52
53

The left needs to address the rise of identity politics (politics.co.uk)

NotSoBlue_Hobbesian が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]pingu10 [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

The "women are wonderful" effect is an observable phenomenon and has been known about for decades. Look it up.

There is also the fact that it is illegal to mutilate the genitals of young girls, and rightly so, but it is perfectly legal to carry about a bizarre Jewish mutilation ritual on young boys. Women are also the assumed custodian in child custody cases and this is borne out by the fact that they do indeed receive custody in 90% of cases.

These are just a few examples of the issues men face

[–]NotSoBlue_Hobbesian[S] [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

But isn't male competitive behaviour the cause of the "women are wonderful effect" and male outgroup bias?

Do you think men face more issues than women?

Who is to blame for these issues? Is anyone to blame?

[–]pingu10 [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

But isn't male competitive behaviour the cause of the "women are wonderful effect" and male outgroup bias?

Women have been shown to have an in-group bias. The fact that it is an observed fact that women have an in group bias and men do not casts doubts on the view that men are the most sexist gender. That being said, a male out group bias could also be an operative variable.

Do you think men face more issues than women?

I think this is demonstrably the case. The fact that millions of boys are subjected to a Jewish mutilation ritual whereas the inverse is illegal for girls is telling, and it shows the concept of male disposability that the person above was talking about. This is the same disposability that lead to the "women and children first" meme which is ever present in our society. In any cases of disasters it is assumed that women and children should be prioritized over men. Men should be sacrificed and left to die and women and children should be saved.

Ultimately I think this is a result of biology, women being the child bearers are of more evolutionary worth than men. You can populate a society with just a few men, however if you only have a few women, it is going to take a lot longer to repopulate.

Who is to blame for these issues?

Biology is to blame for some of them, but also vested political interests for others. The reason a Jewish mutilation practise is allowed to be conducted on the genitals of boys is due to the concept of male disposability. Muslims have equal rituals for young girls and these are rightly illegal and people who commit these gruesome acts are sent to prison.

[–]NotSoBlue_Hobbesian[S] [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Women have been shown to have an in-group bias. The fact that it is an observed fact that women have an in group bias and men do not casts doubts on the view that men are the most sexist gender. That being said, a male out group bias could also be an operative variable.

Have you considered why women may have an in-group bias? Given male competitive nature, the out-group bias is pretty obvious, specifically when you consider that we're a sexually selective species.

The fact that millions of boys are subjected to a Jewish mutilation ritual whereas the inverse is illegal for girls is telling, and it shows the concept of male disposability that the person above was talking about.

But it isn't just jews that circumcise... This didn't become the fashion in the US because they wanted to be more jewish. The fact that you're english and are using circumcision as an example of male issues in the UK is a little weird.

Also, female circumcision is a qualitatively different procedure that involves the partial or complete removal of external genitalia and often involves sewing up the vagina. This would be the equivalent of removing the glans on a male. How can you possibly compare the two in the way you have?

Biology is to blame for some of them, but also vested political interests for others. The reason a Jewish mutilation practise is allowed to be conducted on the genitals of boys is due to the concept of male disposability.

Where is the vested political interest here?

Muslims have equal rituals for young girls and these are rightly illegal and people who commit these gruesome acts are sent to prison.

I think in the UK, there hasn't been a single prosecution for this in a very long time, if ever. Correct me if I'm wrong....

I'm seeing a lot of complaining about the fact that we're a sexually selective species here....

[–]pingu10 [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

This would be the equivalent of removing the glans on a male. How can you possibly compare the two in the way you have?

This is feminist propaganda. They compare the worst occurrences of FGM to the most "humane" versions of male circumcision. In reality there are extremes of both. There are FGM procedures that extend from the most severe form which you have detailed including the total removal of the clitoris the sewing shut of the vagina, to the superficial "trimming" of the extremities of the labia. Conversely, there are versions of male circumcision, extending to the full removal of the foreskin as well as forcible castration of the scrotum and the testes, which when carried out in Africa and the Middle East is just as inhumane as the FGM version, to the trimming of the foreskin or of the trimming of a small section of the frenulum.

You have bought into the feminist propaganda which seeks to compare the absolute worst occurrences of FGM to the "best" occurrences of male circumcision. In reality there is a spectrum of extremity in both cases. I should point out that even the more "humane" forms of FGM, such as the superficial trimming of the extremities of the labia, carried out by a medical profession under anaesthetic, are still illegal in the UK, and rightly so. When we talk of FGM we are not automatically talking of a conscious girl having her entire vagina carved out with a sharp stone in the slums of Africa and the Middle East.

Have you considered why women may have an in-group bias?

I've just detailed to you that I think biology is an operative variable. This doesn't therefore mean that there is no point supporting an end to male disposability, particularly when it comes to actions that are carried out at the behest of the rights of boys, with the full support and complicity of the British state.

[–]NotSoBlue_Hobbesian[S] [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Are you saying there is a tradition of castrating male babies and calling it circumcision? That this is a routine activity?

[–]pingu10 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

In some parts of Africa, yes it is.

[–]NotSoBlue_Hobbesian[S] [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Ok, and what would be the purpose of this?

[–]pingu10 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Backwards cultural and religious practises based on ancient screeds and nonsensical, gibberish notions of witchcraft. Similar to the reason FGM is carried out, as well as the more "humane" versions of male circumcision carried out in the West.

[–]NotSoBlue_Hobbesian[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That really isn't the reasoning behind FGM.

This castration circumcision doesn't actually happen, does it Pingu?