The post that was quoted here has been removedI don't recall calling any particular person 'sexist' at RHP
I don't recall writing that you called any particular person 'sexist' at RHP.
...though when one writes
a post with sexist attitudes, one should be prepared to face the consequences.
I don't recall anyone writing with a sexist attitude except Duchess64.
There's no reason to suppose that most men here are willing to examine
objectively the facts about continuing gender-based inequalities or that they
have enough self-interest to attempt to change anything about them.
There's no reason to suppose that most women here are willing to examine objectively the facts about gender-based inequalities, continuing or otherwise. I have enough self-interest to accept things the way they are and realize that one way or the other isn't really so different.
Tomtom232 seems full of self-pity that now men enjoy less power over women
than men did back in his perceived 'good old days' of gender relations.
I don't think it was ever easy to control women (I suppose you never watched "I Love Lucy" ) and I never stated that I liked to partake in such an activity.
Ah, let's go back to the 'good old days' when women did not have the right to vote
or be legally entitled to receive the same pay for doing the same work as men!
Shouldn't all women have been perfectly happy to 'have it made' then, eh?
When a woman's place always was supposed to be in the home, did men
ever complain there were no women in chess clubs?
Back in the good ol' days if a man was good at being a man and a woman was good at being a woman then both had it made but in this day and age many men tend not to be good at being a man and many women tend not to be good at being a woman. I will concede that in many ways it is better but it is also worse in many other ways.
They were good old days because women are naturally good at certain things and men are naturally good at certain things thus women should learn to be ladies and men should learn to be gentleman. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this world.
"Ah, let's go back to the good old days when women weren't expected to vote and thus didn't have to worry about voting or be legally entitled to receive the same pay for doing the same work as men(I know of no woman that could outstrip me at a blue collar job... isn't that unfair that they get paid the same as me but get sympathy for not being able to lift as much weight nor lift it as long as I can because they are women?) because they didn't have to work at anything but being a mother."
13 Jan 12
2 edits
Originally posted by tomtom232because they didn't have to work at anything but being a mother
I don't recall calling any particular person 'sexist' at RHP
I don't recall writing that you called any particular person 'sexist' at RHP.
...though when one writes
a post with sexist attitudes, one should be prepared to face the consequences.
I don't recall anyone writing with a sexist attitude except Duchess64.
There's no re because they didn't have to work at anything but being a mother."
dude, erase this quickly! women have always and continue to do the majority of work.
13 Jan 12
It seems to me like this forum,chess involves a lot of competitive people,mainly men.Men have the habit of poking the borax at one another and competing in forms of one upmanship.When you generalise about sexism its a form of reverse sexism based on perception.Maybe its just boys been boys treating you with equality.
13 Jan 12
The post that was quoted here has been removedTomtom232 wrote earlier to me, 'if you call me sexist' and 'then you can call
me sexist', which now he apparently has clarified as his rhetorical devices.
They were already obvious rhetorical devices.
Evidently, Tomtom232 seems much too close-minded even to consider any
historical evidence of discrimination, both in law and in custom, against women.
Now I can understand that the changing roles of men and women today has left
many men apparently very confused, embittered, and yearning to go back to the
'good old days' when gender roles were more sharply defined, harshly enforced,
and there could be no doubt about who 'wore the pants' in the household.
This is where I end the debate... when the mud starts slinging.
You didn't adress any of my post.
When someone is beaten in a debate they often attempt this sort of thing.
