At which point does discrimination reverse?

[Raider5678]

Where does it end? One group always hates the other, they can't get along. Either whites hate blacks or blacks hate white.

Muslims hate christians or Christians hate muslims.

There's a never ending loop, and in my personal opinion groups like BLM isn't helping. What's your opinion?

[johnmusic]

There is no end.

Edited October 16, 2016 by johnmusic

[dimreepr]

Where does it end? One group always hates the other, they can't get along. Either whites hate blacks or blacks hate white.

Muslims hate christians or Christians hate muslims.

 

 

Tolerance.

[swansont]

At some point you have to stop teaching the hate. People are not born hating each other. This is learned behavior.

[Delta1212]

Of course they can get along. I work in NYC and am personality surrounded by people with all of the qualities you just mentioned who get along with each other very well in both personal and professional capacities on a daily basis.

 

There is no inherent conflict between anyone with any of those traits. The problems arise when there is a conflict between people's ideas of how the world is supposed to be. And by conflict I don't mean simply different ideas, but ideas that actively get in the way of each other such that they cannot both be implemented at the same time. To pick a silly non-politically charged example:

 

"I prefer cake" and "I prefer pie" are different ideas but they aren't in conflict. "I prefer cake" and "cake should be banned" are conflicting. Or more subtly "Peanut oil is the primary cooking oil that should be used in all restaurants because it is the healthiest and most flavorful" and "I'm allergic to peanuts." I'll come back to that last one.

 

 

 

As a white male, I will 100% cop to having stumbled into conversations and communities online where the topics, language used and rules caused a sort of knee-jerk reaction of intense discomfort, annoyance or even anger at feeling like I was being discriminated against and my opinions were unwelcome because of my race and gender.

 

But I used knee-jerk for a reason. I know a lot of people who hit that initial wall and those first emotions and that's it. They stop right there because it is uncomfortable and nobody likes feeling uncomfortable. But you can't stop at that point.

 

That sort of vague feeling of being under attack? That's where you need to start if you want to contribute to an ultimatum resolution. The next step involves some introspection. What, exactly, is it that is making me uncomfortable? Why is it making me uncomfortable? And most importantly, could there possibly be a valid reason for someone to go about doing things in this way that is making me uncomfortable?

 

That last question, asked honestly, is, in my experience, essential to getting past a negative emotional reaction in order to really listen to what someone is saying and get down to what the deeper problems are. In my case, forcing myself to do this, to really listen, is what helped me understand that a lot of those initial negative feelings and experiences I was having are the feelings that some people have every single day and, unlike me, they don't have the option of walking away because those issues don't only crop up when somebody brings up the subject. They follow them around and are an inescapable part of daily life.

 

But there is a lot to understand and the only way to get there is to open yourself up to being exposed to the thoughts, ideas and experiences of the people who are trying to make these points. It's easy to get caught up in a critique of how these ideas are being expressed, but the blunt truth is that someone who is drowning is going to have to scream and flail in order to draw attention and get help, and telling them that they're being an asshole an could have just quietly tried passing a note along to the lifeguard that would have been taken under advisement instead of disturbing everyone else in the pool does nothing to get them out of an immediately harrowing predicament.

 

I am not saying you have to blindly accept everything that someone says or that you will come out of an experience agreeing with absolutely every point that someone makes, but the only way to solve the problems that we have is for people to really listen to each other. And the only way to listen is to check your ego at the door, accept that you're there to listen for a bit and hold off on contributing yourself for a while and to open yourself up to the possibility that everything the other person is saying is correct. I'm not saying that it always will be, but if you're closed off to the possibility, you'll stop hearing what is being said.

 

Ultimately, this is something that everyone of every background needs to do, but the only person you have any direct input on the behavior of is yourself. You can't insist that other people have to open themselves up to listening to your perspective before you will listen to theirs, or that it's unfair that you have to listen to people who aren't interested in listening to you. That's the attitude that will keep anyone from listening to anyone else at all. But if you do take the time to listen and to understand, you might find it easier to then get your point across to others because you'll have a better understanding of where they are coming from and what will speak to them, and you may also find that some problems that you had have different sources than you thought they did.

[iNow]

Ostracize that behavior. Make it clear it's not allowed. Model for others how to treat and think of others properly and with due respect.

Edited October 16, 2016 by iNow

[Phi for All]

I don't think looking for reverse discrimination is the answer, especially if you're concerned about never-ending loops.

 

Perhaps groups like Black Lives Matter need to wear name tags along with their pins. People discriminate based on group thinking, but I don't think it happens as much when Ben meets with Reychelle at work, or Reychelle asks about Mr Ahmadi's son's graduation when she goes to pick up her dry cleaning at his store.

 

Mob mentality strips away individual identity. You've heard it said that a person can be smart but people are idiots? A person with a name could be a lot like you even if you don't know them, but someone from a group you seemingly have little in common with is a stranger.

 

Perhaps you could look at BLM as an attempt to get to know some black lives, or to look more subjectively at individuals and not people or groups. What you see as reverse discrimination might be attempts at legitimate change. Some white people misunderstand these types of movements as "turning the tables", like we have to discriminate against somebody and it's the white people's turn. I think it's really more about breaking the habit of applying traits and characteristics to whole groups and expecting anything accurate or meaningful to come of it. This shows us that individual lives do matter, and should matter to everyone.

[johnmusic]

Large cities create a place where all types of people live in close proximity and get to know each other and most are smart enough to realize we are all basically the same. People need exposure to things to understand them. That is my opinion and hello i am very new here.

[Ten oz]

Where does it end? One group always hates the other, they can't get along. Either whites hate blacks or blacks hate white.

Muslims hate christians or Christians hate muslims.

There's a never ending loop, and in my personal opinion groups like BLM isn't helping. What's your opinion?

The threads title is about discrimination and not hate. If you're asking about hate the answer is never. People will always hate people. If you are asking about discrimination than that is a different conversation. Discrimination is about treatment.

Regardless of feelings positive or nagative feelings towards other groups the ability to discriminate doesn't always exist. Muslims living in Israel are not in a position to discriminate against Jewish people. Some may hate but as a group they lack the positional power in Israeli society to discriminate broadly. At the same time Isael is sounded by Islamic nations. Some of those nations support terrorism against Israel. So while Jewish people are not discriminated against by Muslims within Israel they are by some Muslims outside of Israel.

 

BLM is not a group with any positional power to discriminate. They can be marginalized and ignored. The way they feel towards other people, me or you, has no impact on our lives. Meanwhile the group (Police) that BLM speaks out against have massive amounts of positional power in our society. If the police choose to discriminate, even a little, the results are life changing. Police cannot be marginalized or ignored. Merely attempting to marginalize or ignore police itself can be a provocation that justifies the police taking one into their physical control.

 

In my opinion it is important to separate the way people feel about each other from the ability of people to mistreat each other. People in power havethe ability to negatively impact the lives of those they dislike. So it is important people in power be more tolerant, inclusive, and etc. Conflating how every individual feels with the fact that some in positions of power use their feelings to oppress is a mistake. Everyone doesn't have to like everyone else. Everyone simply needs equal treatment and protection by society at large.

[Raider5678]

The threads title is about discrimination and not hate. If you're asking about hate the answer is never. People will always hate people. If you are asking about discrimination than that is a different conversation. Discrimination is about treatment.

 

Regardless of feelings positive or nagative feelings towards other groups the ability to discriminate doesn't always exist. Muslims living in Israel are not in a position to discriminate against Jewish people. Some may hate but as a group they lack the positional power in Israeli society to discriminate broadly. At the same time Isael is sounded by Islamic nations. Some of those nations support terrorism against Israel. So while Jewish people are not discriminated against by Muslims within Israel they are by some Muslims outside of Israel.

 

BLM is not a group with any positional power to discriminate. They can be marginalized and ignored. The way they feel towards other people, me or you, has no impact on our lives. Meanwhile the group (Police) that BLM speaks out against have massive amounts of positional power in our society. If the police choose to discriminate, even a little, the results are life changing. Police cannot be marginalized or ignored. Merely attempting to marginalize or ignore police itself can be a provocation that justifies the police taking one into their physical control.

 

In my opinion it is important to separate the way people feel about each other from the ability of people to mistreat each other. People in power havethe ability to negatively impact the lives of those they dislike. So it is important people in power be more tolerant, inclusive, and etc. Conflating how every individual feels with the fact that some in positions of power use their feelings to oppress is a mistake. Everyone doesn't have to like everyone else. Everyone simply needs equal treatment and protection by society at large.

Very few bad cops, I would appreciate it if you didn't group them all up. In the same idea, theres bad people in every race, religion, and country. Just because you don't like the bad ones is no reason to flame against every one in that group, and then include any in that set of circles (white cop, police and whites). BLM seems to be doing just that, in my personal opinion. Sure, they are speaking out against the bad ones, but the "people" in BLM are making it seem like their against everyone in those groups. Rioting, destroying homes, assaultinb people, does not help that out look. I've seen some pretty stupid acts by BLM near the place I live. And as some said, its the group mentality that doesn't help.

 

But in any case, I used BLM as an example, not to target them. Let's use sometin else. Men are commonly accused of making sexist comments about women. Is it possible for that to go reverse? According to the way society portrays it, most would say no. Buts I've heard it just as often coming from both genders. Maybe this means I'm just in a weird school, but, only one group would ever get accused of doing that. I'll let you guess which, male or female.

Edited October 16, 2016 by Raider5678

[Phi for All]

But in any case, I used BLM as an example, not to target them. Let's use sometin else. Men are commonly accused of making sexist comments about women. Is it possible for that to go reverse? According to the way society portrays it, most would say no. Buts I've heard it just as often coming from both genders. Maybe this means I'm just in a weird school, but, only one group would ever get accused of doing that. I'll let you guess which, male or female.

 

I'm the first male in my generation in my family who hasn't taught his daughter that she needs to stay quiet when the men are talking. My daughter doesn't have to fold her hands in her lap and keep quiet if she has something to say. She doesn't have to apologize if I get angry about something that doesn't concern her. She has not been groomed to be a housewife.

 

I want you to think about the "sexist comments" you hear "coming from both genders". Can you tell me any of ones you hear coming from women? Because I've never heard any comment about a man that was anywhere near as hateful and diseased as the worst of the insults men level at women. When a man makes a sexist comment about a woman, he's usually implying that the woman is promiscuous (like that's a bad thing). What does a woman accuse a man of? Promiscuity is a plus for many men.

 

The worst sexist words for men are the equivalent of calling them "jerks". The worst sexist words for women imply that they're unfit, unclean, and deeply tainted sexually. Men can laugh off sexist comments, because they're allowed to like sex almost as much as they want. Women are only allowed to display as much interest in sex as men think is right. Like the BLM issue, I think you'll find there is no equivalency. Police procedures are at the core of the BLM issues, and men are the ones who need to modify their behavior in the gender war for the most part. This is not a they-do-it-too matter. Not equivalent.

[Delta1212]

Honestly? As much as I agree with the difference in the terms, I think it's the wrong tack to take. When you're still in school, it all just feels like name calling, because at that level it mostly is. There are some larger societal things going on that impact boys and girls differently, but the power imbalance between male and female students, while they are students, is usually negligible and so it doesn't feel all that different when a girl says something mean about boys vs when a boy says something mean about girls.

 

It wasn't until I got into the workforce that general "out of school" age bracket that I really started to see the difference in the effects that this stuff has. I got to see the difference in how I'm treated vs how my girlfriend is treated both professionally and just walking around on the street, and the difference between what happens when my girlfriend is taking a walk or going to the gym by herself compared with when I'm with her.

 

I've gotten to see professional differences that range from subtle to overt. The more overt, along the lines of ignoring the contributions of female employees in favor of those of male employees regardless of even fairly wide and obvious gaps in relative competence, seems to be more common in smaller businesses without large human resources and legal departments. But on the subtle end I can think of at least one instance where I've personally benefitted from a level of presumed competence that I did nothing to actually demonstrate, and which based on experience probably not would have been so easily afforded to someone who wasn't a white male from an upper middle class background.

 

As with a lot of things, while still in school, I knew what racism and sexism were and that they existed and that there was a history of each, but, again, especially as a white male, a lot of it felt like "in this day and age" it was mostly "name calling" and while I got to a point where I accepted that there was a difference in the kinds names that you could call a historically oppressed group versus what someone could call me, I didn't really "get" the why of it, nor the weight off it that still existed, until I was older and had developed relationships with a larger and more diverse group of people and had gotten a look first, or in some cases at least second hand, at the differences in how I was treated in situations i would otherwise have taken for granted versus how people I knew had been treated in similar circumstances.

 

When I'm called a name, it's just a name. Doesn't mean that it's a good thing or that it's fun for me. But that's where it ends. There are lots of people for whom certain names aren't just names. They are labels that are used to create an environment with real and serious consequences for them as people that can't easily be brushed off the way hurt feelings can.

[Raider5678]

 

I'm the first male in my generation in my family who hasn't taught his daughter that she needs to stay quiet when the men are talking. My daughter doesn't have to fold her hands in her lap and keep quiet if she has something to say. She doesn't have to apologize if I get angry about something that doesn't concern her. She has not been groomed to be a housewife.

 

I want you to think about the "sexist comments" you hear "coming from both genders". Can you tell me any of ones you hear coming from women? Because I've never heard any comment about a man that was anywhere near as hateful and diseased as the worst of the insults men level at women. When a man makes a sexist comment about a woman, he's usually implying that the woman is promiscuous (like that's a bad thing). What does a woman accuse a man of? Promiscuity is a plus for many men.

 

The worst sexist words for men are the equivalent of calling them "jerks". The worst sexist words for women imply that they're unfit, unclean, and deeply tainted sexually. Men can laugh off sexist comments, because they're allowed to like sex almost as much as they want. Women are only allowed to display as much interest in sex as men think is right. Like the BLM issue, I think you'll find there is no equivalency. Police procedures are at the core of the BLM issues, and men are the ones who need to modify their behavior in the gender war for the most part. This is not a they-do-it-too matter. Not equivalent.

Great job raising your daughter.

 

As for the sexist comments, you would have to understand the difference between language. For example, most people wouldn't call a guy a slut(I'm not a sexist, this is just culture. if this offends you, then sorry, you get offended over nothing.) .Starting a rumor that some girl is one, is usually demeaning and inappropriate. In my school, the term for guys is prick. Pretty much the same result, just a different word. Most people avoid him, they talk about him behind his back, there's all kinds of rumors, NOBODY lets their GF around them, they suddenly have every sexual disease and everything else that being labeled a slut gets you. Perhaps this is just my area(people from around the entire area all use the term the same way), but that seems to be more equal then previous generations. Change comes slowly, entire generations probably won't change, but their children might. Same way you raised your daughter, that seems to have happened here.

 

The worst sexist words for your generation might have been/be "jerk" but in my generation its "prick". As for women its stayed the same probably.

 

And another note, I've heard just recently some girls talking like "If only I could get him alone, the things I would do to him." Which probably the only sexist thing about this is that It's really uncomfortable to sit behind them on the bus from that point on.

[swansont]

Very few bad cops, I would appreciate it if you didn't group them all up. In the same idea, theres bad people in every race, religion, and country. Just because you don't like the bad ones is no reason to flame against every one in that group, and then include any in that set of circles (white cop, police and whites). BLM seems to be doing just that, in my personal opinion. Sure, they are speaking out against the bad ones, but the "people" in BLM are making it seem like their against everyone in those groups. Rioting, destroying homes, assaultinb people, does not help that out look. I've seen some pretty stupid acts by BLM near the place I live. And as some said, its the group mentality that doesn't help.

 

But in any case, I used BLM as an example, not to target them. Let's use sometin else. Men are commonly accused of making sexist comments about women. Is it possible for that to go reverse? According to the way society portrays it, most would say no. Buts I've heard it just as often coming from both genders. Maybe this means I'm just in a weird school, but, only one group would ever get accused of doing that. I'll let you guess which, male or female.

 

 

Perhaps you don't realize that the stance you are taking regarding BLM is exactly what you are decrying in speech about the police.

[Raider5678]

 

 

Perhaps you don't realize that the stance you are taking regarding BLM is exactly what you are decrying in speech about the police.

"People" in BLM are not the sweetest things. A person in BLM is perfectly fine with me. I do not detest BLM, but when they riot and destroy homes, businesses, and ending Cops lives, I tend to get annoyed. Violent protests are not of seemingly good to me, but maybe that's just me. Personally I could work with peaceful protests. The group mentality is usually what causes it to become violent, and the group mentality also causes acts that are unhelpful in any way. Perhaps you don't agree, but this is an opinionated response, and I am not in the mood to argue about BLM.

[swansont]

"People" in BLM are not the sweetest things. A person in BLM is perfectly fine with me. I do not detest BLM, but when they riot and destroy homes, businesses, and ending Cops lives, I tend to get annoyed. Violent protests are not of seemingly good to me, but maybe that's just me. Personally I could work with peaceful protests. The group mentality is usually what causes it to become violent, and the group mentality also causes acts that are unhelpful in any way. Perhaps you don't agree, but this is an opinionated response, and I am not in the mood to argue about BLM.

 

 

If you think that generalization and stereotyping is bad in one case, you should not engage in it in another. It's hypocrisy. It's also one of the roots of discrimination.

[Raider5678]

 

 

If you think that generalization and stereotyping is bad in one case, you should not engage in it in another. It's hypocrisy. It's also one of the roots of discrimination.

Ok, I think I'm phrasing it the wrong way. I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST BLM.

WHEN A GROUP OF THEM VIOLENTLY PROTESTS, I GET ANNOYED.

I DO NOT BELIEVE IN VIOLENT PROTESTS.

GROUP MENTALITY IS NOT HELPFUL VERY OFTEN.

THE END.

[Delta1212]

Perhaps you should take some time to think about what about this conversation is so upsetting to you that you feel the need to yell on an online forums.

 

Also, being annoyed at what someone else is doing is not the same thing as discrimination.

[Raider5678]

Perhaps you should take some time to think about what about this conversation is so upsetting to you that you feel the need to yell on an online forums.

 

Also, being annoyed at what someone else is doing is not the same thing as discrimination.

Hmmm, because I have a bad way with words, an no matter how I said it, it seemed to be taken the wrong way. So I put it into simple sentences that couldn't(Hopefully) be taken the wrong way. Yet the were...... And somehow the point I was trying to make the entire time literally JUST got through. I get annoyed with BLM sometimes, I am not discriminating against them, as Swansnot seemed to say.

[Ten oz]

Very few bad cops, I would appreciate it if you didn't group them all up. In the same idea, theres bad people in every race, religion, and country. Just because you don't like the bad ones is no reason to flame against every one in that group, and then include any in that set of circles (white cop, police and whites). BLM seems to be doing just that, in my personal opinion. Sure, they are speaking out against the bad ones, but the "people" in BLM are making it seem like their against everyone in those groups. Rioting, destroying homes, assaultinb people, does not help that out look. I've seen some pretty stupid acts by BLM near the place I live. And as some said, its the group mentality that doesn't help.

 

But in any case, I used BLM as an example, not to target them. Let's use sometin else. Men are commonly accused of making sexist comments about women. Is it possible for that to go reverse? According to the way society portrays it, most would say no. Buts I've heard it just as often coming from both genders. Maybe this means I'm just in a weird school, but, only one group would ever get accused of doing that. I'll let you guess which, male or female.

I did not imply a number of police that discriminate. I said the police have a lot of positional power in society and "if" they choose to discriminate the result can be life changing. BLM as an organization have a message you disagree with. They do not impact your life and there message doesn't seek to impact your life.

 

Can a women be sexist against a man, sure. Are women typically in a position to discriminate against mean, no. There are nurmerous industries that are dominated by men: Military, defense contractors, Law Enforcement, construction, electrical distrubution, mechanical industries, and etc, etc, etc. A wealth portion of our workforce. For the women who do work in male dominated industries they are minorities by numbers. As a minority in those professions they do not have a position to discriminate from. The list of industries which are dominated by women aren't ones which employ even 10% as many people broadly. There simply isn't a reserve comparison to be made. On average women are out numbered by men professionally.

 

This difference doesn't exist as a natural effect of men just choosing to do X, Y, or Z. Rather, women have been raised for generations to not pursue various careers and/or prevented from it outright. Families have groomed boys to pursue STEM degrees while encouraging girls against it. Various careers have had and a few continue to have gender restrictions. There are still various classes of ships and submarines the Navy that don't allow women for example. That in turn limits a womens options for career diversification and training in the Navy. Discrimination against women has taken different forms. For some it has been religion. A belief that women should be subservient to men. For others it is just straight chauvinism. And then there are those who choose to segregate women for what they consider practical reasons. Whatever the excuse it is almost always women drawing the short straw in the deal. What is the reverse?

 

Then of course there is the violence. Statistically male assualt women at levels that far exceed to reserve. The numbers are significant enough that any woman whom finds herself alone amongst a group of men is justified in being nervous. Again. the reserve of this doesn't exist. Theoretically it could but as something which is pervasive in society it simply doesn't.

[Raider5678]

Can a women be sexist against a man, sure. Are women typically in a position to discriminate against mean, no. There are nurmerous industries that are dominated by men: Military, defense contractors, Law Enforcement, construction, electrical distrubution, mechanical industries, and etc, etc, etc. A wealth portion of our workforce. For the women who do work in male dominated industries they are minorities by numbers. As a minority in those professions they do not have a position to discriminate from. The list of industries which are dominated by women aren't ones which employ even 10% as many people broadly. There simply isn't a reserve comparison to be made. On average women are out numbered by men professionally.

 

This difference doesn't exist as a natural effect of men just choosing to do X, Y, or Z. Rather, women have been raised for generations to not pursue various careers and/or prevented from it outright. Families have groomed boys to pursue STEM degrees while encouraging girls against it. Various careers have had and a few continue to have gender restrictions. There are still various classes of ships and submarines the Navy that don't allow women for example. That in turn limits a womens options for career diversification and training in the Navy. Discrimination against women has taken different forms. For some it has been religion. A belief that women should be subservient to men. For others it is just straight chauvinism. And then there are those who choose to segregate women for what they consider practical reasons. Whatever the excuse it is almost always women drawing the short straw in the deal. What is the reverse?

So industries should fire men and replace them with women so that it can be 50-50 perfectly even? I have always thought this a bad example. Now I'm not stereotyping, but when you think of women, do you imagine them working in a mechanics shop with grease on their hands? There's some jobs that a majority of women would rather not do, and that's by choice. Take for example the military. There's women in it, and as you mentioned there's submarines that women can't be employed on. One of the reasons is that women can become pregnant. They become pregnant and the yet to be conceived child is being raised near a radioactive reactor. Which can have effects on the child. And this is a problem, as a baby being forced to withdraw a sub from deep ocean costs a lot. Another reason is that on a sub, you are crowded together, and it would be extremely hard to add a separate quarters for women. But, as I said, generational change.

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=85274

 

As for ships, I failed to find one example, though I didn't have much time other then a couple of google searches. Please give me an example.

 

Additionally, as for the work force, its been proven, scientifically, men grow muscle and use it more efficiently then women. This is not saying there are not strong women. This is not saying that all men are stronger then women. I'm saying on average, its easier for a man to build and use muscle then a woman. In navy seals you have to be VERY fit. PEAK fitness. And women in the army, Male dominated as you say, even let training on women go easier simply because they are women. And they are still out numbered. but as I was saying, in the navy seals they allow women to try and join, but they MUST meet the standards the men meet. And yet not one woman has passed the training.

 

And how they have been raised in past generations is not the issue. In my school, I see no where is there an area where they discourage girls to join STEM programs. There's actually more encouragement for them to join then guys, yet there's more guys in it then girls. By very little. Generations are changing.

 

Women may be outnumbered in the workforce, but is it men's fault, or simply generations teaching the wrong thing? And if that means anything, look at the movies and how they display girls in high school, college, and life. That might even have a say in it. There are SO many variables, you can't narrow it down to ONE thing.

 

As a note, I am not discriminating against women.

[Ten oz]

Ok, I think I'm phrasing it the wrong way. I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST BLM.

WHEN A GROUP OF THEM VIOLENTLY PROTESTS, I GET ANNOYED.

I DO NOT BELIEVE IN VIOLENT PROTESTS.

GROUP MENTALITY IS NOT HELPFUL VERY OFTEN.

THE END.

The end? You started this thread and brought BLM up in the OP. This is your discussion.

[Raider5678]

The end? You started this thread and brought BLM up in the OP. This is your discussion.

I claim political discrimination!!!!!!!!!!!! Kidding. Yes, I did bring up BLM, but I was using it as an example. It seems as if this discussion has shifted towards wether or not a certain group is being discriminated against, and how they are handling it.

[Ten oz]

1 - Additionally, as for the work force, its been proven, scientifically, men grow muscle and use it more efficiently then women. This is not saying there are not strong women. This is not saying that all men are stronger then women. I'm saying on average, its easier for a man to build and use muscle then a woman. In navy seals you have to be VERY fit. PEAK fitness. And women in the army, Male dominated as you say, even let training on women go easier simply because they are women. And they are still out numbered. but as I was saying, in the navy seals they allow women to try and join, but they MUST meet the standards the men meet. And yet not one woman has passed the training.

 

2 - And how they have been raised in past generations is not the issue. In my school, I see no where is there an area where they discourage girls to join STEM programs. There's actually more encouragement for them to join then guys, yet there's more guys in it then girls. By very little. Generations are changing.

 

3 - Women may be outnumbered in the workforce, but is it men's fault, or simply generations teaching the wrong thing? And if that means anything, look at the movies and how they display girls in high school, college, and life. That might even have a say in it. There are SO many variables, you can't narrow it down to ONE thing.

 

 

1 - Of the various industries I listed Navy SEALS account for less than a a tenth of a single percent of people. Even amongst men there are very large disparities in physical strength and overall health. The argument that men a are stronger than women, in my opinion, has never made sense. Every individual has differences and while there are minimum levels of fitness required to perform various tasks there are few jobs where a maximum level of fitness is superior. Perhaps amongst athletes in the NBA, NFL, and etc but not amongst Electrician's, Structural Engineers, and etc which employ far more people. You are using fringe examples to justify at large trends.

 

2 - Generations of treatment is not an issue because today some girls are encourage?

 

3 - No, it is men's fault. Men are the ones who spent generations keeping women out of the workforce. Women didn't even have the right to vote until less than a hundred years ago, Yale and Princeton first admitted women in 1969, Harvard in 1977, and etc. If is not the fault of men that women were kept out of various industries and denied opportunities given to men whose fault was it, god's?

I claim political discrimination!!!!!!!!!!!! Kidding. Yes, I did bring up BLM, but I was using it as an example. It seems as if this discussion has shifted towards wether or not a certain group is being discriminated against, and how they are handling it.

You brought it up as an example and it is an example I do not agree. I do not see have BLM is an example of reverse racism or discrimination. BLM is about the way they (members and supporters of BLM) feel black people are treated by police. I don't understannd how a group whom is asking that black people not be mistreated is somehow being discriminatory in the reserve? They are not advocating that other races be mistreated. Perhaps you disagree with them. Perhaps you feel blacks are treated fair by police and BLM is advocating a useless point. That is fine. That doesn't make BLM racists in the reserve. I think you are confusing your opinion of their message with mistreatment. They are not advocating discrimination against you.

Edited October 17, 2016 by Ten oz

[Phi for All]

As for the sexist comments, you would have to understand the difference between language. For example, most people wouldn't call a guy a slut(I'm not a sexist, this is just culture. if this offends you, then sorry, you get offended over nothing.) .Starting a rumor that some girl is one, is usually demeaning and inappropriate. In my school, the term for guys is prick. Pretty much the same result, just a different word. Most people avoid him, they talk about him behind his back, there's all kinds of rumors, NOBODY lets their GF around them, they suddenly have every sexual disease and everything else that being labeled a slut gets you.

 

Sorry, but I don't believe this. I think you're embellishing.

 

My research shows that the term "prick" is just what I said it was, another word for "jerk" or "asshole". "Prick" isn't a generic term, but it certainly doesn't imply the reverse of what "slut" implies. Even though it's also a term for genitals, the epithet "prick" doesn't have a sexual basis. "Slut" always does.