Having a vaginia does not determine one's political views.
I can concede you're quite right there. It still doesn't explain the logic of supporting a view that not only doesn't benefit you, but actively makes your quality of life worse, and for discriminatory reasons.
Sometimes I think that it's wrong of us to assume that those that oppose our views are doing so entirely out of misguided selfishness. It's entirely possible that they understand exactly what they're doing, and honestly feel that they're doing the right thing.
And then I remember that that would make them monsters, and that by letting them be merely misguided, we're giving them the benefit of the doubt.
It's really that conservative ideology is rooted in fear. That's where I find myself turned away from it. This fear is likely what creates the exceedingly irrational output in conservative thinking/belief structure. In terms of long term sustainability or progress it's a rather short sighted ideology.
I don't have any actual malice for the average conservative, even Modern Man here is someone who I appreciate posting. I do find a lot of the beliefs or opinions expressed by conservatives to be highly dubious on varying levels, however. I reserve any actual discontent for conservative politicians, who really are destructive to a healthy society in a manner of sorts.
Sometimes I think that it's wrong of us to assume that those that oppose our views are doing so entirely out of misguided selfishness. It's entirely possible that they understand exactly what they're doing, and honestly feel that they're doing the right thing.
And then I remember that that would make them monsters, and that by letting them be merely misguided, we're giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Or that it would make us monsters. To quote Sir Samuel Vimes, "Always take into consideration the fact that you might be dead wrong".
That's not directed at the discussion in this thread, it's more a kind of thing in general.
I do consider that often, but I'm pretty sure the monsters here aren't the ones who want hospitals to be able to deny life saving procedures.
Without getting into the forum hell that is this specific topic, I can't really let this one pass unchallenged. For some significant portion of the population, from the low 20s up to a large majority depending on the specific facts, it's not a question of saving life but the more complicated question of which life to save.
If the decision is complicated for you, I think the problem is on your end.
Circumstance is king in this question, and if you can't acknowledge that the question can become complicated, you might want to read that Vimes quote again.
Does cognitive dissonance have a taste?
Because I think I can taste it right now.
@3lwap0
None of those examples are accurate representations of the GOP's position. They don't support unions of any stripe, don't oppose wage equality, and don't view the mere fact of pregnancy as simply a women's healthcare issue.
Except for overwhelmingly male ones like police and fire.
@3lwap0
None of those examples are accurate representations of the GOP's position. They don't support unions of any stripe, don't oppose wage equality, and don't view the mere fact of pregnancy as simply a women's healthcare issue.
Except for overwhelmingly male ones like police and fire.
Not really. Supporting police and firefighters is definitely not the same thing as supporting their unions.
Except optimism or confidence in the United States government being able to do anything well. Especially if other countries manage it without any problem.
@potatoninja
Your #3 doesn't follow, because the spat is only over misdemeanor dv enforcement. Moreover, it is not and never has been the job of the police to protect you from potential criminals.
Failure to prosecute a "misdemeanor" domestic violence case and releasing the accused to return home doesn't strike you as "horrible tragedy waiting to happen?"
You don't see how that can go badly?
I mean, are you playing coy here or are you just really unfamiliar with DV cases and statistics?
I guess its kind of moot because someone decided that a golf course could take the fall, but yes prosecuting "minor" DV cases is critical to prevent them from becoming "major" DV cases.
"The Topeka police department confirmed that one suspect was brought into jail for domestic abuse, released without consequence, and then immediately picked up again for committing the same crime."
It's not really a conscious thing on most levels though. It's like a fear collective. It's not like every conservative is thinking at an immediate level in a 'omg I'm so scared' fashion. It's just when you strip down the belief structure, fear is usually what you're left with. Not that this is untrue for a lot of people, it's just especially true for conservatism.
Plenty of laws that are common in other countries like subsidized day care and have been shown to greatly help women are opposed by the GOP. In other countries, conservatives often support this as a way of increasing birth rate.
Reporting from Washington — The House has approved a sweeping package of budget cuts that, if enacted, would shrink the federal government's role in American life, curtailing its involvement in healthcare, social services, environmental regulation, child care and research.
The GOP has no problems fucking over issues that are of particular concern to women in order to fight the infidel DEBT and SOCIALISM.
It's not really a conscious thing on most levels though. It's like a fear collective. It's not like every conservative is thinking at an immediate level in a 'omg I'm so scared' fashion. It's just when you strip down the belief structure, fear is usually what you're left with. Not that this is untrue for a lot of people, it's just especially true for conservatism.
I think your conclusion requires prior assumptions that are quite wrong.
I can understand the implication of sexist over tones - however, from an outsider looking in, it leads one to draw a conclusions that may not be completely accurate, since it doesn't seem like logic is involved.
For example, the GOP does not support female wage equality, do not support unions (http://www.iwpr.org/publications/pubs/women-and-men-in-the-public-sector52% of which have female members, think librarians, teachers, nurses), and oppose (admittedly controversial) female health care. So, in a GOP world, women get paid less, do not enjoy the same access to health care, nor are supported for union memberships.
As an outsider looking in, it simply defies logic that someone would support an agenda that makes their lives worse. Is this blind adherence to an ideological movement, or simply someone mislead by rhetoric? Its like a chicken who only votes for Colonel Sanders.
The GOP is not in favor of women getting paid less, no. No one in the mainstream of American politics is arguing that women should be paid less for doing the same work. Whether or not you support a union depends on whether you like unions, not on whether you're a man or woman. And abortion is an issue where there are a lot of different opinions.
The implication of your statement seems to be that women should all agree that women are discriminated on in terms of wages, unions are a good thing and pro-choice is the only way to go. Obviously, many women disagree with you on one or more of these points, for a variety of reasons.
Women have as wide a variety of political opinions as men. Having a vaginia does not determine one's political views.
Yes, MM, all women should agree that women are discriminated against in terms of wages. It's called acknowledging reality. Studies have shown that women get paid less than men, even when you control for job type.
It's not really a conscious thing on most levels though. It's like a fear collective. It's not like every conservative is thinking at an immediate level in a 'omg I'm so scared' fashion. It's just when you strip down the belief structure, fear is usually what you're left with. Not that this is untrue for a lot of people, it's just especially true for conservatism.
I think your conclusion requires prior assumptions that are quite wrong.
Except the first one is a matter of provable facts, that women are paid less for the same job than men are. Reality is not subject to anyone's opinions, much as the GOP loves to claim "controversy" when they're completely wrong.
Is any member of the GOP opposed to women making the same as men? I don't really see what this has to do with the GOP. There are laws that allow people to sue for workplace discrimination based on gender and no one in the GOP is trying to overturn them.
Having a vaginia does not determine one's political views.
I can concede you're quite right there. It still doesn't explain the logic of supporting a view that not only doesn't benefit you, but actively makes your quality of life worse, and for discriminatory reasons.
I would imagine individual woman are better placed to decide what political party benefits them than you or I are. I think thats what it comes down to, really. You don't agree with the voting decisions of Republican women because you think you know better.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
It's not really a conscious thing on most levels though. It's like a fear collective. It's not like every conservative is thinking at an immediate level in a 'omg I'm so scared' fashion. It's just when you strip down the belief structure, fear is usually what you're left with. Not that this is untrue for a lot of people, it's just especially true for conservatism.
I think your conclusion requires prior assumptions that are quite wrong.
great argument
You made an assertion, I made an assertion. I'm not going to dedicate 20 minutes to deconstruct your thing that you believe, when you haven't described it except in the broadest terms, and haven't provided any examples at all.
Except the first one is a matter of provable facts, that women are paid less for the same job than men are. Reality is not subject to anyone's opinions, much as the GOP loves to claim "controversy" when they're completely wrong.
Neither Modern nor myself is arguing that the problem doesn't exist... Only that the GOP doesn't oppose equal pay for equal work from an equally skilled, equally experienced woman with equally as much time in the position.
Decision to invoke cloture on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay act in U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 1st Session (January 15, 2009):
A bill to amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and to modify the operation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to clarify that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice, and for other purposes.
It's not really a conscious thing on most levels though. It's like a fear collective. It's not like every conservative is thinking at an immediate level in a 'omg I'm so scared' fashion. It's just when you strip down the belief structure, fear is usually what you're left with. Not that this is untrue for a lot of people, it's just especially true for conservatism.
I think your conclusion requires prior assumptions that are quite wrong.
It's not really a conscious thing on most levels though. It's like a fear collective. It's not like every conservative is thinking at an immediate level in a 'omg I'm so scared' fashion. It's just when you strip down the belief structure, fear is usually what you're left with. Not that this is untrue for a lot of people, it's just especially true for conservatism.
I think your conclusion requires prior assumptions that are quite wrong.
great argument
You made an assertion, I made an assertion. I'm not going to dedicate 20 minutes to deconstruct your thing that you believe, when you haven't described it except in the broadest terms, and haven't provided any examples at all.
Then why challenge at all? I mean there's not much to argue here anyways. It's not like I'm making some unfounded declaration here. The definition of conservative is aversion to change. Where do you think this aversion comes from, or has its roots in?
4 pages to get to the pro-rape thing. You guys can enjoy the thread - I'm done.
Someday we'll have a political thread that doesn't start with a title that amounts to progressive fanservice, and doesn't degenerate into a poisonous hate-in before we can explore an idea.
Sorry, Lucid... break it out into another thread if you're interested, because I am, but I'm done in here. I have Rape is Awesome signs to print up for the next GOP rally.
Yes, MM, all women should agree that women are discriminated against in terms of wages. It's called acknowledging reality. Studies have shown that women get paid less than men, even when you control for job type.
I suppose the poor dears aren't smart enough to come to their own conclusions about the subject, in your mind?
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
See, it's not sexist to vote against allowing women to challenge discriminatory practices on the part of their employer if the first incident occurred more than six months ago, or to vote to continue hiring companies that force employees to go through arbitration (which favors the companies overwhelmingly) instead of an ordinary lawsuit, even if those employees were raped by other employees and the company covered it up, but questioning why many women still vote Republican despite all that? Extremely sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself.
4 pages to get to the pro-rape thing. You guys can enjoy the thread - I'm done.
Someday we'll have a political thread that doesn't start with a title that amounts to progressive fanservice, and doesn't degenerate into a poisonous hate-in before we can explore an idea.
Sorry, Lucid... break it out into another thread if you're interested, because I am, but I'm done in here. I have Rape is Awesome signs to print up for the next GOP rally.
Yes, how dare we bring how the GOP actually votes into the argument!
Yes, MM, all women should agree that women are discriminated against in terms of wages. It's called acknowledging reality. Studies have shown that women get paid less than men, even when you control for job type.
I suppose the poor dears aren't smart enough to come to their own conclusions about the subject, in your mind?
In a lot of cases, yeah, they are voting stupid (not that this is restricted to any one gender).
Of course, there are also a lot of cases where women are putting their own, personal financial incentives above the good of the country, people other than rich people, and their own children; rather than stupid, these people are simply evil.
See, it's not sexist to vote against allowing women to challenge discriminatory practices on the part of their employer if the first incident occurred more than six months ago, or to vote to continue hiring companies that force employees to go through arbitration (which favors the companies overwhelmingly) instead of an ordinary lawsuit, even if those employees were raped by other employees and the company covered it up, but questioning why many women still vote Republican despite all that? Extremely sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Disagreeing on statutes of limitation and arbitration clauses isn't an example of sexism, no.
You want to make it sensational, but that's what those laws were really about- boring legal procedure in federal courts, basically.
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
See, it's not sexist to vote against allowing women to challenge discriminatory practices on the part of their employer if the first incident occurred more than six months ago, or to vote to continue hiring companies that force employees to go through arbitration (which favors the companies overwhelmingly) instead of an ordinary lawsuit, even if those employees were raped by other employees and the company covered it up, but questioning why many women still vote Republican despite all that? Extremely sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Disagreeing on statutes of limitation and arbitration clauses isn't an example of sexism, no.
You want to make it sensational, but that's what those laws were really about- boring legal procedure in federal courts, basically.
"Baby, maybe you should have thought about what might happen if you went around after having signed such a sexy binding arbitration clause."
Yes, MM, all women should agree that women are discriminated against in terms of wages. It's called acknowledging reality. Studies have shown that women get paid less than men, even when you control for job type.
I suppose the poor dears aren't smart enough to come to their own conclusions about the subject, in your mind?
In a lot of cases, yeah, they are voting stupid (not that this is restricted to any one gender).
Of course, there are also a lot of cases where women are putting their own, personal financial incentives above the good of the country, people other than rich people, and their own children; rather than stupid, these people are simply evil.
So, any woman who votes Republican is either stupid or evil?
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
See, it's not sexist to vote against allowing women to challenge discriminatory practices on the part of their employer if the first incident occurred more than six months ago, or to vote to continue hiring companies that force employees to go through arbitration (which favors the companies overwhelmingly) instead of an ordinary lawsuit, even if those employees were raped by other employees and the company covered it up, but questioning why many women still vote Republican despite all that? Extremely sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Disagreeing on statutes of limitation and arbitration clauses isn't an example of sexism, no.
You want to make it sensational, but that's what those laws were really about- boring legal procedure in federal courts, basically.
It's a lot less boring for the woman who was raped, locked in a cargo container, and then denied the right to sue her rapists or her employer over the whole thing.
And one can allow the legality of a clause requiring arbitration while still voting not to grant contracts to companies using them as blanket get-out-of-court-free cards.
Yes, MM, all women should agree that women are discriminated against in terms of wages. It's called acknowledging reality. Studies have shown that women get paid less than men, even when you control for job type.
I suppose the poor dears aren't smart enough to come to their own conclusions about the subject, in your mind?
In a lot of cases, yeah, they are voting stupid (not that this is restricted to any one gender).
Of course, there are also a lot of cases where women are putting their own, personal financial incentives above the good of the country, people other than rich people, and their own children; rather than stupid, these people are simply evil.
So, any woman who votes Republican is either stupid or evil?
I'm open to other possibilities, but I find it difficult to believe that someone could vote for a group of sexist, racist, misogynist terrorists and not be either evil or ignorant (probably a better word than "stupid" to describe what I mean).
See, it's not sexist to vote against allowing women to challenge discriminatory practices on the part of their employer if the first incident occurred more than six months ago, or to vote to continue hiring companies that force employees to go through arbitration (which favors the companies overwhelmingly) instead of an ordinary lawsuit, even if those employees were raped by other employees and the company covered it up, but questioning why many women still vote Republican despite all that? Extremely sexist. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Disagreeing on statutes of limitation and arbitration clauses isn't an example of sexism, no.
You want to make it sensational, but that's what those laws were really about- boring legal procedure in federal courts, basically.
It's a lot less boring for the woman who was raped, locked in a cargo container, and then denied the right to sue her rapists or her employer over the whole thing.
Or the woman who found out she was paid less than her male peers, and tried to sue only to be told she should have found out within 60 days of the first discriminatory check.
I'm open to other possibilities, but I find it difficult to believe that someone could vote for a group of sexist, racist, misogynist terrorists and not be either evil or ignorant (probably a better word than "stupid" to describe what I mean).
And not just women; men, too.
I think the more likely possibility is that you're the ignorant one. Or, at least, don't know many actual Republicans in real life.
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Women are one of those demographics that I never quite understood what the GOP has that appeals to them. Then again, voting against your own self interest is a thing, I guess.
Women have higher religiosity scores than men, which correlates strongly with GOP involvement.
That said, women do break Democrat by about five points or so.
I'm open to other possibilities, but I find it difficult to believe that someone could vote for a group of sexist, racist, misogynist terrorists and not be either evil or ignorant (probably a better word than "stupid" to describe what I mean).
And not just women; men, too.
I think the more likely possibility is that you're the ignorant one. Or, at least, don't know many actual Republicans in real life.
I know lots of Republicans in real life; I'm related to a fair number of them, even. Mostly the ignorant type, though.
Posts
Fun fact: Women make less than men in this country.
The GOP opposes any law that allows the legal system to better pursue wage discrimination. Really? Really really.
I could go all day citing and backing that up, but I'd rather not derail the thread. Suffice to say, you're wrong on that front.
I can concede you're quite right there. It still doesn't explain the logic of supporting a view that not only doesn't benefit you, but actively makes your quality of life worse, and for discriminatory reasons.
I don't have any actual malice for the average conservative, even Modern Man here is someone who I appreciate posting. I do find a lot of the beliefs or opinions expressed by conservatives to be highly dubious on varying levels, however. I reserve any actual discontent for conservative politicians, who really are destructive to a healthy society in a manner of sorts.
Does cognitive dissonance have a taste?
Because I think I can taste it right now.
Except for overwhelmingly male ones like police and fire.
Not really. Supporting police and firefighters is definitely not the same thing as supporting their unions.
Failure to prosecute a "misdemeanor" domestic violence case and releasing the accused to return home doesn't strike you as "horrible tragedy waiting to happen?"
You don't see how that can go badly?
I mean, are you playing coy here or are you just really unfamiliar with DV cases and statistics?
I guess its kind of moot because someone decided that a golf course could take the fall, but yes prosecuting "minor" DV cases is critical to prevent them from becoming "major" DV cases.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave#Variation_in_international_law
Plenty of laws that are common in other countries like subsidized day care and have been shown to greatly help women are opposed by the GOP. In other countries, conservatives often support this as a way of increasing birth rate.
The GOP has no problems fucking over issues that are of particular concern to women in order to fight the infidel DEBT and SOCIALISM.
Just trying to figure out exactly how much of the GOP's platform she embraces.
I think your conclusion requires prior assumptions that are quite wrong.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/18/republicans-vote-unanimously-equal-pay-women-bill/
Let's also not forget that Republicans are overwhelmingly pro-rape
Especially pro-rape of soldiers
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/10/07/63367/kbr-rape-franken-amendment/
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Yes, MM, all women should agree that women are discriminated against in terms of wages. It's called acknowledging reality. Studies have shown that women get paid less than men, even when you control for job type.
There are plenty of other studies that show women get screwed with wages even when controlling for variables.
I would imagine individual woman are better placed to decide what political party benefits them than you or I are. I think thats what it comes down to, really. You don't agree with the voting decisions of Republican women because you think you know better.
Rigorous Scholarship
You made an assertion, I made an assertion. I'm not going to dedicate 20 minutes to deconstruct your thing that you believe, when you haven't described it except in the broadest terms, and haven't provided any examples at all.
Of course they don't:
Hey, it's good enough for Cain.
Someday we'll have a political thread that doesn't start with a title that amounts to progressive fanservice, and doesn't degenerate into a poisonous hate-in before we can explore an idea.
Sorry, Lucid... break it out into another thread if you're interested, because I am, but I'm done in here. I have Rape is Awesome signs to print up for the next GOP rally.
Rigorous Scholarship
Yes, how dare we bring how the GOP actually votes into the argument!
Of course, there are also a lot of cases where women are putting their own, personal financial incentives above the good of the country, people other than rich people, and their own children; rather than stupid, these people are simply evil.
You want to make it sensational, but that's what those laws were really about- boring legal procedure in federal courts, basically.
Rigorous Scholarship
Rigorous Scholarship
Rigorous Scholarship
And not just women; men, too.
Or the woman who found out she was paid less than her male peers, and tried to sue only to be told she should have found out within 60 days of the first discriminatory check.
Rigorous Scholarship
Women have higher religiosity scores than men, which correlates strongly with GOP involvement.
That said, women do break Democrat by about five points or so.
Rigorous Scholarship