This is KMC after all. It all depends on who is a favorite or not.
Originally posted by UshgarakActually I said chauvinist as in a "person who passionately defends his views". That's exactly what I was referring to, since you asked me. That is the primary definition of the word. I can post the link to where I said that. The whole point is people were not contributing to the thread, flaming, and bashing, and people post blatantly racist, hateful comments on here often and nobody bats an eye. A person has a right to call me what they want, and I have a right to defend my stance on it. That's a discussion. As long as they don't break the rules.
No, they do not. C-master's position is so obviously sexist- and he even said earlier he would take being called chauvinistic as a mark of pride- that calling him so is no more flaming than calling the sky blue. You also entirely mischaracterised any argument I have made against him. I only ever attacked his argument when I was in fact arguing his views. In the last two pages I've not been arguing his views- I have been censoring his behaviour.Just to make it clear- it is absolutely fair game for anyone to call c-master sexist based on him having demonstrated himself to be.
If you have comments on moderator decisions, do them by PM in future, thank you.
And I had no bad attitude about it. People can disagree with me, like dadudemon did on the welfare issue, but there is no need to bash, and they can at least come up with a competent argument. Rules should be upheld equally for mods and members alike. I am blunt about saying things but not wanting equal rights for both genders *is* sexist.
Originally posted by inimalistI hate watching videos in debates, so I clicked on the first 10 seconds. It does sound like the excuses workers make. Thanks for your great contribution to my thread again.
c-master?yaya, sorry Ush, but tell me you didn't chuckle
Originally posted by BackFire
C-Master, were you a regular Tom Leykis listener back when he used to be on the radio?
I live in Georgia so he didn't play here to my knowledge. I have his audio streams I found online. He gives good pragmatic advice in many areas. I liked his stance on not giving money to losers. He'll be back in 2012
Originally posted by Omega Vision
I can't believe C-Master is trying to deny his sexism.
Yet you have nothing to back up this claim. No arguments or facts either. Just the fact that you don't like what I said. You simply posted up a news article and left when I disagreed, claiming the job stuff was all a conspiracy.
I'm a MRA for better lack of words. You can't deny you're being biased on the matter. Divorce laws, rape shield laws, child custody laws, sexual harassment laws, Vawa acts, all of those are pretty much stacked against men.
Do you have a reasonable defense for my statement or are you just going to blurt the same thing over and over without providing anything? Like most here are doing. People need to get by on what they do, and not have laws in their favor.
*You* are sexist if you advocate one gender having rights that the other doesn't. It's the very definition of it.
Originally posted by Lord LucienAww thanks. 😮
I can't believe he's trying to deny he's sexy.
That's now an official warning to you, c-master. I already told you to stop wasting time trying to defend against that which is absolutely and blatantly obvious as it was akin to trolling. You have now returned and produced a post that adds absolutely nothing at all in defiance of what I said, nor is it appropriate for you to make comments about the rules after I very clearly explained the situation to you.
Post like that again and you will be banned. Post any more of your sexism and you will be banned. I hope that is clear.
Make any comment like that again and you will receive an official warning also.
As people seem unclear on this issue, please bear in mind that mods have the discretion to censor any set of comments they feel are overtly offensive and/or disruptive.
And also bear in mind that making snide comments on mod decisions is a warnable offence.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Damn, a lot has been said in a few hours.The way I view it is that marriage, in our society, is a standard contract which usually never gets stated very clearly. That's why divorce can be a very messy business as a lot goes on hearsay, assumptions and what was supposed. I'm all for pre-nups, and honestly think that, rather than the church or the government you should get a lawyer in marriage, as you are basically incorporating. But, that being said, I don't think that women necessarily get favoured in divorce. To me that seems to be a problem of definitions. Society obviously values the person more that makes money, but the contributions of the other person, taking care of the household are just as worthy, even if they are not monetarily rewarded. As such it may seem to someone that the woman is favoured as she gets the "man's" money in the settlement, however the standard deal is that she would not pursue a career and aid the man emotionally and by taking care of his domestic business in making money, so she does deserve a share of it. How much is what needs to be determined in court, and obviously many guys, especially those through a divorce feel that they have been treated unfairly, as they themselves don't value the non financial contributions as highly.
Obviously there is different arrangements too, like women that marry a billionaire or people that cheat, etc. and that has to be weighed differently, but that's why we have courts.
Generally, get a pre-nup, write down exactly what contract you get into, and know what it entails. Easier for everyone. You wouldn't start a business with a friend without drawing up a contract, and that's basically what you are doing there.
nice to see SOMEONE that understands both sides!
Re: Gender roles and equality.
Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Hello once again guys. This was a highly debated topic in another thread, so I will debate it here. I'm well aware of the types that post here and their beliefs, but I don't really care.How do people here feel about gender relations, roles, and equality? I believe in everything being 50/50, some believe in roles, and others (i.e most) believe it should be "equal" to a woman plus extra benefits. Not only in terms of relationships, but law and everything else.
What do you think? Discuss, post, blah blah blah.
I believe that everything should be equel as well but if the woman or man decides that they want to stay home with the kids. Then the man or woman should repect that.
Are we talking about marriage couples? Or shacking up couples?
I don't believe C-Master is genuinely sexist, though I can see why his arguments could be seen that way.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Damn, a lot has been said in a few hours.The way I view it is that marriage, in our society, is a standard contract which usually never gets stated very clearly. That's why divorce can be a very messy business as a lot goes on hearsay, assumptions and what was supposed. I'm all for pre-nups, and honestly think that, rather than the church or the government you should get a lawyer in marriage, as you are basically incorporating. But, that being said, I don't think that women necessarily get favoured in divorce. To me that seems to be a problem of definitions. Society obviously values the person more that makes money, but the contributions of the other person, taking care of the household are just as worthy, even if they are not monetarily rewarded. As such it may seem to someone that the woman is favoured as she gets the "man's" money in the settlement, however the standard deal is that she would not pursue a career and aid the man emotionally and by taking care of his domestic business in making money, so she does deserve a share of it. How much is what needs to be determined in court, and obviously many guys, especially those through a divorce feel that they have been treated unfairly, as they themselves don't value the non financial contributions as highly.
Obviously there is different arrangements too, like women that marry a billionaire or people that cheat, etc. and that has to be weighed differently, but that's why we have courts.
Generally, get a pre-nup, write down exactly what contract you get into, and know what it entails. Easier for everyone. You wouldn't start a business with a friend without drawing up a contract, and that's basically what you are doing there.
Agreed for the most part, though naturally there are always exceptions.
Originally posted by Mikey no 1
Cmaster is certainly right many laws are against men. That is not sexist it's fact, hence movements like fathers for justice etc.
Of course, but you can't forget the sexism that women face too. There has to be some sort of balance.
Originally posted by -Pr-lt's believed in the UK domestic violence against men is almost as high as against women. Thing is, law treats men and women very differently. That's just one example of the need for some sort of balance.
I don't believe C-Master is genuinely sexist, though I can see why his arguments could be seen that way.Agreed for the most part, though naturally there are always exceptions.
Of course, but you can't forget the sexism that women face too. There has to be some sort of balance.
Originally posted by Mikey no 1
lt's believed in the UK domestic violence against men is almost as high as against women. Thing is, law treats men and women very differently. That's just one example of the need for some sort of balance.
I don't think it's necessarily equal, but itt's a lot higher than it used to be. In ireland for instance, there are numerous cases where police would be called to a home by a man who was being abused. The police, assuming they didn't laugh at him, would tell him to "sort his own business out" or something similar. And then there's male rape cases.
As far as interpersonal relationships go, women have more power than they've ever had, and equality is finally starting to become a reality for some under various definitions.
I'm not going to argue for women, because it goes without saying that women are mistreated in various areas, but as far as men go: In this modern age, men are told that it's all right to be sensitive, to be emotional and open about their feelings. Yet by that same token, that man that decides to respect his wife's decision to continue her career and stays at home to mind the kids himself, still gets shafted by the courts in a lot of cases when divorce rears it's ugly head.
men now more than ever are taking a more active role in the rearing of their children, yet the legislation has not been changed to reflect that. sure, there are exceptions, but the rule is horribly skewed at the moment.
Should men have rights that bring them up to parity? Of course, but not at the expense of the opposite gender. The same goes for vice versa, and some of the laws that CM did actually mention, do trouble me after reading up about them.
I agree with a lot of what you say. The Guardian reckons just over 40 % are male in the UK. I beleve in many things women are more likely to be beleived. That worries me, in Ireland you still have an exam based education system. In England at secondary school it is coursework based, something boys hate, as a result they do less well at GCSE than under systems like yours. This was shown when pilot groups used the old Maths curriculum and boys did better again. This is another example of emasculating boys, it's a problem that will get worse and become explosive.
Originally posted by Mikey no 1
I agree with a lot of what you say. The Guardian reckons just over 40 % are male in the UK. I beleve in many things women are more likely to be beleived. That worries me, in Ireland you still have an exam based education system. In England at secondary school it is coursework based, something boys hate, as a result they do less well at GCSE than under systems like yours. This was shown when pilot groups used the old Maths curriculum and boys did better again. This is another example of emasculating boys, it's a problem that will get worse and become explosive.
Funnily enough, they're actually speaking about changing the way schools' final exams are constructed, to give practical and project based work more value towards the final result.
Irish education is horrible atm; it makes little measure of actual intelligence, rather deciding that your ability to retain information than actually testing a person's various abilities with reasoning, language and the like [/off topic]