Don't you see those bold points in your comment? Aren't those two reasons for people to keep seeking equality?

You can choose not to work...that doesn't mean there aren't economic consequences.

But before that, women couldn't choose *to* work. There was no choice. It was stay at home with the kids, end of story.
So if you know a woman, you know someone to whom this applies. Yay!

I could use the backup if you get thoughts collected... at least some verbal approval. :)

Her mother still wears skirts and does not watch TV.

I do not WANT to be equal.

I am a woman. I can hunt and aquire my own dinner, yet I still want the door held for me.

I am not as strong as a man and I am an amazon. I know that a man will beat me in a physcial contest.

So because a man can beat you physical contest, you don't deserve to be given the same treatment?

When was the last time wrestling/boxing was used to solve problems?

...Ok, now when was the last time problem solving and conversation and, you know, brain-based solutions?

I'll hold the door for you, but I think that might offend you at this point.

If I were a cop, I would never be able to manhandle a suspect like a man could, period.

If I were a firefighter, I could not throw someone over my shoulder and carry them down a ladder.

I am the weaker sex in that respect and I do NOT take offense to that at all.

Yet, rosters are FILLED according to sex and race to appease equal opportunity, when applicants who are more qualified, but wrong race or gender are denied.

It blows. And I think decisons based like that puts others who can do the job at risk.


With my back, sometimes I can barely drag my deer out of the woods, but I have the guts to pull the trigger.

And some men are impossible to have a brain based conversation with to solve a problem. (just as there are women)

I am happy with my lot in life and have no wish for any more equality.

I think each sex has different privileges. Women get away with more s**t than a man would. I have so many friends that got out of tickets, just they looked sad and had a vagina.

Also, they get to wear bras. I want to wear bras and not get stares. Sure, most women put a shirt on over there bras, but still.

Why do you keep thinking equality means the same physical ability? There are men who aren't as physically able, but they still get the privileges on this list.

I'm glad you're happy... but you have the life you have because other women fought for it.

And even if you don't want it, I'm going to keep fighting for it. Your daughter might want a different life. Or your granddaughter. Or your grandson.

And the nice thing about this is that it doesn't require you or Bingo to agree... I'm not limiting freedoms...I'm working to give more.

Women also get assaulted more than a man does, just because they have a vagina.
Mel, honey, Victoria Secret has mail-order, if you want...

Really?

Sit with me for a few shifts. Women are excelling at abusing their male partners.

A man should have the right to get just as pregnant as any woman without having to pay out the arse for some surgery.

Sorry, this is plain bulls**t.
Plenty women worked, always have.

What do you count as "always"?

And if you are counting jobs in the home, maybe you're right. But if you wanted to leave the house, no.

Unless you were a prostitute.

Just because men can *also* be abused does not mean they are the majority. It's women.

Also, a lot of women who were abused end up getting punished as abusers when they fight back. It is only recently that some jurisdictions recognize differences in levels of violence.

Bingo and TM, what are you even mad about?

I'm not angry, I haven't accused anyone of anything. I just said "this is how society is."

You both are upset, clearly... because...I want to be equal? I want equal opportunities? Why is that a threatening premise?

You can choose to do what you want... I just don't think that I should have to do the same thing just because we have a similar genetic makeup. What is the threat in letting women grow?

...Would you rather go the other direction? You could move to Afghanistan. I hear they're pretty clear on a woman's place there.

Where in the world are you getting that?!

We've had female doctors since when? 1800's? Nurses, secretaries, operators, those are just the typical ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Lynx, I am not angry at all, but I am exasperated that your thinking is so closed.
You are equal, you have equal opportunities.
Why don't you see that?


And the snide comments are not called for, are they?

1800s is not always. It's a long time, though... but Elizabeth Blackwell was a pioneer, an oddity, not the norm.

Secretaries? Is that what you aspire to?

Some women have had jobs...but that wasn't the norm, and was socially unexceptable. This says: "By the early 19th century, however, acceptable occupations for working women were limited to factory labor or domestic work. Women were excluded from the professions, except for writing and teaching."

I think it's funny you think I'm closed-minded for thinking women can do more, but you are traditionalist and think we can do less.

As for being equal, we've come a long way. But it's not there yet. In this country, and the world.

And snide comments... you started the name-calling. I was just providing a contrast. It was literal, not snide.

No, again you are seeing things backward.

You said working. I show you, you change it to"aspiring"


Forget it, I really am done now. I should have stopped when I said before.

And yes...snide. You do it often.

I'll see what I can do. Right now I'm not quite sure I'm in a state where I can separate my emotions from the argument (this being a touchy subject for me).

Plus, I'm rather confused as arguments against equality tend to perplex the hell out of me.

@Bingo: From what I've seen an experienced, the equality is not there. I don't think it's a case of Lynxie being close minded, because I'm seeing pretty much what she is too.

I concede to you that women did have jobs in the 1800's. That, however, doesn't really say ANYTHING about equality unless you take into account what kinds of jobs they were, how employed women were treated and viewed at the time, how their jobs compared to the jobs offered to men, what their chances of promotion were, etc. etc. To say that women had jobs back then is rather like saying that slaves had freedoms. They did (hey, they got to choose whether they could eat or not), but that ignores the important part: what where those freedoms?

Furthermore, the average woman in the 1800's DID NOT have a job. As Lynxie said, being an employed woman was looked down upon, because the perception of the society at the time were that women's role was to stay at home and take care of the family, and to be subservient to the husband. Their choices at the time were severely limited because the men, in almost every way, OWNED the woman.