Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Pnx]

The Celts actually came pretty close to beating the Romans once or twice, of only they'd used a little bit more strategy.

[Nadaka]

http://www.aclu.org/national-security_technology-and-liberty/are-you-living-constitution-free-zone

I would note that their map is inaccurate. International airports are also considered borders, so nearly the entire US is a constitution free zone.

[Virex]

So, there is this part of India where Women are the "dominant" gender...

Dang. o_o  You know, I think I understand how women in America feel...

The middle east, parts of china and a few other places still have that as the norm, but America? Most of America hasn't been that bad to women for a long time.

Just because you don't see it's that bad doesn't mean it isn't. After all, fake equality is worse than upright oppression, at least the latter can be pointed out easily.

So, there is this part of India where Women are the "dominant" gender...

That's pretty rage-inducing if you ask me. Men already have the whole world as their playground, can't we leave a single little village untouched?

[Levi]

What is a constitution free zone?  I've never heard the term before.

[Frumple]

They're using it to refer to areas with 100 miles of the US border, where law enforcement and similar organizations are assuming greater and greater (unconstitutional) powers under the guise of border patrol.

[Nadaka]

So, there is this part of India where Women are the "dominant" gender...

That's pretty rage-inducing if you ask me. Men already have the whole world as their playground, can't they leave a single little village untouched?

Oppression is bad, no matter who is being oppressed. There is no justice in applying oppression in reverse.

What is a constitution free zone?  I've never heard the term before.

It is a phrase used by the ACLU to indicate areas where some constitutional rights have been "legally" suspended. For instance, the 4th amendment no longer officially applies in most of the US and is the zone they are specifically referring to in this case.

[Levi]

Strange.  Okay then.

[Virex]

So, there is this part of India where Women are the "dominant" gender...

That's pretty rage-inducing if you ask me. Men already have the whole world as their playground, can't they leave a single little village untouched?

Oppression is bad, no matter who is being oppressed. There is no justice in applying oppression in reverse.

From the report things didn't seem that oppressed, on the contrary actually. Job opportunities for women, men giving women due respect, sexual liberation... And these men seek to destroy all that.

[Nadaka]

Virex, did you read the article? Have you ever seen an abused woman afraid to speak and defer to her husband in all cases? Is that not exactly what was described in the article with the gender roles reversed? That is a very clear sign of oppression. The mens rights group (in this case) said they were not trying to tear all that down, just that they wanted equality.

[Virex]

Virex, did you read the article? Have you ever seen an abused woman afraid to speak and defer to her husband in all cases? Is that not exactly what was described in the article with the gender roles reversed? That is a very clear sign of oppression. The mens rights group (in this case) said they were not trying to tear all that down, just that they wanted equality.

There are a dozen reasons why he could've reacted that way. Shyness, unwillingness to talk to the press, doesn't feel the need to incriminate the system et cetera. Immediately jumping to the conclusion that this is oppression is prety radical if you ask me.

[Luke_Prowler]

So, there is this part of India where Women are the "dominant" gender...

That's pretty rage-inducing if you ask me. Men already have the whole world as their playground, can't they leave a single little village untouched?

Oppression is bad, no matter who is being oppressed. There is no justice in applying oppression in reverse.

From the report things didn't seem that oppressed, on the contrary actually. Job opportunities for women, men giving women due respect, sexual liberation... And these men seek to destroy all that.

Virex, everytime you speak I wonder more and more if you're just trying to be funny and failling horribly at it.

I think you never actually read the article, otherwise you would have noticed: A) the fact that the men who live in this village drop out of school far more often than the women B) the way a family cheers if a girl is born, while boys get a "meh" and C): the interview at the end where the husband says nothing through out the whole thing, and when asked what he thinks of the women having the power, the wife speaks for him saying "He's okay with it". And there was never any mention of "sexual liberation".

Bullshit is bullshit, it doesn't matter who profits from it.

[scriver]

A lot of the world started out with matriarchal societies due to women being seen as the givers of life. But as time went by and the world became more and more warlike, the balance shifted towards men, because they make better warriors. In fact before the Romans came, the Celts supposedly had a lot of female leaders (although there aren't really records of this).

If you look at Brittania (the personification of Britain), it started life as a depiction of conquered Britain, which probably makes her a reference to Boudica, the warrior queen who led the Celts in rebellion.

 Boudica is a record of that. We know she was married and that her husband wasn't king but a lesser ranked nobleman (who also supported the Romans if I remember correctly). Personifications being women is very common regardless of gender-archy, though. Motherland and all that.

Also, don't make the mistake of thinking humanity were ever anything else than warlike. Peaceful cultures have always been exceptions, whether matri- or patriarchal.


 

The Celts actually came pretty close to beating the Romans once or twice, of only they'd used a little bit more strategy.

Unlike the Germanians who did it several times, you mean?


@Virex - You have to be trolling. Do you even know what suffrage means?

[Virex]

A) the fact that the men who live in this village drop out of school far more often than the women

I don't know of a country where that doesn't happen. Well, maybe Saudi-Arabia or somewhere.

B) the way a family cheers if a girl is born, while boys get a "meh"

Anecdotal evidence. There are plenty of families in the west that would rather have a girl than a boy, but that doesn't make men oppressed here.

C): the interview at the end where the husband says nothing through out the whole thing, and when asked what he thinks of the women having the power, the wife speaks for him saying "He's okay with it".

How do you know he wasn't OK with it? Did you speak with him?

@Virex - You have to be trolling. Do you even know what suffrage means?

Yes, but I'm also afraid that the men's movement, like any men's movement, will run contrary to the ideal of suffrage. "Equal rights for men" is usually based on a very specific vision of equality. Of course something could be done about men's ability to vote, if neccesary, but I'm affraid a large-scale movement based on masculinity and men's rights is the wrong way to go.

[Criptfeind]

on the contrary actually. Job opportunities for women, men giving women due respect, sexual liberation...

You realize that he was talking about oppression of males right? None of your examples are actually anything to do with that. Well, except for the last one maybe? Although taken in context it is fairly clear you do not mean that.

Anyway, I don't see any evidence in the article of men seeking to destroy anyway. Although perhaps there is a manifesto from the "liberation movement" that states such things.

On the other hand, I hardly see much oppression. Obviously the culture puts more value on females in some ways, but I don't see a order of female overlords holding all the political or economic power. The government of the area (before they moved into a unified government with India obviously) seems like it was male dominated anyway. So I simply do not see signs of oppression.

Edit: Wait. I just read your last post. You realize that half of your argument is "Oh. You should not assume that." And the other half is "Oh. I assume this."?

[Blargityblarg]

Immediately jumping to the conclusion that this is oppression is prety radical if you ask me.

Excuse me, I have to go lie down for a while.