Why Gender Roles

[ShinyTop]

The health club thread has pretty much gone way off topic so I will start my discussion in a new thread.

I noticed at the end of the other thread Violet has made remarks about the mess the situation is in, that the mess is due to our forefathers left us. I have to disagree with this. The mess we are currently in possession of is strictly natural, is strictly the logical consequences of man's progress.

Men cannot give birth, at least not yet. When man was a hunter gatherer on the plains of Africa women could not do the chores of commerce, the hunting of food. They were almost always pregnant when fertile. So since they could not do the tasks of hunting and men could not do the task of birthing the roles of man and woman were pretty much defined. The man who was aggressive and violent could do a better job of hunting than passive men. The woman who was a natural nurturer could care for the home fires and children than the woman who was aggressive.

As the years progressed these roles were pretty difficult to change. The home had to be maintained and who better than the woman who also was nursing children like as not.

And it should be noted that both genders benefited from this. The woman did not have to worry about security or food, she had a man or men who took care of this challenge. And the man in turn received the benefit of taking care of hunting or commerce knowing he had a place to sleep that night with food prepared by his partner.

It is only in the mid 20th century that all the developments came together that permitted the roles of the genders in the modern world to be discussed.
<i>
Effective birth control finally freed women from a lifetime of the choice of not giving birth or not engaging in sex.

Refrigeration allowed shopping and "food gathering" to be done weekly or more. No more was a daily trip necessary to pick the meat and vegetables for the dinner table.

All sorts of labor saving devices allowed home maintenance to be done in much less time enabling either partner to do it in the time off work.

The "8" hour labor day made possible home chores and chores involved in the raising of children to be done after work.</i>

I do not list the above as the only developments that enabled the "liberation" of women but as examples that overcame the "chains" that held women down.

So now we have the situation where women are now able to operate in the work force and to do essentially every job as well as men. Isn't this grand? Now each family can choose which of the parents is the best nurturer to stay home and look after our most precious commodity, our children. And we can determine which of the two is best able to make money for the family.

But wait. Somewhere along the way we have developed into a materialistic society that places more value on having another car or a vacation home that nurturing our kids. This materialism has made it necessary for both parents to work. The great innovations of the 20th Century have us in the 21st Century the slave of our possessions. We must all work to acquire more possessions. We justify some of it by giving the kids cars and video games instead of our time and attention. And we work more hours because the corporations have decided workers are as expendable the office machinery that obsolesces as fast as they are purchased.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have lost our way. We engage in daily battles of much venom over the rights of women vs men. We fight over quotas each defending his own gender, race, age, religion, and even job title. The battle we should be fighting is the idea that all adults must work, the idea that two cars is worth more than mature, happy, children who know their parents' love and time.

We will not have won the battle with women merely having equal rights to men or even equal pay. We will not have won the battle when women or men can have gender specific health clubs. We will have won the day when men and women are sharing public health clubs and public restrooms without even noticing we are sharing. We will not have won the day until we can celebrate the differences in men and women instead of fighting about equality.

[cdw]

I don't know about you, but many people need two cars whether the both people are working or not. If you live in an area where there is no public transportation, you're screwed.
And, depending on the profession you are in and the state of the economy, both people often need to work in order to make ends meet, not to get "extras" and keep up with the Joneses.
Especially if you have children, if you do not have medical insurance you are screwed, and if you do not have it through your job and have to pay for it yourself, you are looking at a bill that years ago would have paid my rent.
In addition, the minute you figure out a way to stop the government from taxing us so god damned much, so that the work and hours I put in can be less because I'll be making more, I'd be happy to quit. And, if I manage to scrape up some money and put it into my house so that my neighborhood can look nicer, if you could please tell the government not to tax me more, but instead to give me an even bigger break, I'll even forgo new additions to my wardrobe and a vacation.
Most people that I know out here in bum f*cking suffolk county aren't working both working because they want to get sooo far ahead, they are just trying to keep their heads above water.
And, the others, are both working and all their extra time and expense are put into taking their kids to sports activities that they belong to.... karate, baseball, basketball, etc. Or, they are saving for their kids college education.
Just what I see, what I live. Maybe it's different where you are?

[ShinyTop]

Sure Cyd, same here. My kids are out of the nest but I have friends who are still paying for all the activities. The money they spend to be part of sport associations is unreal. Then the cost of the required uniform. Would your kids have less gain from sports if they only wore different colored hats to differentiate between teams? What percentage of kids walk to school today? When we were growing up the far higher pecent walked than rode busses. And very, very few parents drove kids to school. And yet we grew up responsible, not too damaged by the requirement to play baseball during the day and on less than manicured fields.

Did anybody note that Fredus talked about $500 a semester for tuition in France. Our public colleges are costing tens of thousands of dollars before we buy Johnny a car, computer and rent him his own apartment.

[cdw]

Well, we have a son... my husbands, my step son. We didn't buy him his car, we didn't rent him an apartment and he doesn't have a computer. But, that's us. And I gotta say, that's our friends too, but that is probably just because we associate with those that think like us. lol.. I should shut up. I really don't have kids per se, he's in his 20's, and I'm not saving for a new car. I'm trying to put some bucks away so we don't have to eat catfood when we are 70 years old.
Neither of us have a pension from anywhere. I should have planned better I guess.

[ShinyTop]

When I entered the work force all large employers offered retirement plans. Now we are considered lucky if they provide any contributions to our 401K's. I am lucky in that I stayed in the Army Reserve for 20 years after I got out of the Army so I have some pension when I hit 60.

But Cyd, I am with you in what we provided our kids. But I believe more of the people I used to work with were providing the cars and computes and apartments than not. And I was not in the high part of the salary scale.

But what about the roles of men and women. Can we not begin to see that where we are was not a plot to subjugate women but natural progression?

[cdw]

I can. Others can't and I'm going to assume that it has to do with my age. I have come to terms with quite a few things in my years, placed blame and accepted responsibility for my part in things.
I've seen some women in here that are VERY angry and I don't know why. I'm afraid to ask too, lol.
But, no, I do not see men as the big bad wolf and women the poor little thing, if that's what you are asking.

edit: omitted a word

[Copzilla]

All I know is that I started off bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, believing in the goodness of people, and had hardly a prejudice one. After years of people screwing me over and ignoring all my hard work, and seeing women and minorities getting awards for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING and promotions based on quotas, I'm so sick of hearing about how the white male is oppressing ANYONE.

It's so retarded, around my department, you can see the two-by-two Noah's Ark thing at work. If a white gets a promotion, you can bet the next one will be black. If a white is Officer of the Year, the next year, you can count on it being a black. Doesn't matter what the minority officer has done. It's almost comic to read the award write-ups, with the legit one stating what the person actually did (developing and teaching schools, saving a life), while the feel-good award being a bunch of bullcrap rhetoric (he's earned respect of peers and community, inspires respect from command staff). Better candidates are overlooked, much to the line officers chagrin. We almost all boycott the ceremonies because they're such a sham.

We have minority supervisors who sleep on duty, spread hateful diatribe throughout the ranks, their misconduct is mostly overlooked because they immediately run off to EEOC at the drop of a hat. We had a black civilian employee lie about a sleeping black patrol sergeant (no, the white officer is lying, he wasn't asleep). This guy reports to work at 6 AM with f***ing catsup stains on his shirt, unbathed, covers it with loads of cologne, and the command staff does nothing because he holds the trump card. He's black.

We had a black patrol supervisor recently threaten a white officer. The white officer was assigned to collect all IDs and reissue new ones. It's a violation of policy to NOT have your ID with you at all times while on duty. The sergeant went to get his new one, and when he didn't have his old one, threatened the white officer, bowed up on him like he was going to hit him, wrested the new ID away, because he did not want to have to explain that he did not have his old ID. That case is still pending, and I'M CERTAIN it will be swept under the rug, because if not, if the sergeant is demoted or penalized, every black activist in Houston will be down at the PD with pickets. This was the illiterate guy who was promoted ahead of me.

I agree with Violet, the world does suck, and I can accept that, because at the end of the day, I go home and I sleep well, knowing that I have what I have because I earned it and not because someone handed it to me. I export my talents now, I don't teach in-service classes for my agency any more, instead teaching for a college that pays A LOT OF MONEY to do it. I do much less for my agency than I did five years ago, and you can thank "equal rights" for that. When I was asking my boss after my promotion was passed over "Why do I work so hard if it's just ignored," the response was "You should do it because you like to do it and not for others." Okay, then do it for myself. Yeah, baby. I get paid big bucks to teach now. F*** 'em.

My employers recently noted that I haven't taught in-service schools lately. But I have. Just not for an ungrateful, racist employer.

[cdw]

Well, copz it happens in the civilian areas too, and not just between men and women or white and blacks. My mother, the whole time I was growing up always said to me..."no one said life is fair". She was right.

[Copzilla]

What isn't fair is people telling me I have had opportunities and I've got it so good because I'm a white male.

Can they see in my soul? Can they look at my sex and skin color and just KNOW my history?

They think they can! Some people think white males have this big giant clique where we golf and systematically work to exclude women and minorities and we hold all the money and power everywhere. Some people think I'm a COP BECAUSE IT KEEPS POWER IN THE HANDS OF THE WHITE MAN. The same bastards whose problems I'm trying to tend to at that particular time.

---

A black politician in NY recently said he'd like to go up to the nearest white guy and slap the crap out of him, just for his own mental health.

Jesse Jackson calling NY "hymietown".

Al Sharpton last week calling whites "crackers". He's a freakin' presidential candidate!!! Let some white candidate call blacks "spooks" and watch the show!

---

Discrimination is alive and well, I'm telling you, but it's approved and sanctioned by society so long as it's black on white, or hispanic on white, or ANYTHING on white male, because we're politically nothing.

How many black organizations are there, that are accepted as legit? Tons... How many women's organizations are there, that are accepted as legit? Tons...

How many white male organizations are there, that are accepted as legit? NONE. Try making one without getting death threats, being ostracized by politicians, branded racist. You could make one that mirrored a black organization, in word and deed, only for whites, and it would be demonized and criminalized.

We will NEVER have equality until true equality is accepted by greedy minorities. And that's the real deal. As long as it's profitable for assholes like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Luis Farakhan and Quanell X to spew their hate, and it's accepted and sanctioned because their rich and filthy asses are "oppressed", then we're going to keep on this screwed up path that will probably be the end of our society.

[cdw]

Just a little correction... sharpton didn't call anyone cracker at that meeting, his friend maddox did.

I agree with some of what you have said, but I really can't agree that the white male is politically nothing.
I don't even know what to say.... you appear to be as angry as some of the women here. I guess I'm out of the loop.. I do not know anyone that is that angry about how far we've come/haven't come. It's a process. The pendulum starts in one place, swings waaay to the other side, and eventually will end up somewhere in the middle. I wish I had the answers. I don't.

[BigDeputyDog]

Cyd, I too was once a believer in the "pendulum theory", and may still be, but it won't happen for a looooooong time. We can't expect for true equality to become a reality as long as history is being rewritten in our children's textbooks so as to present the past in a more favorable light instead of portraying the truth. We can't expect equality and an end to discrimination as long as there are "fire starters" who demand special, not equal, treatment. We can't expect equality and fairness to become forefront in our daily lives until we learn to take responsibility for our own actions instead of blaming others.

CopZ, I feel your pain brother. Your experiences with the promotional process is not a new one. In the early 1970's, I was number 2 on a promotional list of over 100 candidates. They promoted #1 (had to, or he would have filed a lawsuit) and then jumped way down in the list to promote in order to fill the "quota". The next promotional opportunity resulted in the same outcome. After the 3rd shafting, I no longer participated in the promotional process and instead devoted my time to finding schools and seminars that the department could send me to in order to gain knowledge and experience for when I retired. The one saving grace of not being promoted was not having to walk lock-step with administration and being able to continue to be my own man, not in debt to anyone when I retired. When I retired, I had the last laugh, knowing that I now had a lifetime pension and a marketable skill that would have been hard to acquire outside of the police department and made it possible to make a lot more money than I would have as a superior officer. ;)

BDD...

[cdw]

I completely agree with you. Completely.

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by cydweeks
I don't even know what to say.... you appear to be as angry as some of the women here.
Perhaps, Cyd. But I don't get angry when discussing minority relations until I'm told how good I've got it, and how I'm an oppressor, and the minorities have it so bad.

That somebody thinks they can see into my soul infuriates me. It's the ultimate insult to be told that my hard work, personal drive and sacrifice is not why I am who I am. My work ethic, family and personal values define me.

I'm here to tell you, there's a reason why white males excel as a group, while others don't quite as well. It's because white males have hellacious work ethic. It's engrained in us from birth, where we have to get good grades, we have to work hard and provide for our families, we sacrifice ourselves for the good of our communities, and we employ delayed gratification, where we educate ourselves and work and save our money.

No other minority group employs those values to the degree that the white male does.

***That's the truth, and that's the bottom line.***

These things, in a word - perserverance, will always lead to success. It's no big secret. Anyone could do it. But some choose the easy way out, and want it handed to them when they have not earned it.

[cdw]

Perhaps, but my way of thinking is and always has been that it's best that we quit making generalizations about men/women/races/religions and lumping them into groups. People are individuals. It's not until that seeps into everyone's head and is accepted that things can really improve, IMO.

[ethics]

Originally posted by cydweeks
Perhaps, but my way of thinking is and always has been that it's best that we quit making generalizations about men/women/races/religions and lumping them into groups. People are individuals.&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Agreed. The enemy is not a woman/man on this forum, or someone you see on the street, &nbsp;but the lobby groups that have taken a good cause and made it pathetic with the allowance of people around them saying that the inequality was wrong.

We were all taken advantage of for one reason or another. Getting angry, hopefully, does not mean getting even, it's what got us to where we are today.

[melpomene]

Originally posted by Copzilla


I'm here to tell you, there's a reason why white males excel as a group, while others don't quite as well. It's because white males have hellacious work ethic. It's engrained in us from birth, where we have to get good grades, we have to work hard and provide for our families, we sacrifice ourselves for the good of our communities, and we employ delayed gratification, where we educate ourselves and work and save our money.

No other minority group employs those values to the degree that the white male does.

***That's the truth, and that's the bottom line.***

These things, in a word - perserverance, will always lead to success. It's no big secret. Anyone could do it. But some choose the easy way out, and want it handed to them when they have not earned it.

Unbelieveable!

I think i will just have to leave it.

In fact, it is just damn scary. This post just says it all to me. I enjoyed this site for a long time. But no more.

[joseftu]

Copzilla, I respect your experience, and your dedication, and I can understand how you feel you've gotten the short end of things...but you must see that this:
Originally posted by Copzilla
I'm here to tell you, there's a reason why white males excel as a group, while others don't quite as well. It's because white males have hellacious work ethic. It's engrained in us from birth, where we have to get good grades, we have to work hard and provide for our families, we sacrifice ourselves for the good of our communities, and we employ delayed gratification, where we educate ourselves and work and save our money.

No other minority group employs those values to the degree that the white male does.

***That's the truth, and that's the bottom line.***


is not the truth, it's dangerous nonsense.

Please. Please.

Disclaim this.

It makes it all too easy to completely disregard your very valid points.

I don't believe that you believe or mean this. You're saying that, in general, whites work harder? Whites are better?

You must have a broader experience of the world and real life than that, don't you?

[Copzilla]

NO! You're missing my point completely.

I'm saying white males are ingrained with better social values from the start. I'm saying as a general rule, white males are better equipped through social upbringing to handle the business world, through trained work ethic, through early education, through social construct.

I'm not saying anyone is better, or trying to make a statement in reference to supremacy or anything retarded like that. Don't misundertand my point. I'm saying that there's a reason why white males excel, and it's NO SECRET. White males excel because white males are ingrained with better social values from the start.

You want to look for equity, to EVER make it a level playing field, you've got to change work ethic, social values, etc, of minorities. Because until a minority is promoted over me because of what they've accomplished as opposed to what someone thinks makes things "equal", it's all a sham and it's nothing but welfare. And in a hundred years, we'll still be dealing with it.

[Copzilla]

Want me to prove it, Joseftu? It's easy...

What happens when a black man from a poor neighborhood pulls himself up by his bootstraps and gets an education, makes a bunch of money, starts living the good life? Does he build a nice house in the ghetto? Does he give his money to those in the ghetto?

No... As a general rule, he moves out, he finds a nice place in white suburbia, who accepts him graciously. The reason is that he does not want to raise his children, his family, under that social construct. The social construct that says education is useless, that drugs are fine, that the white man is the oppressor. He knows better. He's earned his way. And he understands that work ethic, education, saving, family values, are truly values to be treasured.

The key element to poverty stricken social constructs is lack of education. BUT THAT EDUCATION IS AVAILABLE TO ANYONE WHO WANTS IT IN THE U.S. So why do more minorities not give more credence to it? It's a social disorder that is not shared by the white male, as a general rule.

Women, however, are a bit of a different social construct. Raised from birth to be nurturers, given dolls, told to be sweet and sugary. Women's social construct is less emphasis on education and more on domestic values. This is changing, but it's still not the same as the white male. Women aren't ingrained from early life with the "provider" tenacity that the white male is.

I'm not making supremacy statements, I'm talking about social construct. How we're taught from an early age.

If you want to change society, to make it all on a level playing field, THIS is what you've got to change. You can't give a man a fish - he'll only eat for a day. You've got to teach a man to fish.

[Techie2000]

So maybe rather than funding schools through local property taxes we should do it through the federal taxes and then have the federal government allocate an equal amount of funding for all the schools based on the amount of students, with no penalties or anything for bad test scores. Or am I nuts?

[Fiona]

coughs, "bullshit!"

[Coriolis]

Originally posted by Copzilla
Perhaps, Cyd. But I don't get angry when discussing minority relations until I'm told how good I've got it, and how I'm an oppressor, and the minorities have it so bad.

That somebody thinks they can see into my soul infuriates me. It's the ultimate insult to be told that my hard work, personal drive and sacrifice is not why I am who I am. My work ethic, family and personal values define me.
I don't think anyone thinks they can look into your soul. Perhaps this was a reaction to the conversation in the other thread? Nor has anyone questioned your work ethic, or how hard you work. I'm not exactly sure where this is coming from, other than your obvious frustration.

Originally posted by Copzilla
I'm here to tell you, there's a reason why white males excel as a group, while others don't quite as well. It's because white males have hellacious work ethic. It's engrained in us from birth, where we have to get good grades, we have to work hard and provide for our families, we sacrifice ourselves for the good of our communities, and we employ delayed gratification, where we educate ourselves and work and save our money.

No other minority group employs those values to the degree that the white male does.

***That's the truth, and that's the bottom line.***

These things, in a word - perserverance, will always lead to success. It's no big secret. Anyone could do it. But some choose the easy way out, and want it handed to them when they have not earned it.
This is not true, or at least a massively biased generalization at best. First of all, you say white males... you're excluding white females? In any event, I can honestly refute your statement just based on my own personal experience. But your opinion, I assume, is also based on your personal experience. So instead of trading anecdotes, let's look at the facts.

From a study on <A HREF="http://www.nbs.ntu.ac.uk/cgb/research/PAPERS/ethnicobsrv2conMON.htm">Ethnic Entrepreneurs</A>
There has been a growing interest in both Europe and North America in the high rate of self-employment among ethnic minority groups. The evidence indicates that ethnic minorities are disproportionately represented in self-employment (Razin, 1993; Fairlie and Meyer, 1996; Clark and Drinkwater, 2000). Well-known examples are the South Asians in Britain, the Koreans, Japanese and Chinese in the USA and the Turks and North Africans in France (Barrett, Jones and McEvoy, 1996; Bates, 1997; Hillmann, 1999; Ram and Jones, 1998). There are a number of seemingly conflicting explanations given as to why some ethnic groups enter self-employment. These range from economic efficiency explanations to more sociological explanations that draw on cultural factors.
This certainly suggests otherwise, and not just in America, but in other countries.

But the notion of work ethic, as I believe you are adressing it, is with regard to whites versus blacks or hispanics, correct me if I'm wrong. The income divide between whites and blacks/hispanics in the US is <A HREF="http://www.urban.org/content/Research/NewFederalism/NSAF/Snapshots/1999Results/KeyFindingsbyRaceandEthnicity/KeyFindings.htm">still rather large</A>. Poverty among black, hispanic and Native Americans is <A HREF="http://www.usccb.org/cchd/povertyusa/povfact2.htm">2-3 times that of white groups</A>. But it is certainly a <A HREF="http://www.samford.edu/groups/app/mythsand.htm">misnomer that poverty = laziness</A>. People living in abject poverty often have a better work ethic than those who are stinking rich, they just have a harder time finding constant, full time work, and when it's not available, often rely on welfare or government assistance. We see them on the street, and working shitty jobs we'd never want to do, and it should come as no surprise that they don't appear to be enjoying themselves... would you? No. they are shit jobs, but there they are, doing our laundry, washing our dishes at our favorite eating establishments, and picking up our trash. I don't think work ethic is a problem.

If you're still in doubt, have a look at this national survey (Source: 2001 MARS OTC/DTC Pharmaceutical Study) on <A HREF="http://www.zonalatina.com/Zldata193.htm">Work Ethic in America</A>. Note that results for racial/ethnic groups are all about the same, having no more difference than between males and females (which, BTW, shows females with a higher work ethic than men). Then look at the income and education levels -- there's an inverse relationship between those demographics and work ethic (as measured). This goes a long way to suggest that "white males" are not at the top of the heap with regard to work ethic.

Originally posted by Copzilla
I'm saying white males are ingrained with better social values from the start. I'm saying as a general rule, white males are better equipped through social upbringing to handle the business world, through trained work ethic, through early education, through social construct.
From what source of information is this coming from, beyond anecdote?

[Biker]

Originally posted by melpomene
It is interesting, as i am viewing this thread, that you are not being moderated though.

Chill..

[Fiona]

oops I should be clear when I cough bullshit... because it landed three posts later... Copz I know what you are TRYING to say ,but i t aint comin out right.....

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by melpomene
I think that you are being blatantly racist and misogynistic now.

I said nothing racist, Mel.

I do not believe one race to be superior to the other. I believe that society's problems with regards to discrimination to be the result of social construct that is ingrained in early childhood.

I believe that as an example, more black people drop out of school than white people.

I believe that more black men disown their families than white men.

I believe that in order to fix these problems, one first has to acknowledge that they're true in America.

I believe that the WRONG way to approach it is to discredit these values, to disregard the hard work of a person, a group, in favor of forced equality, which is anything but equal.

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by fiona_campbell
oops I should be clear when I cough bullshit... because it landed three posts later... Copz I know what you are TRYING to say ,but i t aint comin out right.....
Well, people are choosing to misinterpret it, Fiona. :(

Easier to shoot the messenger.

[ShinyTop]

I think what Copzilla said and the reaction is one of the products of political correctness. He said that the raising of white and black children is different with a negative connotation for the blacks. Right or wrong this forum is supposed to be about mature discussions. The quick labeling about any perceived trait of blacks as racist with the immediate adoption of any perceived negative trait of white males as plain fact should make us all stop and take stock. We are reacting in the trained knee jerk manner that political correctness leads to. And this is going to be even worse in our children due to the modification of texts that we have been discussing in other threads. At least in this forum can we open our minds to the other viewpoint without knee jerk reactions, however ingrained.

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by Techie2000
So maybe rather than funding schools through local property taxes we should do it through the federal taxes and then have the federal government allocate an equal amount of funding for all the schools based on the amount of students, with no penalties or anything for bad test scores. Or am I nuts?
That's not so nuts, Techie. Decent schools are part of the solution.

I really really believe the ticket to success, to equality, will be the appearance of a new Martin Luther King. A good and kind representative of minorities who will understand that correcting the issues will require work on all sides, and not say it's the fault of the devil white man. This person has got to be strong and vocal, but not hateful.

Because to correct society's woes, minorities are also going to have to fix what's broken in their social construct. Minorities have got to lend more credence to education and family values, and whites have got to lend a hand when needed to have educational facilities. But for minorities to fix what's broken, they've got to actually listen when told what's broken. And coming from a white guy, it's racist and rejected. Said by a benevolent black leader, it's progressive and inspirational. The Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world aren't gonna cut it. They're nothing but con artists.

[ShinyTop]

Cop, if you had led with this post you would have had a much better reception.

One of the best posts I have seen on the subject. How can black leaders preach separation and blame and then wonder at a negative reaction?

[bruzzes]

WOW!!!

I normally stay out of these discussions but after perusing this thread all sorts of social inadequacies assaulted my mind.

1. I can see how political correctness has shaded the views of many here. Also, I can see where liberal ideas that are meant to help our social fabric has in fact done the opposite.
Those who jump to conclusions on such a sensitive matter and label a person a racist proves the point that Copzilla has voiced.
Any talk about minorities, other than the PC way, is viewed as racist. Those who label a person so and refuse to listen, are as dogmatic in that belief as a true racist would be.

2. While not necessarily agreeing with Copzillas idea that whites have a better work ethic, I can readily agree that social standards play an important role in the directions of one's growth.
I, myself, can see this in my own life. I have black members in my family on both sides. My nephew and niece were brought up in a loving environment, encouraged in education and social values and have grown up without prejudice. My niece is now at Harvard, studying Law, and my nephew is at Oberlin college and is now training to become an airline pilot.
On the other hand, my step grandson and step granddaughter were brought up in a divided and dysfunctional family and their lives are quite different. My step grand-daughter dropped out of high school and became pregnant. My step grandson was abandoned to walk the streets at the age of 11 until rescued by my wife and myself. He is still filled with great hate and I am afraid that it is too late for us to change this behavior, although we try as hard as we can. Two sets of kids, almost the same ages respectively and two totally different social upbringings.

3. As long as the main leaders of the black community follow blithely along behind leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton who do not fight for their rights, but keep them caste down and ignore the true leaders like Colin Powell and Clarence Thomas, we will still see a divide in race relationships.

4. If we can't discuss this topic, without open minds than one can readily see that this is a true problem.

[joseftu]

This is not political correctness. This is just plain old correctness.

To say that whites have a better work ethic than blacks displays (at best) a shocking lack of experience with the way people and the world work.

It's not "knee-jerk."

Copzilla's statement is not worthy of serious consideration. I'm shocked, frankly, that anyone would defend it, and that he wouldn't immediately retract it.

His statement is also the best proof I've ever seen for the real need for integration, for bringing people of all types together.

Let's try the converse...
Most pedophiles are white. It's therefore clear that the reason blacks manage to avoid pedophilia is that they have stronger moral values.
Or you could substitute serial killers. Or accountants.

It's ridiculous to make this kind of generalization, Copzilla. You're smarter than this. You must know (you must) that Black people, like white people, like all people, come in all flavors. Lazy, hard-working, smart, stupid, valuing education, ignorant. Your portrayal of the way "they are" comes from stereotypes, not reality.

And I'm really shocked that every person on this site is not immediately rising up to help Copzilla understand that.

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by joseftu
Let's try the converse...
Most pedophiles are white. It's therefore clear that the reason blacks manage to avoid pedophilia is that they have stronger moral values.

It's true! Most pedophiles are white! How about that? I think saying it's because of reduced moral values may be a pretty broad generalization, because I believe pedophilia to be more along the lines of sexual depravity in a mental illness aspect. It's a severely stunted emotional and social maturity.

To say white males are the majority of child molesters isn't being racist. It isn't biased. It's stating the truth.

I can admit and then address the problems with my race and sex. Can others?

[joseftu]

But Copzilla, you're not saying just that blacks don't succeed as well...that's the "fact" like "most pedophiles are white" is a fact.

It's your interpretation that's wrong. Dead wrong. Like it would be dead wrong to say that it's "white culture" that explains the fact that most pedophiles are white. Saying "whites, generally, are hard-working and blacks are not" is <b>exactly</b> like saying "men, generally, harass women" or "women, generally, are controlled by their emotions and can't think logically."

Some generalizations are always necessary, and reasonably factual ("men have penises" for example, or "African Americans have a greater rate of lactose intolerance" or "women have less upper body strength"). But interpretations, value judgments, like "hard-working," "lazy," "stupid," "cheap," and so on, should be applied to individuals.

It seems you don't like broad generalizations when applied to whites (you complain about my "pedophile" analogy)...but you're really free to slam them against others. Broad generalizations about large groups of people (like races) are useless, and uninformed, and often insulting. To argue based on these type of generalizations is to present an argument that fails on its face.

And, Frodo, if people's experience tells them that most blacks are lazy and don't care about education, and most whites are hard-working and value education, then their experience has been severely, tragically, limited. That's a major problem.

Get out into the real world! See the variety of people in every race! Sweeping generalizations are always completely destroyed by exposure to real-life individuals.

[Copzilla]

Joseftu, please try these questions one by one. They are simple, need only one word answers. It's a challenge to you...

Are you saying that black males in general do stay in school as long as white males?

Are you saying that the equality movement does not promote some minorities ahead of more deserving white people?

Are you saying that many poor blacks are not taught from an early age that their poverty is due to the white man?

Are you saying that black men have as good a rate of divorce, parenthood, child rearing, as white men?

Are you saying that women are not reared to be nurturers as opposed to providers? That women receive everything that men do in terms of educational and emotional preparedness for the working world?

And last, are you saying that all of the above ingrained values do not play into the financial and social successes of the white male?

I understand I'm getting after some sacred cows. But there's an old saying that if you make a rich man poor, in ten years he'll be rich again. If you make a poor man rich, in ten years he'll be poor again. Rodney King is proof of that analogy.

[Violet1966]

Affirmative action and all that stuff, what does it even matter anymore? We live in country where illegal aliens can take our jobs and don't even have to be a registered part of the citizenship. Soon there will be affirmative action for illegals because they have kids in our school systems. Our companies send their goods to be built and assembled, to other countries because it's cheaper. We lose jobs every day to these practices...and we have the nerve to cry about losing a job to a minority or a woman? :rolleyes:

There's a much bigger problem facing us all and it has nothing to do with any United States citizens :(

Wonder if the jobs we are losing to illegals and other countries are hurting Americans? Sure picking oranges isn't anything the basic educated white male wants to do, but the fact that we lost these jobs to illegals takes that many more jobs away from our working class and it's all trickeling down. When will we see the real problem??? We need to be more prejudiced in our laws towards other countries and be self sufficient and keep our own citizens employed :mad: :rant:

[Steve]

This is becoming a little too "Afro-centric" of a discussion, so let me just point out that there are other minorities that value a strong work ethic, demand excellence from their children, recognize in importance of a sound education, and, as a general rule, are largely successful in integrating themselves into American society.

So, it would appear that Copzilla's argument is accurate: it is not race that is the issue, but rather the value and emphasis a particular culture places on certain personal attributes that almost always result in great personal success and, therefore, great cultural success.

It is folly to deny that white males do not fall into one such cultural category; in fact, to deny that would be to make baseless the claims of every special interest group that would lay all of society's ills at the feet of white males! No, Copzilla is right, there are, as a general rule, certain groups that enjoy a cultural upbringing that results in a distinctly greater and generally higher level of succes than is enjoyed by other cultural groups who do not stress the same values.

joseftu, you note: "Broad generalizations about large groups of people (like races) are useless, and uninformed, and often insulting." They are also, all too frequently, quite accurate. But more to the point, if we are to be able to discuss social problems and work out solutions to them, we need to be able to speak in general terms. We must just be careful that we don't fall into the easy trap of racism but, rather, stick to the observable facts and work from there.

[cdw]

Broad generalizations about large groups of people (like races) are useless, and uninformed, and often insulting. To argue based on these type of generalizations is to present an argument that fails on its face.

And is why the very laws that you are complaining about that are so inequitable were created to begin with. To counteract this very way of thinking.

By the way... you have NO CLUE how I was raised. You can't see into my soul either.

It's pretty difficult to insult me, but I gotta tell you, this constant generalization and whinning about the lot of life of the white male is really pretty annoying. Grow up.

And by the way, all those school shootings, the ones with all the kids shot at one time.... WHITE kid.

Ok, I'm done. Have a good time fellas. :)

And Mel, I don't know why you keep threatening to leave...I haven't seen the other women you mentioned moderated. If they have been then it's been done behind the scenes. And replying in a post.... chill... is not moderation. Unless there's something going on behind the scenes in a PM or something I don't see what you are talking about.

[ShinyTop]

I don't take offense at Mel calling me names since I know her to be mistaken. The only person here who is trying to stop this discussion is the one calling names without showing cause or answering other posters. Please discuss what I said so resolution can be approached.

[ShinyTop]

Is it possible you took as offensive my original post starting this thread? Most of which has not been discussed, I might add. You believe it to be wrong you must give more reasons than name calling.

[ethics]

Let me add another inequality, this time in the medical funding of cancers.

Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer are specific to each gender. Which kills more every year and which one is funded more?

With all of the advertising, and lobbying, even stamps -- which Prostate Cancer was snuffed out against the idea (http://www.menshealthnetwork.org/prostate.html)by the way -- you would think Breast Cancer.

Although the breast cancer death rate and that of prostate cancer are nearly equal, the research funding for breast cancer is about seven times that&nbsp;of prostate cancer. The result is that, whereas the death rate due to breast cancer is dropping, the death rate due to prostate cancer has risen for the past thirty years. Thus, it is apparent that research efforts to find a cure for prostate cancer are currently grossly underfunded (http://www.prostatepointers.org/ww/funding.htm).

&nbsp;

[cdw]

rofl It's because the men on the boards that determine these things are sooo fixated with boobs. Why else?!
j/k folks

[Violet1966]

Originally posted by ShinyTop
Is it possible you took as offensive my original post starting this thread? Most of which has not been discussed, I might add. You believe it to be wrong you must give more reasons than name calling.

In regards to your original post Shiny....you're right and I was just making simple comment which was to pretty much say, this situation isn't our fault directly...it was laid upon us, but we have to get out of it somehow. Sorry for putting it too simply as my role as a mom and a homemaker sometimes leaves me little time to articulate this kinda stuff ;)

Now let me say what I feel the downfall of our roles is. We don't have enough jobs for women/minorities to do in this society anymore, since their liberation from opression. Technology and corporations are the blame. We have car washes now that people don't have to work....auto production lines run by robots, etc....and what does have to be hand done, is done in other countries where labor is cheap. This leaves women and minorities feeling cheated because they finally all can be qualified for any job...but there isn't enough jobs out there!!! Same for the white male. No jobs!! Same shit all over. Technology is sometimes a curse.

In a perfect world one day, we'll all be able to go to the beach nude and use the same bathrooms and not even think about it. It would be nice. We might even have some kind of force field that we can activate that keeps us safe from personal space intrusion. Until then, we have to accept the fact that the shell that makes up the male and female bodies, are differing and have different needs in general. There's exception with some instances these days. Like Demi said....women need gynocologists. Well that has to be....it's part of the female anatomy that creates that situation. The laws excluding anyone from anything are wrong though. I don't like the fact that that has to be instead of common sense, but damn it I can't stand the fact that I have to lock my door at night either!!! The world just sucks sometimes :(

Copzilla...you're bitter about this being skipped over thing...rightfully so. I am very sorry to hear this kind of thing when it happens. It's not fair. Just sucks. How many cops on the force down there are Mexican American? Ever wonder how they might have gained entrance to the USA? Could it have been by their mother giving birth to them in the USA and therefore making them an automatic USA citizen? How many jobs you think you got passed on through that shit??? Would make me a bit more mad if it were me. :(

[Violet1966]

Originally posted by ethics
Let me add another inequality, this time in the medical funding of cancers.

Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer are specific to each gender. Which kills more every year and which one is funded more?

With all of the advertising, and lobbying, even stamps -- which Prostate Cancer was snuffed out against the idea (http://www.menshealthnetwork.org/prostate.html)by the way -- you would think Breast Cancer.

Although the breast cancer death rate and that of prostate cancer are nearly equal, the research funding for breast cancer is about seven times that&nbsp;of prostate cancer. The result is that, whereas the death rate due to breast cancer is dropping, the death rate due to prostate cancer has risen for the past thirty years. Thus, it is apparent that research efforts to find a cure for prostate cancer are currently grossly underfunded (http://www.prostatepointers.org/ww/funding.htm).

&nbsp;

Could it be that breast cancer was found to be a widespread problem before prostate cancer? Can progress or lack of it in the fund raising field be the culprit? If breast cancer has been known to be a great threat, longer then prostate cancer has been known, then it would be logical that breast cancer be ahead in research and funding I would think. I don't know this to be true but am wondering myself. What is your deduction on why this situation is what it is? I wouldn't think either sex to be more important then the other. If a man dies to prostate cancer...it's just as bad as a woman dying to breast cancer. What's your opinion on this. Curious because I've heard you mention this fact a few times. What could be the reason that the two cancers aren't at the same level in every aspect of finding a cure? :huh:

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by stevent
This is becoming a little too "Afro-centric" of a discussion, so let me just point out that there are other minorities that value a strong work ethic, demand excellence from their children, recognize in importance of a sound education, and, as a general rule, are largely successful in integrating themselves into American society.
Very astute, Stevent!

There are cultures in American society that display social values that are destined to succeed.

The Asian cultures, as a general rule, are tireless workers. The immigrants sacrifice themselves for the communal good, they work for years in menial jobs and save huge sums of money to open up stores and restaurants. They work tirelessly on education, and have strong family values. Often, Asian families will all collectively work to have one person obtain an education, and then that person obtains a high paying job, and provides the same opportunity to another member of their family. Many of the ills facing other minority cultures are NOT shared by Asian immigrants.

And they typically do not ask for handouts, are not involved in EEO issues.

These are some of the ingrained values they're taught from an early age.

[Steve]

I blame it on us men. We hate going to the doctor, we are generally less willing to seek medical treatment than are women, and, while we support the theoretical value of medicine, we just don't support it on a practical level.

[cdw]

This is just too funny.. I gotta tell ya that when I read these threads now all I hear is...
Aww, the way glenn miller played...
songs that were the hit parade...
guys like us, we had it made...
those were the days.

Archie Bunker lives!!! rofl

Ok, I'm sorry. I'll behave now.

[Steve]

I don't understand? Are you comparing some of the comments here to ones the fictional character Archie Bunker would make? If so, I don't see it that way.

No one has done anything more than state the plainly observable. If we as a group, or as a society, desire to work toward resolving problems, we need to be able to admit they exist, first. Without any ridiculous claims of superiority versus inferiority, I fail to understand why it's wrong to discuss the plainly obvious.

There are clearly cultural groups that value certain aspects of human behavior that directly contribute toward measurable levels of success, just as there are cultural groups that reject such behaviors and, so, are comparably less successful.

It is not bigotry to make such an obvious observation.

[cdw]

Why you think archie bunker was a bigot? He was only stating such obvious observations, was he not?

You will pardon me, but I do have my own opinion, regardless of my sex or culture, heritage and color and what that is supposed to determine in even a general way how I am supposed to be thinking. And I'm finding this very humorous.

By the way. I'm female and of german descent. Just what am I supposed to be like? Ya know, in well, a general sense.
oooh....wait....I'm scorpio too. Don't forget that! Might make a difference, lol.

[Biker]

Originally posted by cydweeks
By the way. I'm female and of german descent. Just what am I supposed to be like? Ya know, in well, a general sense.
oooh....wait....I'm scorpio too. Don't forget that! Might make a difference, lol.

Blonde, blue eyes and hairy arm pits? :angel:

[Frodo Lives]

Are women really weaker and more fragile then men? Why I ask is because I still hear so many times that it's "not ok for men to hit women, but it's fine the other way around". I believe women are just as stronge as men. Getting hit by a woman is going to get the same reaction out of me as if I was hit by a man.

[cdw]

And here I figured someone would come up with bitch, lol.

Hairy arm pits? ewwwww only the French do that rofl

[Steve]

That's fine, cyd, go ahead and avoid the issues by pretending there are no cultural differences and that all of the ills experienced by various groups are solely due to external factors.

Oh, and Archie Bunker was a bigot because he thought minorities and others were inferior, not different, which is the point I and Copzilla are trying to make.

[Violet1966]

Originally posted by Frodo Lives
Are women really weaker and more fragile then men? Why I ask is because I still hear so many times that it's "not ok for men to hit women, but it's fine the other way around". I believe women are just as stronge as men. Getting hit by a woman is going to get the same reaction out of me as if I was hit by a man.

How old does that saying go back and when will it stop? Will you teach your children it's bad to hit anyone instead of just saying "never hit a woman"? If you do...then that's one step towards getting rid of stereotyping :thumbsup:

edit spelling

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by stevent
That's fine, cyd, go ahead and avoid the issues by pretending there are no cultural differences and that all of the ills experienced by various groups are solely due to external factors.

Oh, and Archie Bunker was a bigot because he thought minorities and others were inferior, not different, which is the point I and Copzilla are trying to make.
Well, the fallback is to denounce it and make accusations of bigotry. It's what the "leaders" do as well. As you state, though, the problem won't be fixed until it's acknowledged. And it will never be acknowledged when spoken by a white male, because white males are being touted as the ones who are to blame, not the ones who should be modeled.

That's why I say we need a modern Martin Luther King. But I wonder if the new Martin Luther King would survive the "Uncle Tom" assault that would be leveled by Jackson, Sharpton, et al, as was done to J.C Watts, Colin Powell, et al?

[cdw]

cyd, go ahead and avoid the issues by pretending there are no cultural differences

You can continue to try and insult me by stating somehow you know better than me.
I am not avoiding the issue dear, I just see the issue to be something very much other than what you would like it to be.
We will have to agree to disagree. You think it's appropriate to generalize and lump sexes, religions, races, oh and now origins. Ah yes, cultures. I think the problems began with doing just that. Of course, that's just the hide my head in the sand, I can't handle it, I must avoid the true issues, dumb blonde woman thing going on.
Thank god you guys are here to show me the errors of my ways... where would I be without you?

:)

Oh, and inferior as in... your work ethic is better than the blacks...ya know, just on a cultural level? Not better, no, wait, ummm... different? poooooh!!!

[ethics]

Originally posted by cydweeks
Oh, and inferior as in... your work ethic is better than the blacks...ya know, just on a cultural level? Not better, no, wait, ummm... different? poooooh!!!

&nbsp;

Come on, Cyd, let's not go there. We know that each culture and each nationality prioritizes issues differently from one home to the next. Why are the Jews, who comprise less than 3% of the US population are so dominant in business, politics, and holding higher tiered jobs? They are not superior but growing up with many, I can tell you that nothing came before school work. If there was a constant in most of the Jewish homes I've visited, it was certainly that. Is/was there anti-semitism? Hell ya, but instead taking the victim's road, they took the underdog's road and penetrated success in such a high volume that many, even this day, believe there's a conspiracy.

Asians, mainly Vietnamese and Chinese were dubbed "the New Jews" by Slate when it first came on to the Internet, because of the similar cultural prioritization in schools. My daughter is in a magnet school where 90% of students are Asians.

I've given you a positive above, and we all know that with apparent positive, there's definitely negative cultures, or clumps of cultures.

Pointing out that there's a negative aspects of many, or even some cultures is NOT racism. And this is not directed at you but I am growing tired of people who oppose open debates, constantly think that by throwing labels around they will get a thread locked or something on par of muffling the voices. It won't happen. :)

[joseftu]

OK, I was away from the computer for a while...but I don't want to ignore a "challenge."
Originally posted by Copzilla
Joseftu, please try these questions one by one. They are simple, need only one word answers. It's a challenge to you...
Is this (<b>"need only one word answers"</b>) a snipe at me, Copzilla? I hope not. I'm sometimes verbose, I know, but it's because these are not simple questions...they're complicated. But I'll give the "one word" answers first.

Are you saying that black males in general do stay in school as long as white males?
Yes.
Well, really, I don't know. You assume that this is a "general" fact, but I'm not so sure it's more than your assumption. In New York City, for example, the ethnic group with the <b>lowest</b> high school graduation rate is Italian Americans. Surprised?
But, really, what I'm saying is that even if your assumption about school graduation rates is true, that statistic says <b>nothing</b> about <b>causes</b>. You attribute the statistic to work ethic, or laziness, or family values, but that's certainly not the only possible explanation.


Are you saying that the equality movement does not promote some minorities ahead of more deserving white people?
No. I'm not saying that.
It obviously happens, and when it happens, it's wrong. But I don't think it happens universally or constantly. And I don't think there's any kind of monolithic "equality movement."

Are you saying that many poor blacks are not taught from an early age that their poverty is due to the white man?
Where in the world did you get this?
How in the world do you have any idea what "poor blacks" are taught? Sure, some people are taught this. In some cases racism (not "whites") <b>is </b>the cause of poverty. Do you deny the very existence of racism? Aren't many whites taught that their success is the result of their inherent cultural superiority? It seems you've somehow been taught that.

Are you saying that black men have as good a rate of divorce, parenthood, child rearing, as white men?
Again, I have no idea (and neither do you--at least all you've presented is anecdotes and bald assertions). But the statistics, if they do support your argument, say nothing about causes. It's <b>your false assumption</b> that the reason for these statistics has everything to do with Black failings, and nothing to do with racism, or more importantly, history. Can't there be a <b>mixture</b> of reasons? Real life is more complicated than stereotypes.

Are you saying that women are not reared to be nurturers as opposed to providers? That women receive everything that men do in terms of educational and emotional preparedness for the working world?
The question is unclear...Are women (today) prepared equally for the working world? Is that what you're asking? I don't have a one word answer. It's hard (as I've been saying) to generalize. Class enters into the question, as does race, culture, specific ethnicity, and, yes, individual talent and will.

And last, are you saying that all of the above ingrained values do not play into the financial and social successes of the white male?
Of course they play into that success. But they're a <b>partial</b> explanation.

I understand I'm getting after some sacred cows.
Actually, I think you're upholding, or enshrining, the sacred cows. Your not stating any kind of "new, difficult to face, revolutionary truth" that takes courage to reveal. You're falling back on a set of tired, inaccurate, limited stereotypes.

And maybe it is time for me to check out of this discussion.

[ethics]

Good post, joseftu, certainly answers and faces many of the issues that many, including Copz, have put forth. Perhaps some people can dig up some stats (although we can prove/disprove everything with them) since that would give some of the assertions some life (or death :)).

[ShinyTop]

Joseftu, I find your answers no better than Copzilla's. He responds with gut feelings and so did you. But let's consider something else. Joseftu teaches at college level. Copzilla is a police officer. Is it possible you are both seeing the situation from such a narrow view that you are both right in your observed world?

[cdw]

You're falling back on a set of tired, inaccurate, limited stereotypes.

thank you. :)


let's not go there
Ethics, that statement was posted earlier either in this thread or the other by copz....tell him not to go there.


And this is not directed at you but I am growing tired of people who oppose open debates, constantly think that by throwing labels around they will get a thread locked or something on par of muffling the voices. It won't happen.

I'll remove myself from the thread.
Thanks.

[Violet1966]

Wow it's amazing what you find when you look at white vs black in schooling. I found this website that suggests that there's 2 black males for every one white male, that does poorly in school and it's because black males tend to be more mentally retarded then white males and need special education. http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Issues/psychology/IQ/black-special.html

If you really read the article...it goes into cause and affect and also ratio of population etc, as to why certain statistics are what they are and what it all means in the end. Some answers aren't just yes or no and I think Joseftu explained that very well.

*wondering if black males are really more retarded then white males?* These statistics can be confusing :nut:

Note: check out this new search engine that I found linked in that site.

"Search for resources concerning differential psychology, race, IQ, political correctness, evolution, feminism, affirmative action, and similarly heterodox topics."

http://www.mugu.com/winnow/

[Coriolis]

Originally posted by ethics
Perhaps some people can dig up some stats (although we can prove/disprove everything with them) since that would give some of the assertions some life (or death :)).
I don't think you'd be able to find good stats on the Copz' questions or Joseftu's answers. The questions are fairly abstract, and convoluted by complex interactions and influences. Any stats, including divorce rate and high school drop out, are difficult to interpret, and are probably questionable when looking just at the raw numbers. Divorce rates are supposedly higher for blacks by some sources, but other sources say they are the same, but <A HREF="http://www.divorcereform.org/cor.html">there are so many factors involved</A>. High school drop outs for whites and blacks are rather similar (7-11%) while hispanics are by far the highest (>25% by some sources), but again, <A HREF="http://www.focusas.com/Dropouts.html">there are many, many factors involved</A>, beyond just "work ethic". Joseftu also points out that most of the statistics don't pin-point causes, or their effects, and he is absolutely correct.

Originally posted by ShinyTop
Joseftu, I find your answers no better than Copzilla's. He responds with gut feelings and so did you. But let's consider something else. Joseftu teaches at college level. Copzilla is a police officer. Is it possible you are both seeing the situation from such a narrow view that you are both right in your observed world?
I think the point Joseftu was making (and correct me Joe if I'm wrong) was that Copz' assertions are based on his observations, and not on the facts. Joe made a point of saying, several times, that he doesn't know the answer, and it's highly likely Copz, nor any of us, know the answers. These are complicated questions that don't have straight, simple answers. Thus, answering them as written gets us no closer to resolving the issue of work ethic... or whatever it is we're talking about now.

[Steve]

There is certainly a dearth of quality facts and statistics surrounding this issue.

One wonders why such pervasive and prevalent issues that adversely affect minorities for such a long time have been scantily studied?

[Violet1966]

Originally posted by melpomene
Is this not offensive to the women on this site?

No because if someone was saying it in all seriousness, I would have to think ignorance and have pity and not let my panties get in an uproar over it. Mel, I think it was supposed to be a joke and if it wasn't, then it's the pity on ignorance thing ;)

[melpomene]

Originally posted by Frodo Lives
Maybe it's because, from personal experience, most people understand what Copzilla is talking about. I do, I agree nearly 100% with Copzilla.


And Mel,
I don't know what you are smoking, but I sure would like some. Please ship me some.

The reason you are moderated is because you make personal attacks against members. Like your labaling of 'misogynist' comments to every male member. If you hate men, fine, but leave off the personal attacks.

and you are not personal attacking me, suggesting i smoke pot?

[melpomene]

Originally posted by Violet1966
No because if someone was saying it in all seriousness, I would have to think ignorance and have pity and not let my panties get in an uproar over it. Mel, I think it was supposed to be a joke and if it wasn't, then it's the pity on ignorance thing ;)

no sorry violet, with respect.

i see other things here. on the one hand a "you are personally attacking me" and on the other hand little snippets of denigration.

i throw the word "misogynistic" out there in the thread. i say "you are all misogynistic" and some members have gotten on the band wagon...............in the psychology world its like confronting your demons in front of the window.

i see enormous "gender roles" just in this argument in this thread.

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by joseftu
Yes.
<A HREF="http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0779196.html">You're wrong.</A> Blacks drop out of high school at almost twice the rate of whites. Hispanics drop out of high school at almost four times the rate of whites.

The reason why? I've been saying it all along. The cultures aren't predisposed to education. The cultural environment is flawed in this regard. The whitey can't be blamed for this, but some people seem to think whitey can.

Originally posted by joseftu
No. I'm not saying that.
It obviously happens, and when it happens, it's wrong. But I don't think it happens universally or constantly. And I don't think there's any kind of monolithic "equality movement."
Sure there is. It's called Affirmative Action.


Originally posted by joseftu
Where in the world did you get this?
How in the world do you have any idea what "poor blacks" are taught? Sure, some people are taught this. In some cases racism (not "whites") <b>is </b>the cause of poverty. Do you deny the very existence of racism? Aren't many whites taught that their success is the result of their inherent cultural superiority? It seems you've somehow been taught that.
No, I haven't. I haven't said anything like that. I don't know what you were taught, but I was taught that the key to my success was hard work, education, family values. But I'm also aware of a "victim" class of people that you refuse to acknowledge. And I'm not talking exclusively of blacks, although there does appear to me to be a disproportionate amount, just on my personal observations.


Originally posted by joseftu
Again, I have no idea (and neither do you--at least all you've presented is anecdotes and bald assertions). But the statistics, if they do support your argument, say nothing about causes. It's <b>your false assumption</b> that the reason for these statistics has everything to do with Black failings, and nothing to do with racism, or more importantly, history. Can't there be a <b>mixture</b> of reasons? Real life is more complicated than stereotypes.
Real life is REAL. I've been trying to say what is REAL. Causes of a cultural flaw do not help to cure the flaw unless the culture acknowledges the flaw in the first place.


Originally posted by joseftu
The question is unclear...Are women (today) prepared equally for the working world? Is that what you're asking? I don't have a one word answer. It's hard (as I've been saying) to generalize. Class enters into the question, as does race, culture, specific ethnicity, and, yes, individual talent and will.
Truth to my statement is evident in the medical profession, where the huge majority of nurses are women, but the huge majority of doctors are men.

Women are indoctrinated from an early age to have babies, be motherly and be submissive. They are not as prepared for the corporate environment as men are.

Originally posted by joseftu
Of course they play into that success. But they're a <b>partial</b> explanation.
I believe it's the bulk of the explaination. Because any minority cultures who espouse those values, like Jews, like Asians, they SUCCEED! The proof is in the pudding.

Everyone loves to keep going back to "work ethic". Please allow me to clarify, for the benefit of those who would demonize me and mischaracterize.

Work ethic is the desire, the drive, to produce the best product, to have pride in the result of one's work, regardless of the task. I'm not talking about how long someone sits at the french fryalator. I'm talking about how hard someone applies themselves in school, how much they volunteer, how much they're willing to sacrifice themselves for future benefit. And some of it is how much pride one has in the job being done. I have seen some minority cultures who work tirelessly and have great pride in their successes. And I have seen some that have not.

Nobody can convince me that the black culture in America has the same work ethics of Asians. I don't think WHITES work as hard as Asians. But we could all learn a lesson from these hard working people.

[mikeky]

Originally posted by Copzilla
...
Nobody can convince me that the black culture in America has the same work ethics of Asians. I don't think WHITES work as hard as Asians. But we could all learn a lesson from these hard working people.
Ok then, what's the cause? Genetic? Learned?

[melpomene]

Originally posted by Copzilla
Well, the fallback is to denounce it and make accusations of bigotry. It's what the "leaders" do as well. As you state, though, the problem won't be fixed until it's acknowledged. And it will never be acknowledged when spoken by a white male, because white males are being touted as the ones who are to blame, not the ones who should be modeled.

That's why I say we need a modern Martin Luther King. But I wonder if the new Martin Luther King would survive the "Uncle Tom" assault that would be leveled by Jackson, Sharpton, et al, as was done to J.C Watts, Colin Powell, et al?

Honestly, am i living on another planet? Cant you all see the danger in this post? This is dangerous. Of course, white males are not going to be "modelled". They make up a small percentage of the worlds population and yet they have had far too much say and power and input over the last two centuries.

The world is culturally diverse now. Multiculturalism has got to work. And it will. If white males (sounds like KKK) are not picked for a job, even though they are the highest scorer in some test, and a minority applicant is picked, to align with government policy to bring the ratio up, then too bad. Be proactive. Find another job, sell yourself. Women and minority groups have had to do for milleniums.

[Copzilla]

Ah, so you do not approve of equality, then. You admit you want favoristism. Now we're getting somewhere.

Sorry if I disapprove.

[Violet1966]

Originally posted by melpomene
no sorry violet, with respect.

i see other things here. on the one hand a "you are personally attacking me" and on the other hand little snippets of denigration.

i throw the word "misogynistic" out there in the thread. i say "you are all misogynistic" and some members have gotten on the band wagon...............in the psychology world its like confronting your demons in front of the window.

i see enormous "gender roles" just in this argument in this thread.

Mel I see your point and at this time I just want to remind anyone...no one here is any better then anyone else no matter what badge they wear here. If one is to be told that they shouldn't toss names, then it applies to all. I'm not liking the directions this is all taking and I seriously think it's working more at driving wedge then helping understand. My suggestion to you Mel...and anyone else who feels the same.....please don't take this the wrong way, is to just ignore what might offend you in thread by not responding with a tat for the tit, and take it up in pms or alert a moderator. If there is an instance where anyone thinks they are being moderated unfairly, then take it up in pms with another moderator or let an administrator know that they feel they are being treated unfairly. Let's all take a deep breath now and think before we post. Some of these issues happen to touch nerves with some people...while they don't bother others. Let's all try and be more considerate please.

[Steve]

I see the danger. The danger is in relative bigotry. Or, as my mother put it to me when I was six: two wrongs don't make a right.

Frankly, if the only way the "oppressed" can figure out to rectify matters is to behave in the same fashion toward the "oppressors", then to hell with them.

Let me turn that sentiment around on you, melpomene:

If a minority applicant is not picked for a job because he or she is less qualified than a white male applicant, "then too bad. Be proactive. Find another job, sell yourself."

White males aren't crying about our treatment, we're pissed at the self-serving hypocrisy from those who don't, can't, or won't acknowledge that they have self-imposed problems that only they can address.

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by mikeky
Ok then, what's the cause? Genetic? Learned?
No, not genetic at all. It is definitely a learned behavior.

Blacks in particular, but all races/creeds/sexes have excelled under open environments.

When it's acknowledged by the poor minority cultures that the key to their success is in their own hands, then we can move up. Until then, we're stuck with class warfare.

[melpomene]

Originally posted by Copzilla


Truth to my statement is evident in the medical profession, where the huge majority of nurses are women, but the huge majority of doctors are men.

Women are indoctrinated from an early age to have babies, be motherly and be submissive. They are not as prepared for the corporate environment as men are

Are you serious?

The divorce rate is so high, one in three, that women are left with being sole bread winner, as well as mummy and daddy. The child support arrears is so high, because of wayward fathers taking no personal responsibility for their children. Hence, you have families of children who are watching their mothers provide and nuture. Its generations now. Females are no longer indoctrinated to be mothers. With the media and personal life experiences, its survival of the fittest, and the 1950's have well and truly departed this millenium.

[ethics]

Originally posted by melpomene
and you are not personal attacking me, suggesting i smoke pot?

&nbsp;

He is responding to your personal attack.

Warning #2 to you, abide by the rules, lay off the personal attacks and you will be fine. You were warned once by admins in the PM, I am warning you here for second time. After third warning you will be placed in Moderator's Queue where each of your posts would have to be approved before they appear.

It seems you can't participate in this issue/debate and it's quite apparent, you also can't remove yourself from it and personal attacks so we will remove you for you.

&nbsp;

[melpomene]

Originally posted by stevent

White males aren't crying about our treatment, we're pissed at the self-serving hypocrisy from those who don't, can't, or won't acknowledge that they have self-imposed problems that only they can address.

I disagree absolutely.

It is indeed the white males who formed government in the US. It is indeed white males who built up a network in banking, real estate, law and law enforcemment, education institutions, politics in America. It is indeed white males who passed laws to control the masses.

[Coriolis]

Originally posted by Violet1966
*wondering if black males are really more retarded then white males?* These statistics can be confusing :nut:http://www.mugu.com/winnow/
<A HREF="http://www.mentalhealth.org/cre/ch2_conclusions.asp">They aren't</A>. Mental disorders and learning disabilities affect all races and cultures. Apart from the fact the study was flawed by not properly distinquishing between race and ethnicity, more recent evidence suggests environmental issues may be the driving cause for this "statistic", and surely not genetics. Environmental influences encompass many thing, some of which Copz has pointed out, but like to admit it or not, racism and discrimination plays a major role in <A HREF="http://www.mentalhealth.org/cre/ch2_racism_discrimination_and_mental_health.asp">mental health of youth</A> (<i>Source, Surgeons General Report -- US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General, 2001</i>), and thereby hindering their potential for success in a white dominated society.

[Steve]

Originally posted by melpomene
I disagree absolutely.

It is indeed the white males who formed government in the US. It is indeed white males who built up a network in banking, real estate, law and law enforcemment, education institutions, politics in America. It is indeed white males who passed laws to control the masses. It is your right to disagree, one that, in the United States, was granted by white males, I should point out.&nbsp; The history of this country has ever been one of increasing personal freedoms.&nbsp; If white males have truly been in iron-clad control all along, then the historical record would seem to prove your point wrong.&nbsp; If we have not been in control, then your point is still inaccurate.

In any case, you have ceded the moral high ground by stipulating that discrimination and bigotry are OK with you, as long as they benefit you or the causes you support.&nbsp;

[ethics]

Originally posted by cydweeks

I'll remove myself from the thread.
Thanks.

&nbsp;

Again, it was not directed at you but the usual suspect. I find your posts informative and would wish you continue to debate.

[melpomene]

Originally posted by stevent
It is your right to disagree, one that, in the United States, was granted by white males,

I find this offensive, and it is a personal attack. It is attacking my liberties, my right to agree or not to agree.

This is unbelievable, i cannot believe that stevent and copzilla have not been warned, yet i am. The inconsistencies in gender are rife, just in this thread alone. Without even glancing outside in the "real" world. And you wonder why this thread is so heated. Because this is cyber space and yet the inequalities, not only in employment, education, housing etc etc in the "real" world, but here just on your monitors in this thread and on this site.

[ShinyTop]

So Mel, the white males did much of what you say from the 1700's until now. Who would you have had do it? You are complaining about something that had to be that way for centuries.

And I see the men here asking for equal treatment. Nobody is denying there were bad practices in the past or that in some places they continue. But we have the same right as you to demand equal treatment.

[mikeky]

Originally posted by Copzilla
No, not genetic at all. It is definitely a learned behavior.

Blacks in particular, but all races/creeds/sexes have excelled under open environments.

When it's acknowledged by the poor minority cultures that the key to their success is in their own hands, then we can move up. Until then, we're stuck with class warfare.
But in an open environment, still filled with stereotypes held by some of the majority (none in this forum, but these surely exist), can minorities/women compete fairly unless there is some incentive given to companies to hire them? Could the minorities and women still not be excluded almost wholesale because these weren't as "qualified"? Certainly, a company that doesn't hire or university that doesn't admit a single minority/woman might be suspect to EEO, but might also successfully argue about what makes someone more qualified, using subjective and arbitrary terms. Does affirmative action not put companies, etc., on notice that games such as "more qualified" will not be tolerated to exclude minorities/women?

While I'm not sure I'm in favor of preferential hiring, etc., I can understand somewhat, at least pragmatically, while it may be a necessary evil.

[ethics]

This is America, Mel, where people can debate issues openly and without any recourse for censorship IF they abide by the rules presented to them.

Some of us can do it, some can't. This forum is a monument for freedom to debate these things, without anyone crying "offensive! We need to shut it down immediately because it doesn't match my opinions!!"

[melpomene]

Originally posted by ShinyTop
So Mel, the white males did much of what you say from the 1700's until now. Who would you have had do it? You are complaining about something that had to be that way for centuries.

And I see the men here asking for equal treatment. Nobody is denying there were bad practices in the past or that in some places they continue. But we have the same right as you to demand equal treatment.

Look, i am a big fan of equality for all.

But there is blatant generalisation going on here.

If the human race is at all to succeed, there is going to have to be give and take. Society is now enormously competitive. The days of oppression have got to go.

Copzilla, is majorly pissed off at his lack of getting this job. Understandable, no? Of course. But he is internalising it. In fact, he is turning his experiences into exactly, exactly what the blacks, NESB, women etc etc have been complaining about for centuries and IGNORED. Its the pits that he didnt get the job. But we need to bring the ratio of all cultures and all races up to the same level, an equal playing field.

Society and the world, has never been more attuned to Darwin's Survival of the Fittest, as it is now.

[melpomene]

Originally posted by ethics
This is America, Mel, where people can debate issues openly and without any recourse for censorship IF they abide by the rules presented to them.

Some of us can do it, some can't. This forum is a monument for freedom to debate these things, without anyone crying "offensive! We need to shut it down immediately because it doesn't match my opinions!!"

Look!

You can all see the enormous passion in this thread? NO?

Copzilla is majorly pissed of at his lack of getting the job. Understandable? Of course it is. But for the human race to succeed, to go forward. We need to bring the ratio of the minority groups up to an equal playing field.

a quote................"You can gauge a civil society, by the way that society treats its vulnerable"

[Domh]

Originally posted by pcysmith
The only term that she used was "mysoginist" and that isn't an attack.

WITHOUT looking in a dictionary, PLEASE...

Who can tell me what the word 'misogynist' means?

I know what the dictionary says, and I disagree - for very good reasons. Alot of people will be rather surprised I think.

Maybe we can move this train wreck of a thread in an interesting, educational and MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL DIRECTION for crying out fucking loud.

:thumbsup:

[Violet1966]

Originally posted by domhain
WITHOUT looking in a dictionary, PLEASE...

Who can tell me what the word 'misogynist' means?

I know what the dictionary says, and I disagree - for very good reasons. Alot of people will be rather surprised I think.

Maybe we can move this train wreck of a thread in an interesting, educational and MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL DIRECTION for crying out fucking loud.

:thumbsup:

Ok then why do you disagree? You have my curiousity going now. :huh:

[pcysmith]

Originally posted by domhain
WITHOUT looking in a dictionary, PLEASE...

Who can tell me what the word 'misogynist' means?


:thumbsup: What do you mean "who can tell me what the word mysogynist means"? Is that what has everyone so mad at her? I'm asking this in all sincereity. I don't see what is so bad.

[melpomene]

Originally posted by domhain
WITHOUT looking in a dictionary, PLEASE...

Who can tell me what the word 'misogynist' means?

I know what the dictionary says, and I disagree - for very good reasons. Alot of people will be rather surprised I think.

Maybe we can move this train wreck of a thread in an interesting, educational and MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL DIRECTION for crying out fucking loud.

:thumbsup:

and i know what bigotry means. and i am not a bigot. I find stevent's suggestion that i am a bigot, highly offensive.

[Domh]

Im still waiting for an answer to my question from somebody who hasnt looked in the dictionary.

;)

[pcysmith]

Originally posted by domhain
Im still waiting for an answer to my question from somebody who hasnt looked in the dictionary.

;)
I don't understand what your question is. I assume that anyone who doesn't know the meaning will look it up. What is it that you disagree with? And again I'm not trying to be flippant.

[Violet1966]

Originally posted by melpomene
Look!

You can all see the enormous passion in this thread? NO?

Copzilla is majorly pissed of at his lack of getting the job. Understandable? Of course it is. But for the human race to succeed, to go forward. We need to bring the ratio of the minority groups up to an equal playing field.

a quote................"You can gauge a civil society, by the way that society treats its vulnerable"

Mel could it be that your society there in Oz treats it's minorities more severely in a negative way? Is that why you feel so passionately about this topic? Here in the states...sure there's still prejudices and descrimination but not on the level it once was way back when. There's laws to prevent it and we have to depend on those laws to fall back on on a personal basis, and stop using them to empower groups and enforce quotas. I know I'd rather get a job based on merit then tokenship.

I have a good question for everyone here. Do you think if these quotas and stuff were let up on and tossed, that people would be treated fairly? What if we see no more women being hired then? No more minorities? What then? What kind of preventive measures should we have to insure the past cannot and will not repeat itself?

[Violet1966]

Originally posted by domhain
Im still waiting for an answer to my question from somebody who hasnt looked in the dictionary.

;)

Woman hater and why do you not agree with this definition? I didn't have to look it up because it's been used and I saw the difinition posted somewhere. Please explain now. LOL

[Domh]

Originally posted by pcysmith
I don't understand what your question is. I assume that anyone who doesn't know the meaning will look it up. What is it that you disagree with? And again I'm not trying to be flippant.

Heheh - its like pulling teeth! I know your not trying to be flippant! Its all cool!

So, you know what the word means and you didnt go to a dictionary, right?

Then spill! What is your definition of the word 'misogyny'? Not the dictionaries, but yours...

Im all ears!

;)

&nbsp;

[pcysmith]

That's a good question Violet. I think probably at first it would slump a little. I think these things have to die out and by that I mean generationally. The children of each generation dilute the prejudices of their parents. Programs like affirmative action, no matter how well intentioned, foster new ill will and preserve the ill will of past generations.

[Sharondippity]

Originally posted by pcysmith
I don't understand what your question is. I assume that anyone who doesn't know the meaning will look it up. What is it that you disagree with? And again I'm not trying to be flippant.

I don't get it either. Is this remark meant to bring the thread back on topic? I doubt it.

[pcysmith]

Originally posted by domhain
Heheh - its like pulling teeth! I know your not trying to be flippant! Its all cool!

So, you know what the word means and you didnt go to a dictionary, right?

Then spill! What is your definition of the word 'misogyny'? Not the dictionaries, but yours...

Im all ears!

;)

&nbsp;
It means hatred of woman

[Steve]

One of the primary objections to quotas, affirmative action, discrimination, whatever we want to call it, is that it penalizes excellence. So, is there any way to ensure an equal chance at excellence for all persons, so that only ability matters?

Sure, but it's not done at the employment office, or the HR department. It starts with young children, with safe environments, bellies full of good food, taught meaningful subjects by people who care. It starts with developing the full potential of every person starting at the earliest possible age, without regard to sex, race, or anything.

Then society, having done its proper job, steps back and lets excellence succeed. Quotas are mere bandages that only open new wounds for every one they cover. They are not a solution.

[Frodo Lives]

Originally posted by melpomene
Look, i am a big fan of equality for all.

But there is blatant generalisation going on here.

If the human race is at all to succeed, there is going to have to be give and take. Society is now enormously competitive. The days of oppression have got to go.

Copzilla, is majorly pissed off at his lack of getting this job. Understandable, no? Of course. But he is internalising it. In fact, he is turning his experiences into exactly, exactly what the blacks, NESB, women etc etc have been complaining about for centuries and IGNORED. Its the pits that he didnt get the job. But we need to bring the ratio of all cultures and all races up to the same level, an equal playing field.


But who put the white man in the position that he has been for so long? White men did. By working hard for it. Minorities have to bring themselves up to the level playing field, it can't be done for them. You can't build up column A by taking away from column B, that sounds to much like communism.

[ethics]

I am officially bowing out as a member and a moderator from this and other threads on the same topic.

[cdw]

I'm sitting here shaking my head. I'm amazed. Truly amazed.

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by pcysmith
That's a good question Violet. I think probably at first it would slump a little. I think these things have to die out and by that I mean generationally. The children of each generation dilute the prejudices of their parents. Programs like affirmative action, no matter how well intentioned, foster new ill will and preserve the ill will of past generations.
HELL YES!!!:thumbsup:

[Copzilla]

Originally posted by stevent
Sure, but it's not done at the employment office, or the HR department. It starts with young children, with safe environments, bellies full of good food, taught meaningful subjects by people who care. It starts with developing the full potential of every person starting at the earliest possible age, without regard to sex, race, or anything.

Then society, having done its proper job, steps back and lets excellence succeed. Quotas are mere bandages that only open new wounds for every one they cover. They are not a solution.
New wounds, as was done with me. As was done with RRedline's friend.

Why don't those companies who want to satisfy EEOC requirements advertise "White males need not apply"? The reason is that they cannot say the blatant truth and get away with it. Affirmative Action lives in the backroom deals that they claim are rampant in the white male world.

At some point in order for excellence to succeed, Affirmative Action must be abolished, but I don't see it ever happening. The greed of some and the dependant society we're creating isn't going to allow it.

We need that Martin Luther King.

[Coriolis]

Originally posted by Copzilla
At some point in order for excellence to succeed, Affirmative Action must be abolished, but I don't see it ever happening. The greed of some and the dependant society we're creating isn't going to allow it.
Copz, I believe it will be abolished some day. Or perhaps, more accurately, no longer needed. Who knows, might even have to go the other way for a while. When racial discrimination, of any sort, is long in the history books as an anomoly in our society, then there will no longer be a need for affirmative action. Until then, it's the only way I can see of keeping the playing field level.

[cdw]

May I ask this one last question? Just who do you think was in office when the affirmative actions were put into effect?

[Copzilla]

Don't know, probably Reagan, but let's just hope George W. Bush gets them abolished.

[Violet1966]

Wasn't it Nixon?

[cdw]

Affirmative Action lives in the backroom deals that they claim are rampant in the white male world.

So then that statement is true? reagan, backroom deals, white males?
Just askin'. I don't think anyone else was in those backrooms or in office or position of power at that time. Although, I am getting old, I could be mistaken.

[Coriolis]

Originally posted by cydweeks
May I ask this one last question? Just who do you think was in office when the affirmative actions were put into effect?
Not sure who you're asking, or why, but Lyndon Johnson was the first to use the phrase "Affirmative Action", in 1965. The EEOC was established under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It's gone through many changes and enhancements since then -- to which are you referring? The National Enforcement Plan and Comprehensive Enforcement Plan started in 1996 and 1999, I think, under Clinton.

Ooops -- meant to inlude link to EEOC site
http://www.eeoc.gov/

[Misu]

Originally posted by ethics
Let me add another inequality, this time in the medical funding of cancers.

Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer are specific to each gender. Which kills more every year and which one is funded more?

With all of the advertising, and lobbying, even stamps -- which Prostate Cancer was snuffed out against the idea (http://www.menshealthnetwork.org/prostate.html)by the way -- you would think Breast Cancer.

Although the breast cancer death rate and that of prostate cancer are nearly equal, the research funding for breast cancer is about seven times that&nbsp;of prostate cancer. The result is that, whereas the death rate due to breast cancer is dropping, the death rate due to prostate cancer has risen for the past thirty years. Thus, it is apparent that research efforts to find a cure for prostate cancer are currently grossly underfunded (http://www.prostatepointers.org/ww/funding.htm).

&nbsp;

Would the inequities in funding have anything to do with the fact that for breast cancer, there are grass-roots fund raising events, such as walkathons and ribbon sales and women's magazines always drawing attention to it, with even Yoplait getting into the act by donating 10 cents for every pink yogurt cap mailed back to them each year, whereas for prostate cancer, the funding just comes from traditional sources, like medical companies and the US govt?

[ethics]

Misu, correct as to how it all started but not how the funding has now been grossly mismatched and the fact (first link in my post) that asking for a Prostate Cancer Stamp (like breast cancer's ribbon) was shot down recently.

[Domh]

Originally posted by pcysmith
It means hatred of woman

Yes, it most certainly does, according to the Dictionary - that mysterious book which, like the Bible, comes in many different flavors and, like the Bible, to which many refer in defense of their arguments.

"The dictionary says it means THIS and dammit - thats what it MEANS."

Well, No. Thats what I call lazy intellectual exploration.

Pcysmith - you said, and I quote:

"The only term that she used was "mysoginist" and that isn't an attack."

It isnt? Well, it sure as hell is to me, and Ill bet it is to alot of the other men here.

I dont hate women, and Ill be damned if Im going to sit here and be told, although I personally havent, yet, that I am a 'hater of women'.

The point is that the dictionary is wrong, because those here who have been throwing about what is currently a college campus 'big fancy word' arent fully realizing what they are saying, and might want to pull the guns back a bit, and perhaps find some alternate and more appropriate and less inflammatory and assaultive rhetoric than you are all a bunch of filthy misogynists!. Why? Because that is not only deeply innacurate, but frankly - deeply hurtful.

Its also totally and patently INANE.

So, we find ourselves at a crossroads. Do we discuss and accept a new and more modern definition of the word 'misogyny' than what we find in our&nbsp;current 'holy lexicons', or do we continue to call some of our members misogynists, and accept that we are saying to their faces that they are 'haters of women'?

I think we can, and should choose the former path.

I have come to the conclusion, through reading Eisler and Faludi, that 'misogyny' is a beleif that women are less capable than men, and that their natural place&nbsp;in modern society and culture comes second to those of men. In a nutshell, bringing it back to the universal language of nature, that men are Alpha in the tribe, and women are Beta.

The current definition of the word 'misogyny' is, frankly, misogynistic.

Now then, and I hope youll all forgive me as I address a member and not the issue directly ( I promise to be respectful and gentle!), I think that Mel needs to step back and reconsider if she really thinks that the men here are 'women haters'... or whether they are, like all of us, in a difficult and challenging process of considering and altering their personal&nbsp;viewpoints regarding the roles that men and women play in our modern societies.

Note carefully the word PROCESS because that is precisely what is happening here. There are few of us here who have decided, and refuse to budge, on any of our beliefs - but thats the few, and not the many.&nbsp;The many, well, we lay out an idea, it is challenged, we defend, adjust, learn, teach... communicate... GROW.

People... be careful with your words. The pen is sure as SHIT mightier than the sword. Before you go off and call a group of folks here a bunch of women haters, step back and make sure thats what you mean to say.

Mel, I dont buy for a second that you think that... but I do buy, and *gasp* agree with you that many of us men are in a really difficult and confusing process of reassessing the way we view and interact with women as we watch them change and grow out of the 50s and into a new millenium, where they are just barely starting, finally, to be treated not the same as, but as equals to, men. Thats a really tall order to fill, especially for the children of the baby boomers, whose daddies taught them what their daddies taught them, that women are, as the Bible says, second class citizens.

We are among the first generation on earth to begin to accumulate and integrate a new paradigm into society and culture (hint hint) and frankly, ladies, its not as easy a thing for us to record over what we learned as kids as it is for you to demand to be treated differently.

You women want respect? You want to stop being treated as pieces of meat who are only good for fellatio and pizza preparation? Bravo. Im right there with you... but please take this hint to heart:

Dont go screaming in our faces that we HATE WOMEN, because we dont - we love and adore women desperately. For many of us, women are our entire lives focus, no matter how much we admit it or not.

Instead of &nbsp;getting in our faces about how fucking awful we are, try doing something your sex seems to have as natural a knack at as men seem to have a natural knack for fixing, pulling, pushing, moving and building things...

Teach us. Gently - please.

You think this process is all about you, and your wrong. Its all about you and US.

Thats the whole point, isnt it? That we can grow into the future and teach our children what we learn... that the old beliefs fade, and the new beliefs foster.

Foster with us. Dont fight with us.

:thumbsup:

[Fiona]

(I'd like to foster with someone right now :) ) Dom your statements are quite correct... IMO.
I do see however that many men don't REALIZE that they love women. They've been taught to think like women are less capable than men, and that their natural place in modern society and culture comes second to those of men. In a nutshell, bringing it back to the universal language of nature, that men are Alpha in the tribe, and women are Beta.

and by the way... some of these threads and the depths to which they are sinking..... (posters please remember most of you like each other... and this is a discussion) are becoming tiring

[Copzilla]

And for the record, if I say that I think from early childhood that women aren't given as much ammunition as men are given to compete in the workplace, that doesn't mean I hate women. It means I have eyes. It means I can see that most nurses are women. It means I can see that most doctors are men. It means I think women need to understand that from early childhood, they've got to change that paradigm if they ever want to actually compete equally and gain equality, as opposed to just taking handouts, and being promoted when it's not merited.

I don't see how any other stance can be more benign than that.

But I hope that just because it's a man saying it, that it isn't automatically rejected as hateful.

[Advocat]

Originally posted by Misu
Would the inequities in funding have anything to do with the fact that for breast cancer, there are grass-roots fund raising events, such as walkathons and ribbon sales and women's magazines always drawing attention to it, with even Yoplait getting into the act by donating 10 cents for every pink yogurt cap mailed back to them each year, whereas for prostate cancer, the funding just comes from traditional sources, like medical companies and the US govt?

I went and looked up the Prostate Cance