What does WOMEN's Rights actually mean?

Discussion in 'Women's Rights' started by Libhater, May 25, 2011.

  1. Libhater

    Libhater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    12,500
    Likes Received:
    2,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Back in the early 1970's we were inundated with liberal femanazi women pushing for the ERA or 'Equal Rights Amendment', and for abortion/murder rights of their fetuses, right to prosecute an overly aggressive husband for rape in a legally consummated marriage, rights for women to be hired to any job whatsover despite their physical and or emotional handicaps, i.e. use of the (quota system) or failure to pass a requirements test for a particular occupation, etc. Women also had their rights highlighted by the show called 'Murphy Brown' where single motherhood was depicted and accepted as the norm, while the family structure of a man-woman and children household was rejected as being out of the mainstream.

    I experienced the over-powering state and national control over my lack of rights concerning alimony, child support and custody issues. The woman always made out on those issues at approximately 100% of the time. Failure to pay child support often left the men staring out at an empty passing life behind bars.

    There are requirement tests for firemen to carry a 150 pound dummy over their shoulders about 150 feet and then climb a ladder with the same dummy across their shoulders. Most women couldn't pass this test, but because these women could fall back on those wonderful quota systems and the liberally-based dumbing-down initiatives--many of them got their licenses as firemen.

    Women libbers were even complaining that women weren't allowed to take on all previously male postions in our military. Once the libbers realized that hand-to-hand combat roles were too much for their delicate gender to handle, and or they got themselves pregnant--they soon decided to opt out from those more strenuous male-oriented postions.

    As a nation we gave women the right to vote back in the 1920's, and our welfare roles and social programs have exploded ever since.

    So my question is, what other rights do you women want or need so that I'll be able to notify my congressmen about your latest whims so as to make this a more acceptable and gender neutral society? My ex-wives called me a male chauvinist pig. So in honor of them and all the bullcrap I went through with them, I've dedicated my avatar to them, as they can now see me in the image they always loved.
     
  2. maori

    maori New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    775
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    our differences should be celebrated, not annoy you.

    i think in any relationship, whether it's a romantic one, a professional one or a friendship, we should always use our different traits to complement each other, not to fight each other. this goes for any type of relationship, whether it's between men and women or men and men or women and women.

    i am not for positive discrimination coz the concept entails someone will be discriminated against.
     
  3. jbeukema

    jbeukema New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2009
    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is no such thing as 'women's rights' or 'men's rights' or 'black rights' or anything else of the sort. There are only those rights of the individual shared by all people. To declare otherwise is to declare that some groups have more rights while others have less.
     
  4. Libhater

    Libhater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    12,500
    Likes Received:
    2,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Did you read the entire posting? I would agree with you that we should celebrate the differences between the sexes, but for heavens sake, with factions like womens' libbers (femanazis) and the liberal intelligensia making those differences (entitlements) tax paying issues that discriminate against the male and the working stiff, shouldn't women start learning how to su*kle from their own tit for a change? I know I stopped holding my 3 ex wives hands once I found out those very dirty hands had government approval stamped all over them. :puke:
     
  5. maori

    maori New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Messages:
    775
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0

    i was just adding my two cents....talking in general, you were talking about specific examples. i don't know anything about your tax system so i can't comment on it.

    but now we're on the subject: get married less, have less ex-wives. it's a lot cheaper.

    i am not at all in favour of discrimination whether's it's on a tax level or personal level.
     
    OKgrannie and (deleted member) like this.
  6. Bender

    Bender New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2011
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, all women take government money because the losers you picked up (FYI, water seeks it's own level) did.
     
    los2rec and (deleted member) like this.
  7. Bender

    Bender New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2011
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But then he wouldn't be able to blame women for his problems! :mrgreen:
     
  8. Libhater

    Libhater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    12,500
    Likes Received:
    2,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Those 3 losers I just happened to pick up along the way became femanazi liberal lesbo losers, thus one of the reasons why I dumped them and their destructive presence.
     
  9. Bender

    Bender New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2011
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Again, water seeks it's own level.

    Femanazis? Did they try and shove you in an oven or something?
    Quick reminder of what nazis do:
    [​IMG]
     
  10. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, we see where your hate comes from.


    Yeah, giving women the vote was such a horrible idea. I don't know why anyone would think equality is the right move.

    Well, she was rather right.
     
  11. Libhater

    Libhater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    12,500
    Likes Received:
    2,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Good, perhaps now you'll have a reference in which to see why women have been utilizing big government to get their one-sided social issues--at the expense of the tax payers and at the detriment of the male.


    The term 'equality' as bandied about by women libbers is a total sham. I don't need to explain all of the injustices that the ERA, womens' libbers, abortion rights activists, affirmative action, quotas etc...etc.. have had on our society as a whole, or do I?


    That would be 'they' in the plural as all three of them had no other comeback in dealing with reality than to call me a chauvinist.
     
  12. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The government is there to ensure that the law is obeyed and impartial. Why wouldn't one use the government? That's what it's there for.

    Voting rights was equality, simple.
     
  13. Libhater

    Libhater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    12,500
    Likes Received:
    2,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This isn't a question about the law as made by our government. This is a simple fact that women exercised their voting rights to make a total sham of our economy and society as a whole. Again, I can provide a chart if needed to show how entitlement/welfare programs exploded once women started voting. Of course these entitlement/welfare type programs got an added boost from the liberal FDR's New Deal. I probably should dig up my famous post...'Should Women be allowed to Vote' to use as a buffer in presenting the facts here. You do realize there was a reason why women weren't allowed to vote, and didn't participate in politics during our founders era, don't you? :)
     
  14. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And all of the things you complain about, FDR's deals and LBJ's Society were proposed, supported, and executed by men. What's your point? The female vote, up until recently, has followed the same trend of men.

    Women weren't allowed to vote because of sexism in government.
     
  15. Libhater

    Libhater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    12,500
    Likes Received:
    2,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Don't sidetrack the debate. The New Deal and the Great Society were enacted by two very liberal men. But back to the women, liberal women are the people responsible for voting increases in those social programs whether they started before FDR polluted the society or after he polluted our society.
     
  16. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How could they be responsible for these programs if the support for both was primarily from men; women's votes paralleled men's in percent approval and so forth. How are they responsible any more or less than the men who wrote, signed, and executed it?
     
  17. Libhater

    Libhater Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    12,500
    Likes Received:
    2,486
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Again, the men that signed those programs into existence were very liberal men. Other than a few weenie liberal men, every liberal woman voted for those programs. The point being that Conservative men and women would never vote for these economy draining and burgeoning financial boondoggles, while liberal men and women have kept them alive, and thus our recent bout with dealing with our most leftist/socialist president
     
  18. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes, every liberal voted for these programs; but especially back then, there were just as many liberal women as there were liberal men (in percentage, of course).

    So your problem is with liberal voters, in general, and not women...
     
  19. Bender

    Bender New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2011
    Messages:
    891
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Those people vote differently than I do, they shouldn't be allowed to vote"

    Ahhh, democracy.
     
  20. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    An essentially self-proclaimed sexist is simply a self-proclaimed 'LibHater', good to know. He does blame the nation's problems on women voting, though.
     
  21. los2rec

    los2rec New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is possible to look at feminism as just another special interest group. It doesn't make women's lives easier beyond what was done 2 generations ago. For example women still don't get a few months off work with full pay after child birth, and even if they did, it would be perfectly acceptable to lay them off from their jobs for any other made-up reason before they give birth. Women's movement didn't even make it as far as protecting Mexican and Philippinian women from those sweatshops. But the one thing feminism does very well is that it makes VERY good money for some people. The most common welfare fraud is that women without any means of self support keep giving birth to endless babies. I am not an anti-liberal, but I can imagine how this drives some people against women.
    :sun:
     
  22. los2rec

    los2rec New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In any usual popular vote based democracy, the majority always has more rights than a minority. This is why democracy is unfair. The American founding fathers tried to fix this by introducing the Electoral College.

    Individual rights are a separate category from group rights. To illustrate, individual rights get you an employment, but it is the group rights that get you sick-leave or vacation-leave with it.
    :sun:
     
  23. los2rec

    los2rec New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OMG Bender, now I will not be able to finish my dinner. :twisted:
    :puke: :bump: :omg:
     
    Catch and (deleted member) like this.
  24. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, they do? Don't they? Clinton?

    That's a labor rights issue.

    Who does that in America?
     
  25. los2rec

    los2rec New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    545
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Go to any city and take the wrong exit off the highway and you will see. From what I heard from social workers, the poverty logic is that if a woman can't get an income, then she should have babies, after which various government agencies provide her "family" a basic sustainance. What is interesting is that these women don't have a husband or a man in their houses, and more importantly they regularly fail to see to the basic needs of their children such as doctor visits or elementary school. However they never forget to arrange every appointment necessary to get welfare cheques and subsidies.
     

Share This Page