Philosophy Now Forum

LMAO @ "gold schlong."

Psy, I don't have a problem with any of how you changed up my story. I would have to agree with you. It happens to men to. What I am saying is if you value yourself, you will attract people who value you. You will eliminate the ones who are not kind, because only an unkind person would try to take advantage of your good nature. I don't care what you say psy, there are men and women out there who prey on a good person's nature. If you show them any part of vulnerable side the will eat you up and spit you out.

Since I am a woman, I am coming from that perspective. Did you see how nameless treated me in the mary daly thread when I allowed him to see my weakness? He came in for the kill because he thought I was weak. This is how I discern good kind people from people who are jerks...and it works every time.

On a first date it is difficult to know who is a jerk and who is not. I would not start off vulnerable because I did not want to take the chance I would be alone somewhere with a jerk...that could be dangerous. So I acted this way in self defense. Then I would observe...how did he treat the waitress, how did he speak of other people....do you know I actually had a first date once who during the conversation inquired how come a girlfriend of mine didn't wear more makeup because she was so ugly? I was out the door before he could even get the rest of the sentence out! I have never known an unkind person to change their spots. They may say they are changed if they get embarrassed in public, but rarely do they change in their hearts. An unkind person is an unkind person.

Chipper chicken? Well, don't say I didn't warn you.

You're right, I should've said chocolate



A pedantic friend of mine pointed out that in the latter instance it should read 'too'



I agree that there are people out their who prey on peoples' good nature. I do not think, though, that a good nature is necessarilly a vulnerability. There is all manner of life in this world and its ecosystem, and I would not begrudge a mosquito my blood. I've plenty stored and its constantly generated.



But you are also a human of a particular height with a particular colour of hair, a particular profession, particular attitudes on various matters.

Why select out your womanhood?

One of the reasons that has been identified for women generally being paid less for the same job is that in many jobs wages are individually negotiated, with the results of the negotiations being kept privately. Women tend to set their negotiating aims lower, negotiate less aggressively, and due to lack of rigorous practice also less effectively. There are, however, plenty of women who are just as aspirational, aggressive and skilful at negotiation as the average man, and plenty of men who are equivalent to the average woman.

The injustice is not that women are paid less, but that people are forced by their situation to negotiate individually and so be paid in accordance with traits far removed from the far better measures of performance that are available.

The injustice is not against women, but against poor negotiators whether they be men or women, though more women than men.

This automatic and myopic association with those of like-gender is not constructive and ultimately hinders examination of the real underpinning traits which are being universalised as the sole possession of one gender or the other.



I'm afraid I did not. Link?



I won't disagree that genuine change is rare, but I will say that almost everyone is unkind at times.



This may seem terribly post-modern of me, but I have before dated a woman who, I suppose, in many ways took the traditional male role in the relationship. She paid at restaurants &c., and I wanted to select whatever was cheapest, she was having none of it and I had to insist that the cheap menu item really was what most appealed to me

My point is that people are not stereotypes, they are individuals, and as such they cannot be understood via stereotypes.

People, men or women, should not put up with abusive partners. You speak of the hardships your friends went through, but it was not too long ago that I heard Tom talking about a series of his friends who were dragged through unfortunate divorce litigation, and which he felt had been harpooned by spiteful and abusive wives. I certainly know men who feel that their partners use them as slaves, and resent them for it.

You speak of how women should not put up with abusive partners, and I just don't understand, since you seem to think that men should not put up with abusive partners either, why you so often use gender-neutral language when making gender-neutral points.

But then, heres the kicker. From your description of what you think women should be getting out of a relationship, and I'm sorry to say this because I like you, the relationship sounds abusive to me.

---

Personally I do not think there is any ubiquitous gender inequality, but rather that there is the confluence of various factors that make for generally unequal conditions between individuals, and that a lot of the attempts that have been made to counter the effects which generally militate against women have, rather than removing the original factors, simply complicated things further creating additional problems.

A pedantic friend of thine points out that that in the latter instance it should read 'there'.

Death.

Except I'm assuming in this instance there was no pedantic friend, whereas in the former case there was and I was acting as a mere messenger.

Hi Psy,

P:You're right, I should've said chocolate

AS:Yes, chocolate would be much more fun to devour! Me being the man hater and all....LOL.

P:A pedantic friend of mine pointed out that in the latter instance it should read 'too'

AS: Please tell your friend that I would be more than pleased to have someone edit all of my grammatical errors....free of charge of course! That would be AWESOME!

P:I agree that there are people out their who prey on peoples' good nature. I do not think, though, that a good nature is necessarilly a vulnerability.

AS: It is to this woman, psy. Because I have been tortured by men in the past and I will never allow myself to be tortured again. I would rather die first. So I am very calculated about who I allow in my life. I have spent a lifetime trying to perfect a way to know kind from unkind. Not superficial varieties but the real true dangerous kind. There will always be people who hurt you and I can accept that. Most mean no harm...they are just living their lives and you have accidentally gotten in the way. It is not unkind to want to lead your own life your own way. It's the ones who take pleasure in taking your very essence away as if you were put on this earth solely to entertain them, that I wish to eliminate. It is within my power to do so because it is my life and it will go as I say. As a child I didn't have a choice. I do now.

P:Why select out your womanhood?

AS: Because I like my womanhood. I enjoy being a woman psy. I don't want to be a man. It is a challenge to have this particular handicap (yes, I feel being a woman is a handicap...because there are a ton of men out there who do not see a woman as a human being...they see a woman as someone who was put on the earth to give them pleasure. Men don't have this particular handicap. it is rare when someone sees them as a thing.) However, although being a woman is a handicap doesn't mean it doesn't have it's perks. There is something quite delightful in being underestimated. It is fun. There is an adorable scene from one of my favorite films, "Meet me in St. Lous." This young mischievous little girl goes out on Halloween and pulls a prank that almost has disastrous results. When she is finally home safe...all for a little cut on her lip...she is telling the grand story of her adventure to her sis about how the police got involved but were none the wiser that it was her mischief that caused the whole thing. She laughs in a naughty way and says, "Since when do policemen pay attention to little girls!?" LOL On the one hand it sucks not being given the credit of being human...on the other hand it is so much fun to get away with shit because no one thinks you are human.

P:One of the reasons that has been identified for women generally being paid less for the same job is that in many jobs wages are individually negotiated, with the results of the negotiations being kept privately. Women tend to set their negotiating aims lower, negotiate less aggressively, and due to lack of rigorous practice also less effectively. There are, however, plenty of women who are just as aspirational, aggressive and skilful at negotiation as the average man, and plenty of men who are equivalent to the average woman.

The injustice is not that women are paid less, but that people are forced by their situation to negotiate individually and so be paid in accordance with traits far removed from the far better measures of performance that are available.

The injustice is not against women, but against poor negotiators whether they be men or women, though more women than men.

This automatic and myopic association with those of like-gender is not constructive and ultimately hinders examination of the real underpinning traits which are being universalised as the sole possession of one gender or the other.

AS: Uh...Psy? Who are you talking to? (looking around to see if there is some official standing behind me) It's me....remember...you can talk in plain English....I have no clue what this educated banter is trying to relate. You might as well try Ebonics...you may have more luck...lol.

P:I won't disagree that genuine change is rare, but I will say that almost everyone is unkind at times.

AS: Yes, everyone is unkind at times. That is not what I am saying. What I am saying is there are things I am attracted to in a man....kindness, charity, generosity, intelligence, patience etc. Just like some people value beauty, long hair, nice ass, etc. Why should I want a man who has none of the qualities I admire? Do you think I should force myself to love satyr because it's only fair to him? I don't see anything wrong with weeding out the men in my particular style. So far it has worked for me. I am very happy in my relationship not to mention by me taking the time to responsibly choose a man with whom I could see myself with in the long run, (instead of just making due because I was lonely) I have caused less heartache to all involved. Choosing a mate is the most important decision of your life. This was going to be the father of my children. It wasn't just about me. It was important to me that I found someone who would cherish us. Who would not leave us. I don't know if you can understand this. You had a dad that was around. I did not. I think it would have been irresponsible for me to bed someone selfishly without knowing what type of person they are and take the chance I would allow my children to be abandoned or tortured by a lout. I had much at stake when I allowed someone into my life.

P:This may seem terribly post-modern of me, but I have before dated a woman who, I suppose, in many ways took the traditional male role in the relationship. She paid at restaurants &c., and I wanted to select whatever was cheapest, she was having none of it and I had to insist that the cheap menu item really was what most appealed to me

AS: Cute story. I do that alot with my girlfriends. Men are a different story. Because some men like to own things in return for a meal.

P:My point is that people are not stereotypes, they are individuals, and as such they cannot be understood via stereotypes.

AS: Not all...most. The reality is that there are stereotypes. Why do you think we have gender inequality in the first place? Why do you think that boys play differently on the playground than girls? Oh sure...there are a few who cross over to the other side, but by and large there are stereotypes. There is nothing wrong with telling the truth psy. I have not had one women in my life torture me...and I was raised in a houseful of women! Add a couple of men to the mix and all of a sudden there is torture?! Well, then you tell me...what happened? Did I just get 'lucky'? Was it a rare event that never happens but for this one case? Come on! Let's be real here...the truth is there are more male prisons because there are more men who commit crimes. There are more women and men who are victims of violent crimes committed by men than by women. It is simply a fact.

P:People, men or women, should not put up with abusive partners. You speak of the hardships your friends went through, but it was not too long ago that I heard Tom talking about a series of his friends who were dragged through unfortunate divorce litigation, and which he felt had been harpooned by spiteful and abusive wives. I certainly know men who feel that their partners use them as slaves, and resent them for it.

AS: Okay...I am sorry but I would say to these men...cry me a river. Here's why...because the majority of the time it is a mutual thing....men and women abuse each other in divorce court, they resent each other...the whole divorce thing is ugly. All the more reason to know who you are marrying! People are foolish to allow their genitals to trick them into thinking they are in love. It is irresponsible. I am not talking about resentment here. I am talking about something much deeper. Boohoo...divorce happens. It's no ones fault because both men and women share the blame equally. However, violence is another thing. And I say that most times it is the woman who is a victim...not the other way around.

P:But then, heres the kicker. From your description of what you think women should be getting out of a relationship, and I'm sorry to say this because I like you, the relationship sounds abusive to me.

AS: I like you too psy. Just because you like me doesn't mean you have to agree with me. We can still be friends and disagree. I don't see how knowing what I want in a relationship sounds abusive. I have a certain way I wish to live my life which seems very reasonable to me. I want to live in a peaceful atmosphere. I want a place I can come home and feel free to be who I am. I want to go about my business without worrying about being tortured. I think these are very reasonable requests for anyone to make. I am not forcing anyone to treat me this way. I am just saying that these are my demands. If the person I choose to be with can't abide by them then there is the door. See ya! Call me a bitch if you like but I will make no apologies for my stance on this matter. It is what it is.

Enemies sometimes address each other as "friends".According to Ψ's source, womanhood does not tend to be a feature that causes someone to be paid less. Being a poor negotiator is the key feature that earns you fewer monies. On average, men are tougher negotiators than women and therefore paid more, on average.

Thanks again I blame! So if I am understanding psy right, he is saying that men should be allowed to use their individual talents to out perform women but women should not not use their unique talents to negotiate their way through life because it is not fair to men? If this is this is his point then I have to disagree. What women may lack in negotiating skills they make up for in stubborn intuition and clever strategies which make men weak in the knees. All's fair in love and war. However, this does not mean I think all women are one way and all men are another. It's just that we tend to think of a woman's strengths not as valuable as a man's and therefore sneaky and hurtful. When women negotiate it's often called abusive and manipulative rather than a successful strategy. So of course women would shy away from negotiating on a man's level...because again...most women want to be seen as 'good' in societies eyes.

I highly doubt that.

My point was that any policy intended to target a particular broad-sweeping group such as women vastly over-simplifies the situation and so manages to make things worse for some while ameliorating the situation for others without addressing the root cause, and so is in this way harmful.

In regard to negotiation it is my contention that wages should not be dealt with on the basis of individual private negotiation as this is not a reasonable representation of a person's ability to work or contribution to the system and is unnecessarily punitive to those who are poor negotiators for whatever reason, whether they be men, women, white, black or whatever. Women do tend to be poorer negotiators on average than men, and this plays some part in wage disparity between the genders. Once poor-negotiators of either gender are no longer troubled by this unfair system we will be able to see precisely how much the wage disparity between the genders comes down to other factors (such as sexism) and begin to address them with a properly proportional response.