by minimus 89 Replies latest jw friends
''Now people aren’t afraid to say they don’t like something.''
I agree.
I'm no longer afraid to say I don't like black or brown people, or I don't like homosexuals or abortionists. Or women for that matter, and certainly not black women.
That's my right surely?
PS. The views above are not necessarily those held by Thomas Covenant.
PS Whats wrong with being a nice guy?
Thomas, I think you understand the point. You’re not that dumb.😒
Forgot to mention that the comments following the article are quite enlightening.
Can you expand on that, please?
Well, in the feminista fervour about equality, people seem to imagine that men had the right to vote for thousands of years and then finally gave in and allowed women to vote too.
The reality is that men didn't have the right to vote simply by virtue of being men until a short time before women did.
It wasn't todo with gender, it was todo with class and wealth. The landowners voted and the peasants did as they were told.
In 1918, all men over 21 and some women over 30 won the right to vote, and in 1928 all women over 21 won the right to vote resulting in universal suffrage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffrage
So 10 years - apparently the "white male patriarchy" wasn't quite as some claim - it only lasted a decade and just applied to a certain age gap.
People also forget that it was linked with conscription. If women enjoyed the equal right to be conscripted and sent to die maybe Vietnam wouldn't have happened or would have ended much sooner than it did.
When you have a uterus, vagina and fallopian tubes you can an expert on abortion.
Ah, the old "only women should pass laws that affect women" claim.
Let's debunk that shall we.
Should women be allowed, in any parliament, to pass any legislation that affects men?
Should any policies that affect homeless people be passed until we wait for a homeless person to be elected to office?
How about funding for cancer treatment? Can only be set by someone with cancer? Or rules for disabled access to buildings - only one leg allowed?
If you look at the FEMALE democratic candidates rushing to tell everyone how keen they are to kill babies and allow Planned Parenthood to continue to assist human traffickers, you really have to wonder if women really are the best ones to argue for policies to protect women.
It doesn't apply to all women but good god, some women are just evil bitches who see other women as pawns and props.
Thanks for the info on suffrage. Never realized or even thought of it that way before.( I take it we're talking about the UK. haven't read about other countries.)
It varies by country but many commonwealth countries follow the UK or do things around the same time and the UK was the dominant country for policy up to around these things changing.
Minimus suggested "A woman gets an abortion. The baby is supposed to die because of the abortion but doesn’t..."
Thus does "The Walking Dead" franchise come to The Hallmark Channel.
simon: Well, in the feminista fervour about equality, people seem to imagine that men had the right to vote for thousands of years and then finally gave in and allowed women to vote too.
The reality is that men didn't have the right to vote simply by virtue of being men until a short time before women did.
It wasn't todo with gender, it was todo with class and wealth. The landowners voted and the peasants did as they were told.
Well, I guess I don't fall into your definition of "people" because I am well aware that "men" didn't have the right to vote for "thousands of years". The vote came about with the establishment of democracy which didn't occur "thousands of years" ago.
The reality is that what gave men the right to vote prior to the date you have given of 1918 was if they were white and owned land and/or paid taxes. In addition to being based on race, it definitely was gender based - women could not vote at all - only white male landowners could (I realize that is a bit of a generalization - you appear to be using UK voting rights and in some democratic countries, that right was extended to white males who didn't own land but paid taxes and then later, in 1918 (UK), the common working man acquired the vote. Unless they were Chinese, black or indigenous, etc).
So 10 years - apparently the "white male patriarchy" wasn't quite as some claim - it only lasted a decade and just applied to a certain age gap.
Oh please, Simon. Do some more reading. White patriarchy only lasted a decade?? (by the way, the "male" in white male patriarchy is redundant. Patriarchy is male - no need to say it twice)
