|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by johnnyp on 11:13 AM September 10th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
That is why I try to vote for men - I do what I can to assist women in not neglecting their family responsibilities (assuming women actually have any responsibilities).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:08 PM September 10th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, MEN are so superficial...,
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:37 PM September 10th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
I think you meant "WOMEN", TC.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:12 PM September 10th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
I stand corrected, Dittohd.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:06 PM September 11th, 2005 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry.
I should have indicated that I was being sarcastic.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Clancy
(long_ponytail@yahoo.com)
on 02:02 PM September 13th, 2005 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
My gag reflex is tested every time I read one of those "studies" or a "Cosmo quiz" about how women pick men PRIMARILY based on their personality and their ability "to make me laugh" (yeah, we gotta be freakin' entertainers to gain the favor of a fair maiden). Looks come in about 3rd. This is the biggest bunch of crap ever foisted on the American Male. RULE #1: If you don't pass the physicality test - YOU DON'T PASS. This crap about how "Looks" aren't that important is a very large pile of bull shit and it's so tall that a lot of clueless men can't see over it. Women need about a split second to decide whether or not she might be interested in letting some lug hit on her, WAY before she gets to know his "personality". UNLESS, the man is a billionaire. Then not age, not looks, not breeding, not family history matter one whit. Women are every BIT as superficial as men. The only difference is WE ADMIT IT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:07 PM September 11th, 2005 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
Ouch...!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:29 PM September 10th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
This is not new. A certain percentage of people vote for their "kind" be it race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, or party affiliation.
It takes a certain amount of integrity to vote for a candidate based on their platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"QUESTION: Why are only women allowed to openly discriminate based on sex and gender?"
Answer: Because there are too many masochistic dog trained wussie-poopies who like it that way.
Bert
--------------------
From now on, men's rights first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pardon me . . Men are allowed to openly discriminate based upon sex and gender . . that is, so long as they discriminate in favour of women . . it is by Men doing this, that we are now in the mess we are in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:27 PM September 10th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, men widely practise discrimination against men. However, I think the open discrimination referred to here is women openly calling on voters to cast their votes for women. If a man demanded voters should vote for men, this would be deemed sexist.
Hotspur
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by robrob on 06:19 AM September 11th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
To be honest, I think the best iteration of this is yet to come. I believe that the first US female presidential candidate will benefit from huge block votes from American women.
I also believe that her campaign will make frequent references to "the wage gap", the "glass ceiling", "single mothers" and abortion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:58 AM September 11th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
My biggest fantasy is a 2008 contest between Hillary and Condie!
It would present a "hat-trick" triple-winner possibility for the USA ---
1) first woman president (100% assured)
2) first lesbian president (95% assured)
3) first black president (51% assured)
Hillary likes soul music, so I gave her some blackness in the equation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:13 PM September 11th, 2005 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
I might vote for Condoleeza Rice. MIGHT.
But Clinton..., Not so much.
And that is if I decided to vote for a female candidate in the first place.
With the current cultural female opinion of men as it is, in this country it might be like a Jewish person voting for some one with Nazi ties, or something.
(And before I get slammed for being a "right-wing republican" remember I am a registered Democrat, but vote as an independent.)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:51 AM September 12th, 2005 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
If she's smart, she won't do anything of the sort.
Her presence as a female would be enough to get any radical feminist vote already, so why push it and alienate other potential votes.
A smart female politician would be far better off appearing moderate, and making references here and there about agreeing with token feminist phrases; without making it appear that that she is a zealot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:24 PM September 12th, 2005 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah.
The zealotry will come AFTER she is elected...,
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 10:32 PM September 11th, 2005 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
If you actually did just a tiny bit of research before typing those standard outraged comments, you'd know that you should indeed not vote for the man in this because..
1. Angela Merkel of the Christian Democrats (=conservative) never supported feminism and has been criticized for her lack of interest in "women's issues". For fear of losing women's votes, she has now made a few statements that are supposed to appease these critics but she clearly doesn't believe she should be elected because she's a woman.
2. Gerhard Schröder of the Social Democrats (=labour, progressive) on the other hand is one of those typical male politicians who get demands from women's groups and just signs the paper.
This, and the fact that Merkel is conservative but has no children with what would usually be a man's career (she's a physicist), plus on the other hand Schröder's wife who does, has certainly created some chaos among people who are aware of the gender issues involved.
Conservatives are less feminism friendly, but they have proven that they are not willing to give men more rights either. They are the most diligent defenders of the so-called general draft here (not really general, just for males). And their policies on child support are even worse than those of the feminism-friendly progressive parties, because a man's gotta do what he's gotta do, you know.. like work for his family all day and drop dead at age 50.
Add to this the ally of labour, the Green party, and that of the conservatives, the Free Democrats (also called liberal), and you certainly have something more interesting than the elections in the US with those two big blocks.
In any case, voting for the man won't do for us. And feminists have the choice between a man and a female candidate who could damage them much more than any man. As I said, it's going to be interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:14 AM September 12th, 2005 EST (#18)
|
|
|
|
|
Mein Fraulein,
While you raise some excellent points, the focus of this discussion is the fact that regardless of politics or platform, women are being asked for the vagina vote. That by virtue of a vagina women should vote for her is unacceptable to any person who is against sexism and discrimination of any kind.
auf Wiederhören
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:43 AM September 12th, 2005 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly,
Irrespective of her merits and policies, Hillary Clinton for example(should she ever decide to run for president) will pursue and receive votes from women purely based on her gender. Nothing else.
That, I'm afraid, is wrong and is the bigger point rather than just the German election.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Evil White Male Oppressor writes "'As female voters weigh their choices in Germany's Sept. 18 parliamentary elections, some are wondering whether the chance to put a woman at the helm of their nation is more important to them than the party she represents.'