Women, strength, liberation

[MisterrSingh]

15 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

I hear what you're saying about people earning respect, but to withhold it until some 'test' is passed is problematic in itself. 

No, it's not even that, and you make it sound like "test" is a pejorative. As for problematic, that's a worryingly Marxist term that's white noise to me.

  Usually, adjudging someone's demeanour and the way they carry themselves and in the manner they interact with others, is enough to get a accurate handle on whether someone is worth the respect being potentially doled out. It's rarely, if anything, to do with appearance for obvious reasons. This can happen at a distance if a person is capable of reading signals.

I don't leave my house in the morning under the assumption that every human being I encounter will be wort the effort just because they're alive. Withholding respect in the absence of any redeemable qualities usually entails, for me, keeping my distance and ensuring contact is eliminated or kept to a minimum at best. It's not being mean, aggressive, rude, or even generating an atmosphere of unspoken tension where it becomes obvious something is "up". On the subject of women, there's a whole other aspect of considerations that need to be taken into account when interacting with them in this day and age.

[Ranjeet01]

I think the correct term is being corteous rather than respect 

[dallysingh101]

55 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

No, it's not even that, and you make it sound like "test" is a pejorative. As for problematic, that's a worryingly Marxist term that's white noise to me.

  Usually, adjudging someone's demeanour and the way they carry themselves and in the manner they interact with others, is enough to get a accurate handle on whether someone is worth the respect being potentially doled out. It's rarely, if anything, to do with appearance for obvious reasons. This can happen at a distance if a person is capable of reading signals.

I don't leave my house in the morning under the assumption that every human being I encounter will be wort the effort just because they're alive. Withholding respect in the absence of any redeemable qualities usually entails, for me, keeping my distance and ensuring contact is eliminated or kept to a minimum at best. It's not being mean, aggressive, rude, or even generating an atmosphere of unspoken tension where it becomes obvious something is "up".

I hear you, but the reality is that we have a wide range of personalities within our panth (as every other community), we are compelled to deal with that. Not every female in our community or even family might behave how we feel is worthy of respect, that's obvious. But until they demonstrate otherwise, you have to give a benefit of the doubt. And even then, what would you do with some teenager who isn't behaving exactly how you feel is right in your family, or even an older women? Alienating and castigating them harshly clearly hasn't worked in the past and created even worse problems we are all aware of.  Maybe because I've worked with lots of teenagers over the years and seen the reality of varying behaviour, I'm seeing it different to you. You might be able to distance yourself from a certain type you meet socially or at work, but do blokes have that choice when it is closer to home?

 

Quote

On the subject of women, there's a whole other aspect of considerations that need to be taken into account when interacting with them in this day and age.

If you're saying this, I don't know what we are 'arguing about'? CP even states that women's behaviour can be complex and sometimes even unintentionally self sabotaging. 

You know certain people have already created some myth of the inherently misogynist ethnic man. You know they are ready to pounce on that stereotype despite their own shortcomings in this department (like ignoring mass grooming all over the country despite trying to portray themselves as some noble protectors of females).  

[Not2Cool2Argue]

8 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

No.

Respect is earned, not distributed without merit like sweets. It is neither moral nor noble to do what you're suggesting. The opposite of not respecting somebody IS NOT demeaning them.

I view it as, "Wait and observe." Making the leap from not respecting somebody to the extreme of lambasting them or wrapping a cricket bat around their head, is what short-sighted, excitable third worlders do. The middle way of allowing them to display if they are in fact worth respecting is the only sensible route. Otherwise, just avoid and move on.

Yes. 

Women have been considered lowly creatures of low intelligence, morals, and hygiene for centuries. To change culture at a massive scale, hyperbole and pendulum swings are needed before a balanced view comes into being. So praising women for being women and respecting women in general is needed. Respect for individuals can be withheld 

People think it's a tragedy that feminism is winning, that women have more rights in divorces, more women are graduating from college than men, media portrays women as leaders, sensible with men as comedic characters,  affirmative action for women etc. 

It's not a tragedy, its justice or even karma. Let women rise so high they become oppressive. Then balance will then be restored. Unless it swings the other way and we are back to patriarchy. But it takes a few swings of the pendulum before things settle down. 

As happened with democracy and monarchy in France. 

[puzzled]

Person should be respected for the person they are       yh you should treat everyone equally and nicely     but when it comes to respecting someone   it should depend on their character and the person they are.  There are women at work who openly crack jokes about how they had a wee in the alleyway and about their sex life etc    do I respect them no!  Do i treat them good and nice yes      big difference. 

[puzzled]

A woman at work back in summer told everyone in the canteen that she saw a builder working with his top off and that she could of got fvcked by him right there. Do I respect that/her? Absolutely not!   But do I talk to her nicely and politely yes      big difference 

No one should simply be respected because of what gender they are!  That's stupid 

[Ranjeet01]

2 hours ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

Yes. 

Women have been considered lowly creatures of low intelligence, morals, and hygiene for centuries. To change culture at a massive scale, hyperbole and pendulum swings are needed before a balanced view comes into being. So praising women for being women and respecting women in general is needed. Respect for individuals can be withheld 

People think it's a tragedy that feminism is winning, that women have more rights in divorces, more women are graduating from college than men, media portrays women as leaders, sensible with men as comedic characters,  affirmative action for women etc. 

It's not a tragedy, its justice or even karma. Let women rise so high they become oppressive. Then balance will then be restored. Unless it swings the other way and we are back to patriarchy. But it takes a few swings of the pendulum before things settle down. 

As happened with democracy and monarchy in France. 

Please explain what Patriarchy is.

Also please explain how balance will be restored if women rise so high that start to oppress. 

[Not2Cool2Argue]

4 hours ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Please explain what Patriarchy is.

Also please explain how balance will be restored if women rise so high that start to oppress. 

Patriarchy in my opinion is when power and wealth is determined on a person being Male. For example inheritance laws that favor males only. Education available to males only. Divorces can only be finalized by males and offspring automatically belong to father. All income belongs to husband. Fate of women decided by father or husband. 

You know all the things suffragettes fought against. I know most of them could be beneficial like offspring belonging to father in a divorce so raising them is not a burden on women only. But they became oppressive laws. Inheritance to male is to offset dowry and property remaining in bloodlines etc 

 

Balance will be restored firstly because If women get a chance to be so high up that they became oppressive. That hopefully means feminism spread to every corner of  Earth. Even traditional countries like Africa, Saudi Arabia, villages in poorest india will get the message that women can be in power. Are not a burden and drain on resources only. Can have another purpose besides marriage and breeding. And maybe even clue onto the fact that in this day and age can be just as equal and worthy as sons. So basically the feminist agenda is not shut down before it has spread everywhere. Not just knowledge, but actual experience and shift in thinking. 

Secondly, once women become oppressive. They can stop using the victim card. All those theories about women being better Rulers, kinder, less prone to warfare can be debunked. And they can stop saying women suck because of patriarchy. And men who defend women because of previous injustices will realize they are human. For example Israel, even though they are committing atrocities, their previous victimhood is protecting them. And until they commit a crime that is so heinous or effects more than just the current despised ethnicity, the world isn't too bothered. Same with women. Let them win. Accomplish their feminist agenda. And let it fail. Sure ppl will suffer especially men. But karma. Also, only after failing will ppl realize how unrealistic feminism is. Like communism.

Although I believe communism and feminism will be possible in a far far future when technology is way more advanced. Human race just isn't ready for it yet. Like it took an  educated and affluential middle class to make democracy work. Although all of Europe was convinced democracy is mob rule and bound to fail after the French revolution. 

 

[Not2Cool2Argue]

2 hours ago, KSVIRK said:

I have been falsely accused of many things related to women...lost all my respect...and you want me to elevate the status of women until they become EVEN MORE AGGRESSIVE? That is ridiculous. 

See? Here is one woke man

Due to his experience of oppression. If everyone had a chance to feel that. Balance would reassert itself

[Ranjeet01]

6 hours ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

Patriarchy in my opinion is when power and wealth is determined on a person being Male. For example inheritance laws that favor males only. Education available to males only. Divorces can only be finalized by males and offspring automatically belong to father. All income belongs to husband. Fate of women decided by father or husband. 

You know all the things suffragettes fought against. I know most of them could be beneficial like offspring belonging to father in a divorce so raising them is not a burden on women only. But they became oppressive laws. Inheritance to male is to offset dowry and property remaining in bloodlines etc 

 

Balance will be restored firstly because If women get a chance to be so high up that they became oppressive. That hopefully means feminism spread to every corner of  Earth. Even traditional countries like Africa, Saudi Arabia, villages in poorest india will get the message that women can be in power. Are not a burden and drain on resources only. Can have another purpose besides marriage and breeding. And maybe even clue onto the fact that in this day and age can be just as equal and worthy as sons. So basically the feminist agenda is not shut down before it has spread everywhere. Not just knowledge, but actual experience and shift in thinking. 

Secondly, once women become oppressive. They can stop using the victim card. All those theories about women being better Rulers, kinder, less prone to warfare can be debunked. And they can stop saying women suck because of patriarchy. And men who defend women because of previous injustices will realize they are human. For example Israel, even though they are committing atrocities, their previous victimhood is protecting them. And until they commit a crime that is so heinous or effects more than just the current despised ethnicity, the world isn't too bothered. Same with women. Let them win. Accomplish their feminist agenda. And let it fail. Sure ppl will suffer especially men. But karma. Also, only after failing will ppl realize how unrealistic feminism is. Like communism.

Although I believe communism and feminism will be possible in a far far future when technology is way more advanced. Human race just isn't ready for it yet. Like it took an  educated and affluential middle class to make democracy work. Although all of Europe was convinced democracy is mob rule and bound to fail after the French revolution. 

 

In regards to your first point

A lot of those laws that preferred men no longer exist.

Women can inherit land and property, they can acquire wealth.

Women can access education.

So the question is, does patriarchy still exist?

In regards to suffragettes, they weren't a peaceful bunch. They were quite violent and largely made up of women in higher echelons of society.

Secondly, do you not think we have entered a period of misandry?