For or against feminism(Plus exclusive Flame comic)

[Flame]

The others have said pretty much everything.
To have the chance to do what you like most (if you fit the requisites) is just something about human, not gender.

Males and females have advantages and disavantages on different things. A good thing is to know it and gain from it, yeah. But this don't have to become a rule on what you ARE ALLOWED to do.
You should be allowed to do what you want, and then decide what you CAN actually do it.

No one female here is asking to have a cock and use it as a rod to bash bushes, lol!
Not that man do this, actually, but meh. That's was just a paradoxal example.

Stop.

Stop looking at me! I did nothing to that bush!!

[Potjeh]

In other words if a woman is capable and desires to do say a traditional male profession, she should be able to.

This I can get on board with. What I have a problem with is when lower standards are applied to women when they're a minority in a field. For example, having lower cut-off point on physical fitness tests for joining the military is a terrible idea. If you're not strong enough to move a wounded squadmate to safety, you have no business being on the battlefield.

[Flame]

I think that army are well prepared for this and take only woman that can handle their duties. For example, not every armies have to be in front line.
I know nothing about this, but i find hard to imagine an army is so blind. He's not going to fail a mission just for some female that is fakely acting like a man.

[Potjeh]

It's not a problem for logistics or vehicle crews, but if a woman wants to be in infantry she should pass the same criteria as a man. A random google result tells me that a man needs to do 35 push-ups, and a woman only needs 13.

[MagicManICT]

Males and females have advantages and disavantages on different things. A good thing is to know it and gain from it, yeah.

And just to note: the only thing a woman can do that a man can't is have a child. And the only thing a man can do that a woman can't is... well, they can be significantly stronger (does have its advantages). Other little things exist, but in performance categories, there really isn't a huge margin in "better than" studies. Good training or education usually makes up for the difference.

No one female here is asking to have a cock and use it as a rod to bash bushes, lol!
Not that man do this, actually, but meh. That's was just a paradoxal example.

Since I know you're not highly fluent in English, Flame, I think we should ignore the double entendres here.

or maybe you really are saying what could be read into it, and in that case, yes, there are women that want this.

[Potjeh]

Well, in military, I guess you'd need slightly less space for female crews in tanks, so you could carry a couple extra rounds or something.

[MagicManICT]

It's not a problem for logistics or vehicle crews, but if a woman wants to be in infantry she should pass the same criteria as a man. A random google result tells me that a man needs to do 35 push-ups, and a woman only needs 13.

What you didn't note is that requirements start dropping with age starting at 20. If I recall right, a 30 year old man has the same requirement as a 18 year old woman in the US military. Also, it seems like that's the physical requirement for enlistment in the Army no matter the job. (At least it was when I went to enlist at the age of 20 before I had taken the ASVAB... denied for health issues. Would have been in tech field had I been accepted, and probably had the Navy wanting me to join to be a Nuke Engineer.) Specific jobs, Special Forces, tank corps, pilots, etc. all have their own special requirements. As far as stringent requirements go, Infantry is probably the lowest of the physical jobs.

Well, in military, I guess you'd need slightly less space for female crews in tanks, so you could carry a couple extra rounds or something.

Let's see... Average male weight (in pounds) is something like 180-200(80-90 kg or so), average female weight is something like 120-140 (55-65). That's 50 lb (25 kg) per person. An average tank crew is 4 or so people (since so much is automated now), so that'd be 1-2 rounds, or enough fuel to go an extra 15-30 minutes?

[LadyV]

This I can get on board with. What I have a problem with is when lower standards are applied to women when they're a minority in a field. For example, having lower cut-off point on physical fitness tests for joining the military is a terrible idea. If you're not strong enough to move a wounded squadmate to safety, you have no business being on the battlefield.

So are we to ban men from being pilots? Women are lighter, have better dexterity and reaction times... Ability is relative to your function. Can that same woman lift another woman soldier? Your applying a situation to a wide span instead of in context. If a woman in a combat situation will be expected to carry another wounded soldier then yes she should be able to. If she is a non combat unit then no she should not be expected. Obviously all military are trained ot fight if need be but requirements should apply to what you directly need, not every possible circumstance.

[loftar]

I think of feminism as I do of any other Jacobin mid-night egalitarian calculation. People are different and much discrimination is done on reasonable ground. Please keep in mind the actual meaning of the word "discrimination" not as a mean or grudgeful action, but simply as making distinctions between one thing and another.

I'm obviously in no position to do so, but if we were to hire, say, an extra artist or something for Haven, had two otherwise equally qualified candidates, but one were a woman in her mid-20s, you can bet I'd be worried that she might quit soon again due to child-bearing. Or take more days off due to the women's statistically significantly higher amounts of sick leave. Likewise, if she were to agree to a lower wage, that might make me reconsider. Of course, the situation is hypothetical not only in that we're not in such a position but also in that no two people are "otherwise equally qualified", but it is a real factor among several.

The same can, of course, be said for any other "disprivileged" group. Of course an immigrant with a poorer knowledge of Swedish or a clearly foreign social protocol would have to make up for that somehow. If I were to move to another country, I wouldn't expect to be treated equally with the natives in those aspects.

Some might argue that it's just an irrational prejudice to think that all women take more sick-leave or have children in their 20s. You don't know if she, specifically, is like that. You don't know if that particular immigrant will be disconcertingly foreign in his manners. And I don't, of course -- it is prejudice, but not all prejudices are irrational or false. Precisely since I don't know her, I have nothing but prejudices to guide me. If a telemarketer calls me up to let me test a new product "for free", you can also bet that I will assume that it is not actually free, even though this is just as prejudicial. If I'm in a dark alley at night and two black men walk towards me swinging a chain, I won't be assuming that they intend to ask me for directions. If I choosing between two loaves of bread, I am going to factor in my prejudice that the darker bread tastes better. I'm sure going to count on my prejudice that the sun is going to rise tomorrow and that water is going to flow out of my tap when I open it. There are no qualitative differences between these various prejudices.

If I, as a man, were to seek employment at a preschool, I think it is right for the employer to be more suspicious that I may be a child predator.

Of course, this is not to say that it is not a virtue for a person to be inclusive, try to look past prejudices, treat others with dignity and be generally generous. It is, and it should be encouraged, but there is a balance to be struck at some point, and no statute of law can strike this balance with mathematical precision. It has to be discovered and continually adjusted individually by everyone according to their station and situation.

The Stranger within my gate,
He may be true or kind,
But he does not talk my talk--
I cannot feel his mind.
I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
But not the soul behind.

[ewlol]

Why do we even need equality? I thought the whole purpose of men and women was to be different. Some people should just accept that not everyone has the same opportunities and they never will. Why can't you be fine with the cards you were dealt?

I don't know, but this whole "you're special and the entire world revolves around you!" kind of modern parenting doesn't seem to be working very well.

Are you black? Are you a woman? Have you ever thought to put yourself in the shoes of the marginalized?

I think if you lived one day as a black man, you would understand why we need more equality. Do you want white, privileged women to clutch their purses in fear as you walk past them in the city? Do you want to fear going to jail every time you are pulled over by the cops (and get pulled over more frequently)? Do you want to have a statistically higher chance of going to prison in your life, and serving a longer term? Do you want to have to work five times harder than most white folk to land a job in a STEM field? Do you want to just be born into a situation where you have to work a lot harder than the white man to achieve excellence in your interests?

I hope you were just trolling, but even then, you just took the troll way too far.

You know, there is something quite hopeful about the changing ethos in parenting and schooling. I truly believe the idea that everyone has something unique and special they can contribute to society is a good one.

I invite you to present evidence on how this "you're special and the entire world revolves around you!" principle is a failing one. I mean, you twisted it enough already. Nobody is saying "the world revolved around you". If anything, they are saying "you have something special and productive that you can contribute to society", which is quite the opposite of the bullshit you just retorted.