xTreme feminism!
- Thread starter strawman
- Start date
- Status
Dave
Staff member
It's like Rule 34, but for racism/sexism. "For every condition there is an irrational dislike or hatred for that group."
Misandry does exist, but it may not be at the level that some think it is. Anti-Christian bigotry exists, although it may not be as big as some think it is. Racism against whites is real, although it might not be as big as some think it is.
You get the picture. There are circumstances where people are looked down upon not because of anything they did but because they are a dude. I think this lady fits really well into that category. People don't try and eradicate 90% of something they like, unless it's booze.
Or bacon.
Dave
Staff member
I still don't like bacon.
[DOUBLEPOST=1358957614][/DOUBLEPOST](FTFY)
The idea of people thinking misandry is some big threat just makes me laugh and laugh and laugh.
Necronic
Staff member
It's very similar to the "Black on White" racism. Like people claiming that the NAACP is a racist organization (had someone at work explain that gem to me. But the thing is that, while these things are not practical concerns (I'm not losing job opportunities because I am white/male), they are most definitely philosophical concerns. Going back to the race side of things that is primarily the reason I don't like Malcolm X. He had a couple of good points, but the foundation of his argumen was basically racial superiority, which compromises his position in an argumen about equality.
The same is true of misandry. When a feminist movement has, as a base assumption, gender superiority, they then abdicate a right to argue for equality. The only difference between racial and gender superiority is that race has little to no genetic effect on a person's strength/weakness (there are some significan differences, like some Asians being unable to process alcohol), while genders are clearly and significantly different genetically.
So that makes the equality argument a lot more complex. As opposed to racial equality, where the fundamental argumen is that races are fundamentally equal in creation, gender equality is that genders should fundamentally be treated equally. And there's the problem with misandry, as it completely violates the concept of treating people equally.
So ANYway I can't help but play the devil's advocate here.
As far as I can tell, the male subspecies of Homo Sapiens is a genetic mutation. One which was necessary for the whole of homo-sapiens to progress, but, like the appendix, no longer serves a useful function.
Face it. We've got incomplete and/or broken DNA, which expresses traits not strictly conducive to a harmonious society.
In many countries we are already allowing pregnant women to perform genetic testing for chromosomal abnormalities, and terminate the pregnancy based on that testing. We already have processes for performing gender selection prior to implantation.
As a human race, it might be time to take a hard look at the male subspecies, and identify it as a mutation, one which is no longer needed.
As far as I can tell, the male subspecies of Homo Sapiens is a genetic mutation. One which was necessary for the whole of homo-sapiens to progress, but, like the appendix, no longer serves a useful function.
Face it. We've got incomplete and/or broken DNA, which expresses traits not strictly conducive to a harmonious society.
In many countries we are already allowing pregnant women to perform genetic testing for chromosomal abnormalities, and terminate the pregnancy based on that testing. We already have processes for performing gender selection prior to implantation.
As a human race, it might be time to take a hard look at the male subspecies, and identify it as a mutation, one which is no longer needed.
Sis? Is that you?
Sorry, who said that again?
So ANYway I can't help but play the devil's advocate here.
As far as I can tell, the male subspecies of Homo Sapiens is a genetic mutation. One which was necessary for the whole of homo-sapiens to progress, but, like the appendix, no longer serves a useful function.
Face it. We've got incomplete and/or broken DNA, which expresses traits not strictly conducive to a harmonious society.
In many countries we are already allowing pregnant women to perform genetic testing for chromosomal abnormalities, and terminate the pregnancy based on that testing. We already have processes for performing gender selection prior to implantation.
As a human race, it might be time to take a hard look at the male subspecies, and identify it as a mutation, one which is no longer needed.
You really should be using a stronger password for your account.
Dave
Staff member
From an EMAIL FROM CHAZ:So ANYway I can't help but play the devil's advocate here.
As far as I can tell, the male subspecies of Homo Sapiens is a genetic mutation. One which was necessary for the whole of homo-sapiens to progress, but, like the appendix, no longer serves a useful function.
Face it. We've got incomplete and/or broken DNA, which expresses traits not strictly conducive to a harmonious society.
In many countries we are already allowing pregnant women to perform genetic testing for chromosomal abnormalities, and terminate the pregnancy based on that testing. We already have processes for performing gender selection prior to implantation.
As a human race, it might be time to take a hard look at the male subspecies, and identify it as a mutation, one which is no longer needed.
AN EMAIL!! Look what you've all driven the poor guy to do!
Chaz - get on twitter and tweet me! I rarely visit twitter these days, but if you tweet @halforums I'll see it on the forum front page occasionally.
@stienman is my twitter, fyi.
Besides, such manifestos aren't supposed to be based on fact, they're merely to convince people to think a certain way about a certain subject.
Lastly, how many scientific holes does a block of swiss cheese have, exactly?
@stienman is my twitter, fyi.
Besides, such manifestos aren't supposed to be based on fact, they're merely to convince people to think a certain way about a certain subject.
Lastly, how many scientific holes does a block of swiss cheese have, exactly?
Aspholes aren't. They're psychological holes.
But if you want to play devil's advocate, you have to be a bit more refined than a manifesto!
Replace the 'our DNA is broken/incomplete, whatever', which is too blatant, and instead give us a couple points about why males really are so awful.
You can leave the rest of the scientific holes in, they work in a manifesto-exaggerated metaphore
Replace the 'our DNA is broken/incomplete, whatever', which is too blatant, and instead give us a couple points about why males really are so awful.
You can leave the rest of the scientific holes in, they work in a manifesto-exaggerated metaphore
Psychology is a science!
Actually, it probably depends whether you consider Psychiatry and Psychology to be part of the same field. In practice, they're deeply interlinked, but in principle, the disciplines are radically different.
No.Psychology is a science!
Even if you don't consider them as the same field/science/whatevs (I usually don't), there's certainly a part of psychology that can be considered a science, right?
Yes, the part the enacts the scientific method.
That analogy doesn't really work.
Sure Behaviorism (now largely replaced by it's younger brother Cognative Behaviorism) and a few other branches that discard the large swaths of the mind that are not observable and direct attention toward what can be observed, tested, and repeated. Then there's the "english major" sections that handle things like a literary critique.[DOUBLEPOST=1358963169][/DOUBLEPOST]
Well I only ever took my one required economics class what do you expect
Necronic
Staff member
Meaning the part that doesn't involve Psychiatry (my gf is a Psychology PhD student and we have talked ad nauseum about "the problem of psychiatry")
Edit: it really is a significant problem. Psychiatrists recieve phenomenally little training in the study of Psychology (it's mostly medical school), but psychologists should not be prescribing medication without medical training.
Is that you, Nick?
- Status