Amicus is a Philogynist! Are you? (Men only)

[kbate]

Quote:
Originally Posted by amicus




~~~

Hello, Kbate, the Wise One, speaks...

Should you truly desire an understanding of the subjugation of women, I suggest you study Muslim life under Shariah Law.

But, should you seek information concerning the shared life, the partnership of the human male and female, I suggest you delve into the natural inclinations, the nature of man, and perceive the 'natural' association between the two, as a partnership wherein each freely explesses and lives their own innate physical and psychological imperatives.

This fabricated and artificial equality you seem to have swallowed, hook, line and sinker, is a failed experiment to enforce equality between not just the genders, but ethnic and racial groups and has observedly failed miserably.

We are barely the third century into the concept of human individual freedom and only the second century of the Industrial Revolution, which took the burden of physical work from the backs of men and women and transferred it to the machines and the technology that provide us with wealth, abundance and prosperity; thanks to the free market place.

In other words, we really are in a Brave New World, experimenting with our newfound freedom and wealth and the issue is somewhat in doubt as most you you twats seem to want to regress to a more Pastoral time, or cuddle up with collectivism. (doncha just love my alliterations?)

A greatly reduced birth rate seems to go hand in hand with Western Post Industrial societies; I could recommend a thousand tomes to salve your quest.

But, I won't, do your own damned research or be comfortable with your bug in a rug mentality.

No one knows what the future holds, not even you, my furry friend, but the certainty that I hold as fundamental, is that it will be a future where the individual rights of each are protected and defended and kept free from the hands of those who would impose their vision upon us...by the use of force and the barrel of a gun.

Think about that just a tad...we, in the United States, have a limited government with enumerated powers, in other words, our government is not authorized to provide your view of an Utopian future, it only acts to protect our rights to live free.

In the social world, the way we live our lives, the fact that nearly half of all we earn, a half of every day of work, a half of every year, is confiscated by government, in one way or another, has dictated that it requires the total effort, output and income of two people to support a family.

That is not a good thing.

Amicus Veritas

You are not quite as well read in your conservative theory as you pretend.

You also jumped all over a dozen topics in an attempt to justify the subjugation of women. Sharia - really? Have you really studied it? No? Or perhaps you only see and read about the modern interpretation of Sharia - a perversion which began rather recently in time - in fact far more recently than your "Three centuries" or even your hated, "Sufferage movement". But - you can do your own damned research on this instead of simply spouting shit (which is what you did).

Birth rates? You believe the subjugation of women will raise these? Or are you simply spouting again? The latter.

Industrial revolution? Again - are you even aware that until the late 1930s and the TVA , that 50% or more of a persons time (man, woman, child) was taken by gathering food and supplying heat? Again - do your own research on the effect and changes that electricity brought.

And my Utopian future? You must mean that anything but your ideal of Randian society is a false utopia?

But, keep your head-in-the-sand mindset - it amuses.

Your utopia - seems a utopia for white men?

Liberal constitutional government means liberal for everyone not just you.

 

[amicus]

TVA? Tennessee Valley Authority? Rural Electrification? Soup Lines of Franklin Delano Roosevelt? A Depression fomented by government intervention in the market place that took world war two to recover from?

For nearly a decade since 9/11, America’s national security establishment’s understanding of the threat of Islamic terrorism and its approach to contending with that danger flow directly from a conviction that they have nothing to do with Islam, except to the extent al Qaeda “perverts” or “hijacks” that religion. But what if this characterization of the problem we continue to face is simply and utterly wrong? What if there actually is a direct tie between what recognized, mainstream authorities of Islam call “shariah” and the jihad (or holy war) it demands of adherents, some of which is manifested as terrifying violence? What if, in addition, jihadists engage in non-violent – and, in some ways, far more insidious – efforts to accomplish the same goal: the supremacy of shariah worldwide under a caliph?



These questions have been the focus of an intensive six-month study by a remarkable group of highly accomplished civilian and military national security professionals. The results are in Shariah: The Threat to America.

~~~

There are apologists for Shariah Law, no doubt, those who are slaves know no other way of life.

All beside the purpose of my Thread, but worthy of a question: why do all the militant feminists reply in flammable rhetoric when one such as myself questions the results of almost a century of female emancipation?

Woman tend to vote for those who offer to take care of them, Democrats take great advantage of that and without women voters, Democrats would never hold another major political office in this country.

Men and women are essentially different and anyone who does not recognize that fact are blind indeed.

This continued push to force equality on the genders is highly destructive, demeaning to women and has led to the destruction of the family, the honor of being female and a homosexual population that continues to increase because men and women have been alienated from each other by social pressures.

Please tell us, as best you can, just what kind of a world you envision for the future with total equality between the sexes. Will there be a need for men at all? Just how do you justify maintaining family life and nurturing a child when you are in the rat race of business?

thank you...

Amicus Veritas

 

[girlsmiley]

``You judge very properly,'' said Mr. Bennet, ``and it is happy for you that you possess the talent of flattering with delicacy. May I ask whether these pleasing attentions proceed from the impulse of the moment, or are the result of previous study?''


``They arise chiefly from what is passing at the time, and though I sometimes amuse myself with suggesting and arranging such little elegant compliments as may be adapted to ordinary occasions, I always wish to give them as unstudied an air as possible.''



Like I said, tobasucs

You're absurd

LOL

girlsmiley

 

[warrior queen]

Amicus, the only people who are qualified to ascertain whether or not the 'continued push to force equality on the genders is highly destructive' are those on whom the equality is being forced.
That means women.
Apparently, you are not a woman, therefore you are not qualified.

 

[shoulderblade]

Amicus, the only people who are qualified to ascertain whether or not the 'continued push to force equality on the genders is highly destructive' are those on whom the equality is being forced.
That means women.
Apparently, you are not a woman, therefore you are not qualified.

Either/Or.

 

[kbate]

TVA? Tennessee Valley Authority? Rural Electrification? Soup Lines of Franklin Delano Roosevelt? A Depression fomented by government intervention in the market place that took world war two to recover from?



~~~

There are apologists for Shariah Law, no doubt, those who are slaves know no other way of life.

All beside the purpose of my Thread, but worthy of a question: why do all the militant feminists reply in flammable rhetoric when one such as myself questions the results of almost a century of female emancipation?

Woman tend to vote for those who offer to take care of them, Democrats take great advantage of that and without women voters, Democrats would never hold another major political office in this country.

Men and women are essentially different and anyone who does not recognize that fact are blind indeed.

This continued push to force equality on the genders is highly destructive, demeaning to women and has led to the destruction of the family, the honor of being female and a homosexual population that continues to increase because men and women have been alienated from each other by social pressures.

Please tell us, as best you can, just what kind of a world you envision for the future with total equality between the sexes. Will there be a need for men at all? Just how do you justify maintaining family life and nurturing a child when you are in the rat race of business?

thank you...

Amicus Veritas

Why do you push for restoration of traditional subjugation of women of the past in a thread where you are arguing the advances of the industrial world?

There is no objective evidence that women should be subject to men. In the history of mankind - a rule of women (which failed) was never attempted. Men took command of both women and of over 50% of other men as slaves (both domestically and in actuality in ancient times and the tradition remained until basically the French Revolution. (although the oppression/slavery standard experienced some decline with the coming preeminence of the English Longbow and the Continental crossbow - which gave the peasantry and yeoman the ability to end the oppression of the feudal lords - firearms and industry were the death blow to slavery as an institution - but the domestic and legal subjugation of women remained in both law and in reality until the Sufferage movement - despite the 14th amendment and our lofty ideals in the constitution.

The real question here is what do you fear in women being equal in all things?

Industry means that the ancient role of "nurturing" is no longer a 24/7 occupation. Refrigeration and processed food mean that a woman needs no longer spend her entire day nursing an infant and the occupation of 'nursemaid' has changed into 'daycare'. Is this so evil?

The world is going to continue to advance - regardless of your desire to return it to 1850 in all things but industry. The institution of human slavery is over and any who still pursue it are hunted as criminals. The subjugation by sex is largely over and even Sharia does not demand it (as you claim but obviously have not studied) which is why I brought up the extremist issue with the modern Saudi interpretation of Sharia. You fail to understand that it is not a general law under Sharia that women are to be lesser. It was the addition of British law under British rule that stripped women of property rights in certain Islamic nations - but hey - do your own research.

What do you fear?

Is it that you think the world was better when women were beaten with rods for laughing out of place? I think you do. You wish to beat women with impunity and that is the real reason for your objections to equality. You fear equality because you cannot use physical force to obtain your will - even as you decry "force" in the form of government. Muscle good - Rule of Law bad, and every thing else you post on the topic is mere smoke to hide your basic brutality.

It is no longer a muscle world and hard labour is no longer the prime mover in business. The superiority of the male mind has been completely and thoroughly proven to be a whimsical theory of (you guessed it) men. There is no objective reason a male cannot nurture and teach children in the home while a woman works in the business world. Technological advancement cannot be lauded on one hand and denied on the other in order to advance only your causes.

For someone who cries for "Liberty" you seem to misunderstand the word in an epic manner. Liberty for Men!

What do I see for the world?

I see that in a fully equal society - where law protects no person more than any other person. All humans of all sexes, races and ages are subject to nothing but the objective rule of law. If you wish to form a family - you will do so with a woman of like mind to you. If you wish to form a family with a dominant male, you will select a subservient female as your spouse and the two of you will rear your children in that manner (see Church of Latter Day Saints). The government will have no need to use force - except when one steps onto the rights of another by force. That I want equality does not mean that I want equality by force of arms - I want it as a social reality, meaning that every person has the liberty to choose the manner in which they live - free from the mores of the past. Complete freedom of association, if you do not wish to work for a woman - you can find work elsewhere, if you do not wish to hire a woman - you may hire men.

Your work is toward the past, a world where liberty was talked about but not realised. My work is toward a future where true liberal constitutionalism is the norm.