweden, feminist capital of the world, feminists campaigned for, and acheived, paternity leave for new dads equal to maternity leave for women. Both parents now get 6 months each.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/world ... wanted=all

How can I put this, when you force someone to take parental leave or lose the economic benefits, you will get equality. Personally I'm for the "each couple has to decide what they want" model, rather than the "do as we politicians think or we snatch more money out of your pocketbook". This is not anti-feminist, it's anti-nanny-governments and authoritarian legislation.



CloudLayer
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 308

25 Apr 2012, 3:30 pm

TM wrote:
MotherKnowsBest wrote:
Can I wade in and give an example, even though I haven't read the preceeding pages to see if it's already been given?

In Sweden, feminist capital of the world, feminists campaigned for, and acheived, paternity leave for new dads equal to maternity leave for women. Both parents now get 6 months each.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/world ... wanted=all

How can I put this, when you force someone to take parental leave or lose the economic benefits, you will get equality. Personally I'm for the "each couple has to decide what they want" model, rather than the "do as we politicians think or we snatch more money out of your pocketbook". This is not anti-feminist, it's anti-nanny-governments and authoritarian legislation.


Hello, I am back. No money is being snatched out of anyone's pocketbooks. Families are granted thirteen months of paid leave by the government with a new baby - thirteen months that people without babies do not get, and two of these are reserved exclusively for fathers. If they do not use them, no money is taken out of their pocketbooks, but they do not receive this benefit that is granted by the government to those families who choose to have babies. Nothing is being taken away from them; rather, limitations are being placed on a "perk." As the article says,

Quote:
“I always thought if we made it easier for women to work, families would eventually choose a more equal division of parental leave by themselves,” said Mr. Westerberg, 67. “But I gradually became convinced that there wasn’t all that much choice.”

Sweden, he said, faced a vicious circle. Women continued to take parental leave not just for tradition’s sake but because their pay was often lower, thus perpetuating pay differences. Companies, meanwhile, made clear to men that staying home with baby was not compatible with a career.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

25 Apr 2012, 3:47 pm

CloudLayer wrote:
TM wrote:
MotherKnowsBest wrote:
Can I wade in and give an example, even though I haven't read the preceeding pages to see if it's already been given?

In Sweden, feminist capital of the world, feminists campaigned for, and acheived, paternity leave for new dads equal to maternity leave for women. Both parents now get 6 months each.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/world ... wanted=all

How can I put this, when you force someone to take parental leave or lose the economic benefits, you will get equality. Personally I'm for the "each couple has to decide what they want" model, rather than the "do as we politicians think or we snatch more money out of your pocketbook". This is not anti-feminist, it's anti-nanny-governments and authoritarian legislation.


Hello, I am back. No money is being snatched out of anyone's pocketbooks. Families are granted thirteen months of paid leave by the government with a new baby - thirteen months that people without babies do not get, and two of these are reserved exclusively for fathers. If they do not use them, no money is taken out of their pocketbooks, but they do not receive this benefit that is granted by the government to those families who choose to have babies. Nothing is being taken away from them; rather, limitations are being placed on a "perk." As the article says,


Extra time off work with pay that are not transferable and that you lose if you do not use them how the government orders you to, is taking things away from people.

How many of those who do not use it would like it to be transferable to their partner? After all, its paid time off that is being taken away. You can phrase it how you like, but:

38 work weeks with 100% pay - 40 work weeks per year at 100% pay = - 2 work weeks with pay.



CloudLayer
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 308

25 Apr 2012, 4:23 pm

TM wrote:
CloudLayer wrote:
TM wrote:
MotherKnowsBest wrote:
Can I wade in and give an example, even though I haven't read the preceeding pages to see if it's already been given?

In Sweden, feminist capital of the world, feminists campaigned for, and acheived, paternity leave for new dads equal to maternity leave for women. Both parents now get 6 months each.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/world ... wanted=all

How can I put this, when you force someone to take parental leave or lose the economic benefits, you will get equality. Personally I'm for the "each couple has to decide what they want" model, rather than the "do as we politicians think or we snatch more money out of your pocketbook". This is not anti-feminist, it's anti-nanny-governments and authoritarian legislation.


Hello, I am back. No money is being snatched out of anyone's pocketbooks. Families are granted thirteen months of paid leave by the government with a new baby - thirteen months that people without babies do not get, and two of these are reserved exclusively for fathers. If they do not use them, no money is taken out of their pocketbooks, but they do not receive this benefit that is granted by the government to those families who choose to have babies. Nothing is being taken away from them; rather, limitations are being placed on a "perk." As the article says,


Extra time off work with pay that are not transferable and that you lose if you do not use them how the government orders you to, is taking things away from people.

How many of those who do not use it would like it to be transferable to their partner? After all, its paid time off that is being taken away. You can phrase it how you like, but:

38 work weeks with 100% pay - 40 work weeks per year at 100% pay = - 2 work weeks with pay.


By the way the law actually reserves the two months for the "minority parent," which can be either male or female.

What is the 38 in this example though, and what is the 40?



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

26 Apr 2012, 7:58 am

Terlingua wrote:
Does anyone have any examples as to how feminism helps men? I am not looking for speculative or hypothetical answers, but actual real world examples of feminism helping the other sex. Thanks.


1. Hyphenated last names. Those will become intriguing when the next generation has four last names to hyphenate together.

2. Most brides' wedding vows no longer oblige them to "obey" their husbands. Men are no longer, by default, expected to lead and provide for a family. Now, the wife can have a career, and the husband can lead a more relaxed life, and play with his x-box all day.



sage_gerard
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 20 Apr 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 149

26 Apr 2012, 9:10 am

Quote:
I may just be a stupid, sexist bigot, but it seems weird to me that if feminism is pro-equality, in every respect for both genders, then they should practice what they preach and have 50% representation of both genders on their board and amongst their leadership.


50% representation of both genders leaves the possibility of an all-male or all-female board where half of them have a complementary gender identity. (50% men, 50% "women trapped in men's bodies")

Equal outcome advocates would not hire members of any group that met their assigned quota. Picture being told that you are not allowed to work somewhere because "we have enough of your kind". Oooh! Here's some drama: Imagine that you could not get a position because a tomboy got the last spot.

I might not worry much about disproportionate representation of people if there is a fair representation of diverse ideas. In other words, I would not be too bothered by non-diverse authority if they empathized with all socially viable ideas that were not their own.

Thing is, you would have to rotate power often, because that level of rationality does not tend to last too long. :?

On the other hand, there is a problem with equal representation based on sex, too. It would be harder for people who actually are of another sex or culture to conform to the ideologies of the ingroup since they were raised with unlike interests. That is, women should be included in the men's network because they identify things that men consistently do not. This helps the integrity of the whole, but it also assumes that looking different means thinking different.


_________________
"Sex, streams, friends accessing private members... Either I am just discovering unintentional innuendo or Stroustrup is a pervert."


ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

30 Apr 2012, 3:14 pm

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4kTXdeFenw[/youtube]



Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

30 Apr 2012, 3:16 pm

ArrantPariah wrote:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4kTXdeFenw[/youtube]


:lol: but for real I am a feminist but that was funny.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

30 Apr 2012, 8:52 pm

The Amazing Atheist is funny, too.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qt_0ko4njmc[/youtube]

He seems not to care too much for feminism--and has a large number of videos on the subject.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

30 Apr 2012, 9:28 pm

Cleared because the mods removed the post it was in response to and thus it seems irrelevant now.



Last edited by TM on 30 Apr 2012, 9:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,148
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

30 Apr 2012, 9:35 pm

And how many women would beat the heck out of these other women if they so much as tried because they like a world with available pole? I'm thinking close to 100% minus 'them'.

(comment related to the existential question of the male apparatus)


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


Last edited by techstepgenr8tion on 30 Apr 2012, 9:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

hyperlexian
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 22,023
Location: with bucephalus

30 Apr 2012, 9:40 pm

i removed the post about castration as it was violent and sexist, but i left the responses in place as they didn't quote it. just wanted to let you know why the thread makes less sense.


_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

30 Apr 2012, 9:42 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
And how many women would beat the heck out of these other women if they so much as tried because they like a world with available pole? I'm thinking close to 100% minus 'them'.


Fairly close I'm sure. Net discussions have a tendency to bring out the extremist in people.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

01 May 2012, 12:43 am

wrt the 'Amazing Atheist' referenced above (nsfw language):
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... immolates/



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

01 May 2012, 7:34 am

hyperlexian wrote:
i removed the post about castration as it was violent and sexist, but i left the responses in place as they didn't quote it. just wanted to let you know why the thread makes less sense.


Thank you, Mother WP

:hail:


By the way, your joke about eliminating 99 percent of men was BRILLIANT!! !


:hail: