Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll share a big point with you instead of making you go find it. He points out biological history. Men had more sexual partners than women far various reason that I'm sure we both know. Fine. Presumably, this is important or else he wouldn't have brought it up. But alas, he brought up monogamous relationships. Weird, right? Given that biological history makes it clear, that's not what we're made to do. But no, women are at fault for the 'decline' in monogamous relationships, not men who are biologically conditioned by his own admission to not have just one sexual partner. No, women are at fault because they'll have more than one partner in life.
The big point is that some men had lots of sexual partners but most had none at all. That has been the norm in primitive societies (and among animals), and the argument is made that this is one of the things that keeps societies from progressing, as the non-dominant majority of men, being shut out of reproduction, have little incentive to use their talents to the fullest. Eventually it was agreed that men would have only one woman each, at least in public. That way there were enough women to go around, and all men had a reason to work toward the goal of a wife and family. Societies that made this transition made progress, but there has been a reversal in Western societies in the past two generations leading to decline. And it doesn't really matter if the fault for this return to primitive ways lies more with women or men. The West will continue to decline, absent monogamy, or so the argument goes...
Dude, half the time the candidates themselves may not be able to pass a test on what the issues and positions of themselves are, as they change depending on the day and audience.
That's exactly why it's so important for voters to be able to pass the test so that they can spot those inconsistencies and recognize their significance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomparent
I am appalled at the idea that anyone would advocate denying more than fifty percent of the U.S. population the right to vote based solely on gender. How exactly does this make us different than a Middle Eastern culture that subjugates women?
We should deny MORE than half of the population the vote based on their ignorance and unwillingness to educate themselves. Either that, or let inmates in an asylum decide for the rest of us. Either one makes as much sense as the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PullMyFinger
Actually, successful nations can be measured by how equal they treat their women and with the amount of respect almost directly related to their success curve.
If you want to fix problems in a country, make sure the women are helping.
I agree.
But at the same time, women can certainly help by staying home and raising children -- something that feminists disdain.
Our society is paying the price for both parents having to work full-time and proper parenting being outsourced to schools, etc.
And a lot of people aren't even having kids anymore -- except to get welfare.
Not a good prospect for the future survival of our society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
...people who receive money I earned via the federal government vote for politicians who deliver my hard-earned goods.
Well said.
You've just illustrated why democracy fails and must fail.
Our founding fathers created a Republic to counterbalance that problem, but they obviously didn't go far enough.
Quote:
This means one-man/one-vote doesn't work, cannot work and is unsustainable as long as earners have no way to prevent raids on their paychecks.
Exactly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler
Wow, this video nails it. I wondered why Merkel would allow millions of aggressive males that are going to rape, pillage and destroy to come in and sew the seeds of destruction of the German civilization and thought, it's gotta be sexual desire and submission. The reality is women will always prefer the most aggressive males. Our metrosexual gentlemen do nothing for them.
So true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skepticratic
As I said earlier, I think there are reasonably overarching points being made but the conclusions being met are what I would call Trump thinking (calling it thinking is pretty generous on my end). It's taking complex problems and giving them simple solutions.
You're assigning fault...it's just men and women responding to their biological predispositions. The only thing about Drumpf that comes to mind from this video is that as a strong aggressive male, women are obviously sexually attracted to him (doesn't mean they will vote for him but I bet he surprises in that regard). You're focused on political expediency of the moment which completely misses the mark, it's actually much more fundamental and basic than that. The video absolutely makes sense to thinkers.
There's that little sentence at the end. Another 'Donald Trump' sales tactic. It assumes agreement to avoid any sort of factual assertion.
I also didn't assign fault. I actually did that opposite. I said their are complexities at play here that make is difficult to blame a single movement, like feminism. In contrast, this video is only looking at parts of the whole then blaming the entire thing on feminism.
And a side note, I didn't bring up Trump in any other way than to compare his tactic to that of the video. While I wouldn't be shocked if the man making this video was a Trump supporter, I have no basis to assume that from as of now. My point was that it took a complex problem (in this case many, with a focus on the immigrant crisis and cultural instability) and blamed it on a single movement in the same way that many seem to think a wall is the master solution to illegal immigration. I've also yet to meet a woman who finds Donald Trump attractive in the slightest.
The big point is that some men had lots of sexual partners but most had none at all. That has been the norm in primitive societies (and among animals), and the argument is made that this is one of the things that keeps societies from progressing, as the non-dominant majority of men, being shut out of reproduction, have little incentive to use their talents to the fullest. Eventually it was agreed that men would have only one woman each, at least in public. That way there were enough women to go around, and all men had a reason to work toward the goal of a wife and family. Societies that made this transition made progress, but there has been a reversal in Western societies in the past two generations leading to decline. And it doesn't really matter if the fault for this return to primitive ways lies more with women or men. The West will continue to decline, absent monogamy, or so the argument goes...
Well, that's a more reasonable argument.
I don't oppose monogamy. I don't think most people do either, to be honest. There's an assumption that many still cling to that people should only ever have one sexual partner before settling with someone. Not sure why. But that seemed to be the predominate argument for why women are the main reason for the immigrant crisis (just saying it sounds insane...). Many women have multiple sexual partners before marriage, but they still get married. Most people still want to get married. I've met very few people who genuinely dislike the concept of marriage. I'm talking very few. Gay people, atheists, non-religious religious people; they all have expresses interest in marriage, despite what I'd imagine the guy who made this video would say about them for not abiding by cultural customs.
There are a great deal of complexities at play here. As I've said, I think there are overarching points made in the video that are perfectly valid. Western society seems to be growing ashamed of our culture, for reasons that aren't totally invalid, but this is creating instability. While we should be ashamed of the West's colonialism, this doesn't mean we should be ashamed of the west as an entity. And the way we're expressing our regrets are self destructive in nature. And indeed, there are many cultural problems currently surfacing around how we interact with each other, particularly in regards to romantic relationships.
I really can't make this clear enough. Despite the ever present "if you aren't with me, your dumb and I hate you' mentality that exists on this forum, I'm not just dismissing the whole video. I think their are points made here that should be heard, but I found the conclusion drawn to be childish and baseless.
I'd compare the Obama 'hope' campaign to Bernie's 'revolution' campaign. Well intentioned, but largely empty and unsuccessful.
I'm all for discouraging illegal immigration, but why spend $12+ billion dollars on it? As I've said many times when this topic is brought up, is there really no other cost effective solution? I know Americans love their instant gratification, but maybe, just maybe, that's stupid?
I think there is something to be said for only allowing people to vote who speak English fluently, can pass a test in history, pass another test in civics, pass a test on the issues and positions of the candidates, and who pay federal income taxes above a certain minimum (for federal elections.)
Sickening thread, but let's add level of education to that list.
Sickening thread, but let's add level of education to that list.
People who think like that won't agree. They present it as something that makes democracy smarter, but once you add a level of education in it, we'll start getting things like "liberal bias in academia" then the political reasons behind their little voting restrictions (fascism; thats what it's actually called) become clear. So I wouldn't anticipate a response that's terribly constructive, if you get one at all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
