The cause of sexual conflict

[stafffighter]

It has occured to me that gender roles are a social construct and that for true equality they must be done away with. And I'd like a jetpack and solid gold toilet while we're at it. No this is not heavy handed feminist rhetoric based more on anger than any true sense of harmonic existance. It is time to act people, if you chose to define yourself as people. There is one common enemy and that is nature.
Without the natural processes there would be no male and female. Damn you sexual reproduction,were we given a social construct that allowed for the understanding to acheive the division of our own cells there would be no wars. Did those flowers give their consent to be pollinated? No, they just sit there and take it because nature has been oppressing them. Rise up sisters and brothers, not that I'm saying the body you were born into should define your sence of self, and stand up to the true cause of our socio/economical/pycho/sexual/fiscal/polit
ical/thoelogical/supercalifragelistic division.
It is nature that says we have meaningful diffrences and I'm far too reactionary to admit diffrence without attaching a points system to see who wins.
Fuck you nature, fuck you in a way that in no way suggests that you are the submissive partner and thus less important to society

[RedSkunk]

yawn.

But it is significant that stafff made a thread. That doesn't happen often.

[beaucoup-yeux]

The measure of any great civilization has always been how they treat their women. There are problems in america, but it could be much, much worse.

actually strike that, I forgot Alito was confirmed.

[stafffighter]

At 2/3/06 09:30 PM, red_skunk wrote: yawn.

But it is significant that stafff made a thread. That doesn't happen often.

Because when I do they end up like this. I would have complained about it in the lounge but I've done that more than my family guy joke. They overuse those fucking cut scenes

[RUFUSthePENUS]

I am not a male chauvinist and to prove it i will give birth to twins in 9 months >:(

[stafffighter]

At 2/4/06 06:56 AM, Guiding_Light wrote: I am not a male chauvinist and to prove it i will give birth to twins in 9 months >:(

If you were a true actrivist you would care enough to tell your body that you're good enough to make your own choices and get that involentary system to give you more than 2 children

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

The only problem is that SOME gender roles are not only neccesary but un-escapable. For example, it's assumed that when a baby is born, the man should work, and the woman should stay home with the baby. That is the femal role. Well, there is a reason. Females are simply better at taking care of thier babies then men, and have natural, god given abilities to fit that role that men just don't have.

[Mjolnir-1]

have you ever noticed how chicks thinks all guys are pervs? seriously... think about it... the reason we want to have sex all the f***ing time is because its in our nature. if we didnt want to have sex like chicks do we wouldnt exist.

[Draconias]

At 2/4/06 10:11 PM, LettuceClock wrote: Females are simply better at taking care of thier babies then men, and have natural, god given abilities to fit that role that men just don't have.

Bullshit.

Your statement is based solely on sexism. Men are just as good at raising children as women. The only factors that really influences how well you can raise children are mental health (insane?) and whether or not you have a full-time job. It may seem like men don't do as much of the child rearing, but that's because they have a job.

Men are no worse than women at child rearing. I personally know many stay-at-home Dads and widowers, and I'd say most of them are better fathers than your average woman. It's not a matter of "god given ability," it's who has the time to raise kids.

I'm disgusted by sexists like you, LettuceClock. Bigotry cuts both ways and only hurts people.

[Elvis666]

Center politics are old. Men are stronger, women are more durable. Babes need love and attention, which is possible from each sex. As far as god given abilities, f**k that, god doesn’t exist. Men are more rough, because in the past emotional males were considered weak, which of course is crap. Women these days run big companies, which make millions and are very successful, that shows “stay at home mothers” are history. Stop this ignorant comparing and get together, cause each side has something good and positive to offer.

[x-Toadenalin-x]

Arguably, gender roles have come crashing down. Actors like Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt or footballers like David Beckham and Ronaldinio seem to spend more time posturing in fashion magazines than actually working.

It used to be that a man would be considered a little "off" if he gelled his hair, applied face cream or spent a long time picking an outfit. Nowdays it is a social norm.

Contrast that to women. Traditionally subserviant and the "weaker sex", the 60's sexual revolution has set them on a new level of the gender-politic. Now it seems that women are _more_ adept than men in the workplace!

I conclude that in the next ten to twenty years, the gender divide will be almost a thing of the past, as Western society becomes more and more metrosexual in an effort to avoid 'offending'

[Guilty-Biscuit]

At 2/6/06 01:29 PM, x_Toadenalin_x wrote: I conclude that in the next ten to twenty years, the gender divide will be almost a thing of the past, as Western society becomes more and more metrosexual in an effort to avoid 'offending'

Yeah, we're getting there. Slowly does it.

[bradford1]

At 2/3/06 08:44 PM, stafffighter wrote: It has occured to me that gender roles are a social construct and that for true equality they must be done away with. And I'd like a jetpack and solid gold toilet while we're at it. No this is not heavy handed feminist rhetoric based more on anger than any true sense of harmonic existance. It is time to act people, if you chose to define yourself as people. There is one common enemy and that is nature.
Without the natural processes there would be no male and female. Damn you sexual reproduction,were we given a social construct that allowed for the understanding to acheive the division of our own cells there would be no wars. Did those flowers give their consent to be pollinated? No, they just sit there and take it because nature has been oppressing them. Rise up sisters and brothers, not that I'm saying the body you were born into should define your sence of self, and stand up to the true cause of our socio/economical/pycho/sexual/fiscal/polit
ical/thoelogical/supercalifragelistic division.
It is nature that says we have meaningful diffrences and I'm far too reactionary to admit diffrence without attaching a points system to see who wins.
Fuck you nature, fuck you in a way that in no way suggests that you are the submissive partner and thus less important to society

Ok, so you are saying that I am not a guy? It is human nature to be submissive to the other sex, and some people who build up anger and tension (http://newgrounds.co../topic.php?id=42832
4 - read my murder page to understand) Rape women to get a feeling that they are better than them. Society can't do things as radical as exist without gender. Stop dreaming.

Besides, even if there wasn't gender, people would still rape to feel better than the victim.

The reason why there aren't really and female rapists is because it is almost impossible to rape a guy for anatomical reasons, and for the fact that guy want to have sex with anything that isn't fat, or a guy anyway.

Just thought I'd say a few words.

At 2/6/06 01:29 PM, x_Toadenalin_x wrote:

DISSED THE GREATEST SOCCER PLAYER OF OUR TIME

Oh no , you didn't ! You dissed Ronaldinho ! * Charges and breaks your neck* LOL!

[DrunkenNinjer]

Yeah, lets start an anti nature group, which no one will care about and complain about things that happend in the middle ages!

[bradford1]

At 2/7/06 01:29 PM, DrunkenNinjer wrote: Yeah, lets start an anti nature group, which no one will care about and complain about things that happend in the middle ages!

He couldn't be more right. Staffighter, you are indeed a mod, but that doesn't give you the excuse to be wrong. :P

[stafffighter]

At 2/7/06 05:52 PM, bradford1 wrote:

He couldn't be more right. Staffighter, you are indeed a mod, but that doesn't give you the excuse to be wrong. :P

I'm a mod? If I was I could ban you for being unable to see sarcasm