HisDivineMajesty wrote:
I'm not saying you're a feminist. I'm saying that this opinion - and most women I speak to share that opinion - basically destroys any theoretical arguments for feminism based on equal treatment. Women have equal rights, but still like men who can take care of them. They want social and economic rights like it's 2012, but expect social and economic responsibility from men like it's 1950. And once again, there's a difference between your ideals and the truth. In this case, the truth is that defending other people from injustice isn't something natural, especially if they're grown men. If something really goes wrong, women can still expect preferential treatment.
I have seen the phenomenon of which you speak, and I disliked it intesnely when I was younger, I am not unaware of how it is being exploited today by those who seek to gain more privileges - rahter than seeking their rights be upheld and them upholding their responsibilities.
You won't ever hear me advocate for the rights/responsibilities coinflip-mesh thing of which you speak. They have two choices, either behave like a lady, in which case she will be treated like one, or take care of herself.
If it's unnatural, then there must be something very wrong with me.

Quote:
That's what people say. What they do is rather different. Most people would stand back and let it happen.
And I won't even say that's a bad thing. It's a human thing, and the ground rules are evident.
Ok - well then forgive me, because I have never been one of those to stand back and let it happen.
Does the group rules being evident make them
right? The only thing necessary for someone to commit an atrocity is for those who are there to be silent and do nothing - they have just assisted the perpetrator through their silence and their lack of actions.