You know, I'm not even gonna go here....cause it just ain't worth it. The idea, that only "liberals" are enlightened and the only ones who use their brain though....wow.

The incredible arrogance and sheer delusional aspect of that type of thinking, is dumbfounding....but, no, I'm gonna just let it go. And liberals wonder why many "average" folks despise them....ROFL

I mean, how can I rail against a woman who puts "Tits" in her username. I'm willing to bet you are a natural fuggin' blonde though, in every sense of the word.....heh. :)

These are not free choices that are being made. You are going to love this one...your entire post speaks of false consciousness. You think that women enjoy being in the occupations they are and enjoy working traditional 'pink-collar' jobs, then you suffer from a serious dearth of imagination. There is a difference between someone wanting to do a job, and someone being told there are only certain jobs that they can do. Think about it. If you were a male executive at a company, would you want to hop on the equal rights bandwagon, knowing that it would increase the relative competition in your field, making it harder for you to rise to the top? Absolutely not. And yet you honestly believe that women aren't having deleterious messages sent through them through various forms of media and throughout our culture that affect their ability to make decisions that aren't influenced by these various messages?? If you say no, then I'm going to take it that you also believe that advertising has no effect on the purchases people make.

Your status as a woman does not give you any more weight in this argument than does my status of a man give me in a discussion about football.

Yes it does. Believe me you have to experience it...hormonal fluctuations and all.

And of course I believe advertising influences people buying products since I work in that industry.I am only adjunct faculty where I teach at night.

But you are making of case of nuture verus nature when it's a combination. As for those messages being "deleterious" that's just an opinion based on values. That implies the rearing of children or women's work as having no value and a man's job, a CEO's as superior. That's demeaning. That's my main beef with the feminazis position. We have the most important role...we create the future generation. I said all along that it's technology, including medical, that has allowed women more freedom to fulfull other roles as she can control reproduction. But you act like women don't like some of the choices they make and are just a stimulus-response Pavolian dog and who isn't sentient at all about it. You act like I'm advocating a return to chattel.



Look at the woman's history: Women's roles were a matter of sheer survival at one time for the race. Even in the Renaissance, which was no Renaissance for her, the average woman had fifteen births because only about 7 would survive and maybe 4 would make it to adulthood. Many women died in childbirth. It was even worse for the aristocratic women with the pressure of producing male heirs to keep property in the family. They'd have as many as 25 pregnancies. It was survival. It took up most of their lives and times. That's no longer true.

"How do you like that, Eva? I'm skull****ing Hitler!"

I'm not saying that some women wouldn't desire to rear children in a home environment, but I have a very hard time believing that the sheer number of women that do so, do so because they honestly desire to. Do you really think all people work jobs that they desire to? That's just naive. The fact that you call feminists feminazi's undermines your position...it bespeaks an extreme right wing hatred of progressivism on behalf of women.

Here is the difference: 95% of all CEOs are male, and yet you can honestly make an argument (and believe it) that there is true gender equity because only 5% of women truly desire to ascend to the top of the corporate ladder?? I find it far more likely that a great majority of women are held down precisely because they are not part of the boys club. Your position seems to be indicative of a desire to believe things are good so that you don't have to think about changing your ways than an honest analysis of how things really are.

Honestly, it is not naive. I was a professional first and worked in exactly the field I wanted to work in and loved it. A creative profession and self employed with good money. I never thought I'd say what I say today when I was in college. The images you call deleterious, they not traditional images that promote this whole idea that a woman can have it all...be at the top of a high paying career and still be a great relaxed and patient mom. And it's just not true. I found some things had to go or be completely frazzled and make a lot of mistakes on my job. I've other professional friends who found the same. Even Maria Shriver, a liberal found the same. She wrote a book on it.

You may be able to have it all but not all at the same time. I've a girlfriend who chooses to continue with the big salary but she uses babysitters 24/7. She spends no time with her kid at all. Her kid is also out of control. I notice this correlation with other kids too. Or it just costs some too much to work and it's cheaper to stay home. Best case scenarios is other types of work with flexible schedules or work from home set-ups.

Anyhow, once my daughter was born, and I had faxes being run into the hospital on current projects as I was ordered to a rush C-section, I WANTED to cut back on working and be home. After seeing my work in print, on billboards for national firms I thought: "What was I thinking? This is better than all that!"

I did not completely stop working, I kept my hand in it just not to the same degree. But you lose out in other ways moneywise and opportunity-wise when you make those choices. Some things about staying home can be boring and not stimulating too.

Yep! That's what I am saying...maybe not those exact numbers though. I should see if I can find this report for you. You don't get the big bucks for nothing. They have big responsibilities that are attached. These can conflict when you have children.

No they're not. I think a woman can find success in business...I did at one time. I have a gf with a PR firm that also does well. Self employment or having your own business is a way around those issues. You call the shots! You have a great product or service the market shouldn't care.

I find that inequality can even work to a woman's advantage...even in securing that work.

That's not to say I haven't met with blatant discrimination, I have. I had a rep drop me after I got pregnant making my becoming a Mom his basis. It turned out later I didn't care but he said something discriminatory and he used to give me the top clients. In fact I won an 2 Addy awards the year I had my daughter on a project he gave me.

You must be young Hamas. You can't get this stuff all out of book in an Ivory Tower. You gotta live some life. As far as the feminazis statement that's exactly what radical feminists are. Even Judge Roberts wife belongs to ifemnists which is not a radical femnist group but conservative/libertarian.

That was funny as hell.

One church believes that the Bible is inerrant and holds all the answers any of us need, and one doesn't. One type of church preaches that you are not to question the Bible, and one allows questioning. Sounds like her description fits pretty fairly to me, as far as I can tell. Sure, the descriptions of both sides are broad generalizations and only based on one's personal experience, but I think it's fair to say that the inerrance of the Bible, and whether it holds all the "answers" is a good measuring stick for the difference.

And as far as questioning someone's username, Kotter(?), why don't you go watch "Anchorman," and get over yourself. For someone who claims that the majority of his posts are based in humor, that one sure flew over your head... :rolleyes: ROFL ROFL

Exactly.

So you can just STFU about how bad a time you have when "yer' friend" comes to visit once a month unless you'd prefer to go retro and act as the host nation to an every 16 month infant luge competition through yer' pelvis. Hell, there's even shots and pills that stop that from happening.

If you live in America every race, religon, and sex has it MADE compared to 200 years ago...

Kotter does have a point though. It's no longer ok to judge another person's beliefs because if you do it's assumed YOU are the ignorant one.

It's flawed logic. To be smurt one must willing to admit validity and merrit in all belief systems, which you can't do because of the conflicts between belief systems. If I admit yours is as valid as mine I really can't believe 100% in mine, now can I?

Where is Baby Lee to invoke Godwin's Law of Nazi analogies when you need him :rolleyes:

Probably chained to the other 999 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean, I guess :banghead:

ROFL


That is an excellant point! :thumb:
Or you can just show courtesy and respect to what another believes, called good manners, without having to agree.

Bull$#it.

I don't have to respect your opinion, just your right to have one and voice it.

Then I get to voice mine... :)

Feminazi means they want to use force of law to make people do as they think should be done.

Anyhow...these links are not the original study which was pretty in depth but is the closest I could find. They in the main liberal sources but do cover some of what I said. I don't agree with their solutions though.

The 76-cent myth
Do women make less than men? The wage-gap ratio isn't the best gauge for pay discrimination, and overemphasizing it can undermine an important issue.
http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/21/comm...eryday/sahadi/

Guardian
http://www.businesspundit.com/502267...d_salaries.php

http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/census.../womenspay.htm

German study:
http://www.businesspundit.com/502267...d_salaries.php


Now,now on the lawyer thingy...we know that academics can't make it in the real world so they teach right?

Sounds good to me...