It's not possible always to link responsibilities to rights.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:02 pmWhat about male responsibilities? For responsibility is the conterpart of "rights and privileges."
Everyone forgets that. They think they can have the best anyone else has, without also accepting the worst...which they ignore.
So are women fit to bear the burden of not having children so that they, like men, have no time out of their careers? Are they prepared to devote 70 hour weeks to their jobs, sleep at the office and have no private lives? If they are, then there's no reason that they, like men are, can be top CEOs or investment bankers. Are they ready to defend the country with their blood, build our bridges and roads with their hands, haul down our trees and mine our resources, and so on, with exactly the same level of strength and effort as men are putting forward, and with the same effects? If they are, they can have all the rights and privileges and responsibilities of men.
No problem there.Then you have never seen our education system, which is almost entirely shaped to favour the disposition and skills of women, and in which men are failing and dropping out in record numbers today. And you have never realized that 60% of college students are now women, but there is no talk at all of affirmative action for men, or even dropping affirmative action because of the men. Nor have you considered that 76% of teachers and 91% of nurses are female, but there is still no concern about the imbalance there. And good luck getting tenure, or even a university job today, if you are a male...particularly a pale-skinned heterosexual one.In all my experience I have never heard of a professional teacher or medic who marginalises males.Yes, it is.The nuclear family is the normal societal unitThen a man can BE a woman.How does a "transer" identify themself? Any more is none of your business.So what happend to the transers? They say their sex doesn't fit what they claim is their "gender." So what are they? Are those women really women, or are they really men? And are the men who trans really women, or are they men?
And women are no longer important, at least not in any distinctive way. We can cancel all the real women in sport...they'll be gone very quickly anyway, unable to compete with the trans-men. And why are we having affirmative action when a man is a woman if he wants to be? Hiring quotas...we can just hire trans-man to fill the female quota. Wage parity? All trans-men can make the same as real men, and who cares about the real women? And what is all this talk of "violence against women," when a man can be a woman? The conversation has to change. And "women's washrooms" -- why should they have any privacy if it makes trans-men feel bad? What is "women's history," when any man can be a woman? What are "women's rights" then? Or a "woman's shelter," or a "women's prison"?
It's already happened. In women's sports, women are being wiped out by trans-men. In prisons, any claiming "woman" is put in the female population. And how that is working out is exactly as you would expect.
They're coming for the real women, B. You just don't know it yet. You've become accustomed to assuming the "victim" position, and you can't imagine you're going to lose it...but in truth, you already have. You're in the new "oppressor" class.
Young men from disadvantaged backgrounds are often unemployable for reasons of psychological anomie. Girls can feel part of society by becoming mothers.The remedy is improving social mobility by means of reducing the difference between rich people's schools and poor people's schools, and between rich people's housing and poor people's housing.