How can we combat deep misogyny?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things. Much of what is deemed "misogyny" is simply just taking this reality as a first principle rather than seeking absolute "equality" in everything, which is folly. Equality is a mirage.

And here is why she lost. RIGHT HERE!!!! Blatant, unapologetic misogyny on display.

On the contrary, I think you are Exhibit A of why she lost. You can't even handle a little sober truth without freaking out. This behavior is repellant to most of America.

Please don't mistake your bigoted views for the "truth." Live with the fact that you think that women are inferior and accept the fact that you're a misogynist. That is the only truth. Another sad truth is that there were many of you this time around and you elected another bigot. Good for you. For now.

All I said was that men and women have different inclinations and capacities. This is the truth. Apparently this was too much for you to handle without getting bent out of shape and reading a bunch of mumbo jumbo into what was a very simple statement. You are the problem.

This kind of gaslighting works on uneducated women. Not the vast majority of us on here (who have at least a BS/BAdegree). We are capable of having discussions with nuance and reading between the lines. You have said women are not capable of the job.

You are bringing your own baggage into your reading of what I said. Plenty of women are capable of being President. Choose and create for them instead of trying to force a mediocrity like Kamala down our throats.

But that's not what you said!!!!! You said women are not equal to men. We "need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things."

Yes, if you take the average man and the average woman, they are not equal in inclination or capacity. It's ok to acknowledge this and silly to present otherwise. It does not mean that no woman has the capacity or inclination to be the President. I thought this thread was about misogyny, broadly speaking.

Do you think that men and women have the "inclination" and "capacity" at equal rates?

No, of course not. As one simple example, men seek risk more, which means they die more frequently from dumb risky things but also reap more benefits from risk-seeking behavior. This desire for forced equality of outcomes benefits no one.

Let me ask this question again. Do you think that men and women have the "inclination" and "capacity" to be POTUS or in high status positions at equal rates?

Define "high status position"? If it means something like law firm partner, then women probably have more capacity than men to do that work but, from my experience, less inclination. More women I know who hold such roles would rather be doing something else (at least relative to the men I know who hold those roles), though some do actually genuinely enjoy it. The equal rates thing is a mirage and only really ever comes up in the context of apex, status positions.

Regarding President, the short answer is probably no as of right now. But that could shift and depends on what cluster of traits the electorate (which is majority female) deems desirable in a President. If you take a snapshot at the present of what those traits are, it appears to fall around things that more men have than women. That is not to say that no woman has these things. If women eventually choose to desire traits in a President that cluster more about what women have, then men would be less equipped. Men are women being equal and outcomes being equal is a mirage.

But these views are not misogynist? Right? It's what you keep coming back to say. Just want to make sure I understand for the 15th time.

I notice you take no quibble when I say women have more capacity. Would you ever? In any context? When inequality suggests that women are better than men, you have no problem. Your true colors are showing. We see you. And we don't like what we see!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things. Much of what is deemed "misogyny" is simply just taking this reality as a first principle rather than seeking absolute "equality" in everything, which is folly. Equality is a mirage.

And here is why she lost. RIGHT HERE!!!! Blatant, unapologetic misogyny on display.

On the contrary, I think you are Exhibit A of why she lost. You can't even handle a little sober truth without freaking out. This behavior is repellant to most of America.

Please don't mistake your bigoted views for the "truth." Live with the fact that you think that women are inferior and accept the fact that you're a misogynist. That is the only truth. Another sad truth is that there were many of you this time around and you elected another bigot. Good for you. For now.

All I said was that men and women have different inclinations and capacities. This is the truth. Apparently this was too much for you to handle without getting bent out of shape and reading a bunch of mumbo jumbo into what was a very simple statement. You are the problem.

This kind of gaslighting works on uneducated women. Not the vast majority of us on here (who have at least a BS/BAdegree). We are capable of having discussions with nuance and reading between the lines. You have said women are not capable of the job.

You are bringing your own baggage into your reading of what I said. Plenty of women are capable of being President. Choose and create for them instead of trying to force a mediocrity like Kamala down our throats.

But that's not what you said!!!!! You said women are not equal to men. We "need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things."

Yes, if you take the average man and the average woman, they are not equal in inclination or capacity. It's ok to acknowledge this and silly to present otherwise. It does not mean that no woman has the capacity or inclination to be the President. I thought this thread was about misogyny, broadly speaking.

Even if we accept that what you are saying is correct, or "the truth," it's still a misogynistic statement because it presupposes that the presidency requires male inclinations and capacity to be carried out effectively. Operating on the assumption that what you are saying is the truth, it may well be that women's inclinations and capacities are better suited to leadership.

I don't really disagree with much of what you are saying and have addressed this in another post, but the proof is always in the pudding. Depends on results. People's intuitions, preferences and instincts are refined in the face of evidence over time. However, inclinations as I am using them are preferences and propensity to gravitate toward a certain activity and enjoy or deal with whatever might accompany said activity. No matter how much you try to push for equal outcomes of women going into engineering it will probably never be equal because women are not as inclined to do those things. That is ok and it is not helpful to keep pushing for equal outcomes in such contexts.

That's all fine and dandy, but no one is pushing women into engineering. Women have been denied a seat at the table fo centuries because of thinking like yours. All we want, all we ever wanted is the opportunity to go into engineering if we so choose. But your BS about different inclinations will always make sure that we don't get the opportunity.

Women don't like engineering as much as men. And that's ok! Pushing for equality is folly.

Complete BS and pure misogyny.

Ha! Ok you're delusional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things. Much of what is deemed "misogyny" is simply just taking this reality as a first principle rather than seeking absolute "equality" in everything, which is folly. Equality is a mirage.

And here is why she lost. RIGHT HERE!!!! Blatant, unapologetic misogyny on display.

On the contrary, I think you are Exhibit A of why she lost. You can't even handle a little sober truth without freaking out. This behavior is repellant to most of America.

Please don't mistake your bigoted views for the "truth." Live with the fact that you think that women are inferior and accept the fact that you're a misogynist. That is the only truth. Another sad truth is that there were many of you this time around and you elected another bigot. Good for you. For now.

All I said was that men and women have different inclinations and capacities. This is the truth. Apparently this was too much for you to handle without getting bent out of shape and reading a bunch of mumbo jumbo into what was a very simple statement. You are the problem.

This kind of gaslighting works on uneducated women. Not the vast majority of us on here (who have at least a BS/BAdegree). We are capable of having discussions with nuance and reading between the lines. You have said women are not capable of the job.

You are bringing your own baggage into your reading of what I said. Plenty of women are capable of being President. Choose and create for them instead of trying to force a mediocrity like Kamala down our throats.

But that's not what you said!!!!! You said women are not equal to men. We "need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things."

Yes, if you take the average man and the average woman, they are not equal in inclination or capacity. It's ok to acknowledge this and silly to present otherwise. It does not mean that no woman has the capacity or inclination to be the President. I thought this thread was about misogyny, broadly speaking.

Even if we accept that what you are saying is correct, or "the truth," it's still a misogynistic statement because it presupposes that the presidency requires male inclinations and capacity to be carried out effectively. Operating on the assumption that what you are saying is the truth, it may well be that women's inclinations and capacities are better suited to leadership.

I don't really disagree with much of what you are saying and have addressed this in another post, but the proof is always in the pudding. Depends on results. People's intuitions, preferences and instincts are refined in the face of evidence over time. However, inclinations as I am using them are preferences and propensity to gravitate toward a certain activity and enjoy or deal with whatever might accompany said activity. No matter how much you try to push for equal outcomes of women going into engineering it will probably never be equal because women are not as inclined to do those things. That is ok and it is not helpful to keep pushing for equal outcomes in such contexts.

That's all fine and dandy, but no one is pushing women into engineering. Women have been denied a seat at the table fo centuries because of thinking like yours. All we want, all we ever wanted is the opportunity to go into engineering if we so choose. But your BS about different inclinations will always make sure that we don't get the opportunity.

NP. Disagree. The STEM fields that are dominated by men are begging women to join. The problem is one of critical mass. There are all sorts of stories out there about women in STEM fields who become completely uncomfortable with the attention/harassment that they get because they suddenly are the only women that these men interact with.

And you think this is the women's fault!!!!???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things. Much of what is deemed "misogyny" is simply just taking this reality as a first principle rather than seeking absolute "equality" in everything, which is folly. Equality is a mirage.

And here is why she lost. RIGHT HERE!!!! Blatant, unapologetic misogyny on display.

On the contrary, I think you are Exhibit A of why she lost. You can't even handle a little sober truth without freaking out. This behavior is repellant to most of America.

Please don't mistake your bigoted views for the "truth." Live with the fact that you think that women are inferior and accept the fact that you're a misogynist. That is the only truth. Another sad truth is that there were many of you this time around and you elected another bigot. Good for you. For now.

All I said was that men and women have different inclinations and capacities. This is the truth. Apparently this was too much for you to handle without getting bent out of shape and reading a bunch of mumbo jumbo into what was a very simple statement. You are the problem.

This kind of gaslighting works on uneducated women. Not the vast majority of us on here (who have at least a BS/BAdegree). We are capable of having discussions with nuance and reading between the lines. You have said women are not capable of the job.

You are bringing your own baggage into your reading of what I said. Plenty of women are capable of being President. Choose and create for them instead of trying to force a mediocrity like Kamala down our throats.

But that's not what you said!!!!! You said women are not equal to men. We "need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things."

Yes, if you take the average man and the average woman, they are not equal in inclination or capacity. It's ok to acknowledge this and silly to present otherwise. It does not mean that no woman has the capacity or inclination to be the President. I thought this thread was about misogyny, broadly speaking.

Do you think that men and women have the "inclination" and "capacity" at equal rates?

No, of course not. As one simple example, men seek risk more, which means they die more frequently from dumb risky things but also reap more benefits from risk-seeking behavior. This desire for forced equality of outcomes benefits no one.

Let me ask this question again. Do you think that men and women have the "inclination" and "capacity" to be POTUS or in high status positions at equal rates?

Define "high status position"? If it means something like law firm partner, then women probably have more capacity than men to do that work but, from my experience, less inclination. More women I know who hold such roles would rather be doing something else (at least relative to the men I know who hold those roles), though some do actually genuinely enjoy it. The equal rates thing is a mirage and only really ever comes up in the context of apex, status positions.

Regarding President, the short answer is probably no as of right now. But that could shift and depends on what cluster of traits the electorate (which is majority female) deems desirable in a President. If you take a snapshot at the present of what those traits are, it appears to fall around things that more men have than women. That is not to say that no woman has these things. If women eventually choose to desire traits in a President that cluster more about what women have, then men would be less equipped. Men are women being equal and outcomes being equal is a mirage.

But these views are not misogynist? Right? It's what you keep coming back to say. Just want to make sure I understand for the 15th time.

I notice you take no quibble when I say women have more capacity. Would you ever? In any context? When inequality suggests that women are better than men, you have no problem. Your true colors are showing. We see you. And we don't like what we see!

No, women are not better than men. And men are not better than women. I have no problem saying that. Now you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things. Much of what is deemed "misogyny" is simply just taking this reality as a first principle rather than seeking absolute "equality" in everything, which is folly. Equality is a mirage.

And here is why she lost. RIGHT HERE!!!! Blatant, unapologetic misogyny on display.

On the contrary, I think you are Exhibit A of why she lost. You can't even handle a little sober truth without freaking out. This behavior is repellant to most of America.

Please don't mistake your bigoted views for the "truth." Live with the fact that you think that women are inferior and accept the fact that you're a misogynist. That is the only truth. Another sad truth is that there were many of you this time around and you elected another bigot. Good for you. For now.

All I said was that men and women have different inclinations and capacities. This is the truth. Apparently this was too much for you to handle without getting bent out of shape and reading a bunch of mumbo jumbo into what was a very simple statement. You are the problem.

This kind of gaslighting works on uneducated women. Not the vast majority of us on here (who have at least a BS/BAdegree). We are capable of having discussions with nuance and reading between the lines. You have said women are not capable of the job.

You are bringing your own baggage into your reading of what I said. Plenty of women are capable of being President. Choose and create for them instead of trying to force a mediocrity like Kamala down our throats.

But that's not what you said!!!!! You said women are not equal to men. We "need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things."

Yes, if you take the average man and the average woman, they are not equal in inclination or capacity. It's ok to acknowledge this and silly to present otherwise. It does not mean that no woman has the capacity or inclination to be the President. I thought this thread was about misogyny, broadly speaking.

Do you think that men and women have the "inclination" and "capacity" at equal rates?

No, of course not. As one simple example, men seek risk more, which means they die more frequently from dumb risky things but also reap more benefits from risk-seeking behavior. This desire for forced equality of outcomes benefits no one.

Let me ask this question again. Do you think that men and women have the "inclination" and "capacity" to be POTUS or in high status positions at equal rates?

Define "high status position"? If it means something like law firm partner, then women probably have more capacity than men to do that work but, from my experience, less inclination. More women I know who hold such roles would rather be doing something else (at least relative to the men I know who hold those roles), though some do actually genuinely enjoy it. The equal rates thing is a mirage and only really ever comes up in the context of apex, status positions.

Regarding President, the short answer is probably no as of right now. But that could shift and depends on what cluster of traits the electorate (which is majority female) deems desirable in a President. If you take a snapshot at the present of what those traits are, it appears to fall around things that more men have than women. That is not to say that no woman has these things. If women eventually choose to desire traits in a President that cluster more about what women have, then men would be less equipped. Men are women being equal and outcomes being equal is a mirage.

So you believe, in general, that women are less capable of being POTUS?

Of course he does. But I love how he wrapped it in "If women eventually choose..." BS. Class A gaslighter.

So all of a sudden women have no agency. The ballot is secret. What's stopping them from picking what they really want?!? Thanks for the "A" though, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We can combat deep misogyny by doing things in our daily lives like refusing to take on the unpaid, unappreciated work that women tend to do. Planning family holidays with no help from spouse? Stop. Scheduling all the family events? Stop. Force men in your life to step up.

This is huge. Within your own family, shift the dynamic where the wife/mom does all the planning, communicating, gift shopping, etc. A small step, but because it directly involves others outside the nuclear family, it sends a bigger societal message than 'we take turns buying milk'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe don’t label every traditionally masculine behavior you don’t like as “toxic masculinity”? Just a thought. Maybe stop placing men under a microscope?

Maybe learn how to be masculine but not toxic at the same time.

Maybe learn to speak English.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can combat deep misogyny by doing things in our daily lives like refusing to take on the unpaid, unappreciated work that women tend to do. Planning family holidays with no help from spouse? Stop. Scheduling all the family events? Stop. Force men in your life to step up.

This is huge. Within your own family, shift the dynamic where the wife/mom does all the planning, communicating, gift shopping, etc. A small step, but because it directly involves others outside the nuclear family, it sends a bigger societal message than 'we take turns buying milk'.

I don't think that will ever happen en masse. Sure, buy milk, but if it's something involving the kids or school, I want to be involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can combat deep misogyny by doing things in our daily lives like refusing to take on the unpaid, unappreciated work that women tend to do. Planning family holidays with no help from spouse? Stop. Scheduling all the family events? Stop. Force men in your life to step up.

This is huge. Within your own family, shift the dynamic where the wife/mom does all the planning, communicating, gift shopping, etc. A small step, but because it directly involves others outside the nuclear family, it sends a bigger societal message than 'we take turns buying milk'.

I don't think that will ever happen en masse. Sure, buy milk, but if it's something involving the kids or school, I want to be involved.

Fine, but your spouse should be equally involved. The school shouldn’t be calling you about everything kid-related.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can combat deep misogyny by doing things in our daily lives like refusing to take on the unpaid, unappreciated work that women tend to do. Planning family holidays with no help from spouse? Stop. Scheduling all the family events? Stop. Force men in your life to step up.

This is huge. Within your own family, shift the dynamic where the wife/mom does all the planning, communicating, gift shopping, etc. A small step, but because it directly involves others outside the nuclear family, it sends a bigger societal message than 'we take turns buying milk'.

I don't think that will ever happen en masse. Sure, buy milk, but if it's something involving the kids or school, I want to be involved.

Fine, but your spouse should be equally involved. The school shouldn’t be calling you about everything kid-related.

No, I want to be called. That's the problem (and my point). I don't think I'm that unusual. I know people on this board want their husbands called equally or instead, but I know plenty of moms who want to know what is going on and want to be the ones who get the call (me included!). You can't have the cultural shift you want if moms don't want to give up control (same for hosting, planning parties, etc.).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things. Much of what is deemed "misogyny" is simply just taking this reality as a first principle rather than seeking absolute "equality" in everything, which is folly. Equality is a mirage.

And here is why she lost. RIGHT HERE!!!! Blatant, unapologetic misogyny on display.

On the contrary, I think you are Exhibit A of why she lost. You can't even handle a little sober truth without freaking out. This behavior is repellant to most of America.

Please don't mistake your bigoted views for the "truth." Live with the fact that you think that women are inferior and accept the fact that you're a misogynist. That is the only truth. Another sad truth is that there were many of you this time around and you elected another bigot. Good for you. For now.

All I said was that men and women have different inclinations and capacities. This is the truth. Apparently this was too much for you to handle without getting bent out of shape and reading a bunch of mumbo jumbo into what was a very simple statement. You are the problem.

This kind of gaslighting works on uneducated women. Not the vast majority of us on here (who have at least a BS/BAdegree). We are capable of having discussions with nuance and reading between the lines. You have said women are not capable of the job.

You are bringing your own baggage into your reading of what I said. Plenty of women are capable of being President. Choose and create for them instead of trying to force a mediocrity like Kamala down our throats.

But that's not what you said!!!!! You said women are not equal to men. We "need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things."

Yes, if you take the average man and the average woman, they are not equal in inclination or capacity. It's ok to acknowledge this and silly to present otherwise. It does not mean that no woman has the capacity or inclination to be the President. I thought this thread was about misogyny, broadly speaking.

Do you think that men and women have the "inclination" and "capacity" at equal rates?

No, of course not. As one simple example, men seek risk more, which means they die more frequently from dumb risky things but also reap more benefits from risk-seeking behavior. This desire for forced equality of outcomes benefits no one.

Let me ask this question again. Do you think that men and women have the "inclination" and "capacity" to be POTUS or in high status positions at equal rates?

Define "high status position"? If it means something like law firm partner, then women probably have more capacity than men to do that work but, from my experience, less inclination. More women I know who hold such roles would rather be doing something else (at least relative to the men I know who hold those roles), though some do actually genuinely enjoy it. The equal rates thing is a mirage and only really ever comes up in the context of apex, status positions.

Regarding President, the short answer is probably no as of right now. But that could shift and depends on what cluster of traits the electorate (which is majority female) deems desirable in a President. If you take a snapshot at the present of what those traits are, it appears to fall around things that more men have than women. That is not to say that no woman has these things. If women eventually choose to desire traits in a President that cluster more about what women have, then men would be less equipped. Men are women being equal and outcomes being equal is a mirage.

But these views are not misogynist? Right? It's what you keep coming back to say. Just want to make sure I understand for the 15th time.

I notice you take no quibble when I say women have more capacity. Would you ever? In any context? When inequality suggests that women are better than men, you have no problem. Your true colors are showing. We see you. And we don't like what we see!

No, women are not better than men. And men are not better than women. I have no problem saying that. Now you!

Agree to disagree. Women are better and more inclined than men at some things and men are better and more inclined than women at other things. I wish you the best in your quest for absolute equality in everything across the board, but I don't think it's going to work out as you like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe don’t label every traditionally masculine behavior you don’t like as “toxic masculinity”? Just a thought. Maybe stop placing men under a microscope?

Maybe learn how to be masculine but not toxic at the same time.

Maybe learn to speak English.

Which part didn't you understand? It was pretty straight forward. DP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things. Much of what is deemed "misogyny" is simply just taking this reality as a first principle rather than seeking absolute "equality" in everything, which is folly. Equality is a mirage.

And here is why she lost. RIGHT HERE!!!! Blatant, unapologetic misogyny on display.

On the contrary, I think you are Exhibit A of why she lost. You can't even handle a little sober truth without freaking out. This behavior is repellant to most of America.

Please don't mistake your bigoted views for the "truth." Live with the fact that you think that women are inferior and accept the fact that you're a misogynist. That is the only truth. Another sad truth is that there were many of you this time around and you elected another bigot. Good for you. For now.

All I said was that men and women have different inclinations and capacities. This is the truth. Apparently this was too much for you to handle without getting bent out of shape and reading a bunch of mumbo jumbo into what was a very simple statement. You are the problem.

This kind of gaslighting works on uneducated women. Not the vast majority of us on here (who have at least a BS/BAdegree). We are capable of having discussions with nuance and reading between the lines. You have said women are not capable of the job.

You are bringing your own baggage into your reading of what I said. Plenty of women are capable of being President. Choose and create for them instead of trying to force a mediocrity like Kamala down our throats.

But that's not what you said!!!!! You said women are not equal to men. We "need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things."

Yes, if you take the average man and the average woman, they are not equal in inclination or capacity. It's ok to acknowledge this and silly to present otherwise. It does not mean that no woman has the capacity or inclination to be the President. I thought this thread was about misogyny, broadly speaking.

Even if we accept that what you are saying is correct, or "the truth," it's still a misogynistic statement because it presupposes that the presidency requires male inclinations and capacity to be carried out effectively. Operating on the assumption that what you are saying is the truth, it may well be that women's inclinations and capacities are better suited to leadership.

I don't really disagree with much of what you are saying and have addressed this in another post, but the proof is always in the pudding. Depends on results. People's intuitions, preferences and instincts are refined in the face of evidence over time. However, inclinations as I am using them are preferences and propensity to gravitate toward a certain activity and enjoy or deal with whatever might accompany said activity. No matter how much you try to push for equal outcomes of women going into engineering it will probably never be equal because women are not as inclined to do those things. That is ok and it is not helpful to keep pushing for equal outcomes in such contexts.

That's all fine and dandy, but no one is pushing women into engineering. Women have been denied a seat at the table fo centuries because of thinking like yours. All we want, all we ever wanted is the opportunity to go into engineering if we so choose. But your BS about different inclinations will always make sure that we don't get the opportunity.

Women don't like engineering as much as men. And that's ok! Pushing for equality is folly.

Complete BS and pure misogyny.

+1

Is the trad wife really brunch granny?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Put up a better female candidate next time and stop blaming it on this.

In what world is a grifter, rapist, insurrectionist, and convicted felon a better candidate?

That is something you need to ask Yourself. Ask Why did many people who think Trump is a horrible person, and agree with you that he is a "grifter, rapist, insurrectionist, and convicted felon" think he was a better choice than the other candidate? That says more about the other candidate than it does about Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things. Much of what is deemed "misogyny" is simply just taking this reality as a first principle rather than seeking absolute "equality" in everything, which is folly. Equality is a mirage.

And here is why she lost. RIGHT HERE!!!! Blatant, unapologetic misogyny on display.

On the contrary, I think you are Exhibit A of why she lost. You can't even handle a little sober truth without freaking out. This behavior is repellant to most of America.

Please don't mistake your bigoted views for the "truth." Live with the fact that you think that women are inferior and accept the fact that you're a misogynist. That is the only truth. Another sad truth is that there were many of you this time around and you elected another bigot. Good for you. For now.

All I said was that men and women have different inclinations and capacities. This is the truth. Apparently this was too much for you to handle without getting bent out of shape and reading a bunch of mumbo jumbo into what was a very simple statement. You are the problem.

This kind of gaslighting works on uneducated women. Not the vast majority of us on here (who have at least a BS/BAdegree). We are capable of having discussions with nuance and reading between the lines. You have said women are not capable of the job.

You are bringing your own baggage into your reading of what I said. Plenty of women are capable of being President. Choose and create for them instead of trying to force a mediocrity like Kamala down our throats.

But that's not what you said!!!!! You said women are not equal to men. We "need to dispense of the notion that men and women are equally equipped and inclined to handled the same things."

Yes, if you take the average man and the average woman, they are not equal in inclination or capacity. It's ok to acknowledge this and silly to present otherwise. It does not mean that no woman has the capacity or inclination to be the President. I thought this thread was about misogyny, broadly speaking.

How nice to start playing dumb now. It's one thing to say Kamala was not qualified to be president because of her record, policy plans or any number of things. It's entirely different to say that Kamala lost because women are not capable of being president which is what you did and continue to do even though you're pretending not to.

And NO, women do not have different abilities or inclinations when it comes to running for office. Only a misogynist would say that. Which is what you are.

Please show me where I said that.

Your last few sentences are silly. Of course they do. Unless you believe that all of those studies touting women as more empathetic leaders than men are complete bunk. Yeah...thought so.

What a beta you are - it makes perfect sense why you feel threatened by intelligent women. I’m glad my husband is a real man who doesn’t spend his afternoons trolling mommy blogs.

Oh, no! Not beta!! I am finished!

Funny how you probably balk at men calling themselves "alpha" but fall right into the same paradigm when you get rattled to try to score points. You're a hypocrite.

I laugh at all the men who call themselves alphas because they simply aren’t. Men calling themselves alphas are such low value men that they need to try to convince people they aren’t losers. If you need to say it…

I fully acknowledge there are alphas and betas in this world. I believe women or men can be alphas. And I admit I find betas a total turn off. I married an alpha (he would never call himself that because he thinks it’s dumb) but it’s true. He has a high pressure, high paying job. I wouldn’t settle for a poor loser that tells everyone they are an alpha while spending the day arguing with a stay at home mom sitting in the carpool lane.. But I’m sure you have other redeeming qualities other than being a total beta.

Your husband is a wage slave that works for men like me. Congrats, girl!