[–] Number1dududuNumber1 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I appreciate the humorous approach to my viewpoint, though I think in time the balance will not be so... balanced.
[–] Shammyhealz 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Did they say compare the likelihood of a man raised by two women being able to knock together a table out of wood vs the ability of a man who had a father figure to do the same?
Had different sex parents. Couldn't build a halfway decent table if I tried. Besides the fact, as long as we're going on stereotypes, aren't lesbians supposed to be good at woodworking?
It's been shown multiple times that our peers are highly influential in our upbringing. Of all of the gay couples (male and female), I can't think of one that wouldn't send their kid to a woodworking class if they wanted to.
How about the % of those males who are more or less inclined to pursue masculine lines of work.
I fail to see how that's problematic. It does mean higher pay due to lower supply for those who are inclined to do "masculine" work, so that's a plus for your kids.
[–] Number1dududuNumber1 ago (edited ago)
Had different sex parents. Couldn't build a halfway decent table if I tried.
Then you would be the exception and not the rule. Actually this could be an example of how gender based roles are already being negatively impacted by the negative stigma that society is attaching to being a manly man.
Though while you cannot build a table, which is just one example of a typically manly thing, what can you do? I bet you fall into a different of gender based stereotypical rules.
As for the less people = higher pay proposition, that's not the problem. The problem is supply and demand and the industry not being able to meet the minimum requirements of the population. No matter how much money you throw at people they can only do so much in a day.
Machines will have very little impact on the construction industry. Everything will still require human input. Even 3d printed building still require human monitoring since they can't do shit like put in windows in even our most advanced prototypes. Actually, the jobs most at risk by machinery are tosser commonly filed by women such at tellers, phone operators, receptionists, secretaries etc. Many of today jobs can and will be automated sin. Hell tellers are already being replaced by machines that do the same job without the human error factor.
So when the likelihood of men to do manly tasks decreases and the volume of "aoft" jobs available decreases it'll either push men who are disinclined to perform the job well back into an industry which will then be negatively impacted by bad tradesmanship or it will mean a skyrocketing unemployment rate.
this isn't going to happen tomorrow or next year. Hell, it might take 100 years to happen, but ut is my opinion, my belief, that if we continue down the current path of manshaming, white knighthood and same sex couple raising children then it is going to fuck our world.
I'm sure I just offended many people, that's great. Funny thing is I don't give a fuck what you think of my opinions and honestly you shouldn't give a fuck what my opinions are. Hell, this is the internet who really cares what anyone thinks when you can recede to a hugbox on another site. I'll probably appear in a tumblr post or a facebook conversation and someone'll get a big ol' pat on the back for calling me an asshole.
[–] Fact_Checking_Alien 1 point 2 points 3 points (+3|-1) ago
You are still "begging the question". The question you need to ask is actually twofold, and philosophical. You perceive those acts to be masculine, and assume based on what you believe to be inherent masculinity that not doing those things makes one effeminate. At least that's your table hypothetical.
You go further, however, and seem to correlate lesbians with SJW perspectives. SJW narratives have proved, time and again, to have real negative socioeconomic effects. If no economic outcome loss was found, on average, then it's either not happening or part of a small group of outliers. If it were happening we'd see the consequences of those attitudes in the demographic outcomes of the resulting adults.
While you are connecting these things as consequences of same sex parents, data from studies should show indicators if those effects have outcome consequences.
Honestly the leaps you're using in your logic are so expansive it's making it very difficult to parse together. You have defined masculinity by traditionalist behaviors, without proving those traditional behaviors develop masculinity. You've not defined masculinity except in this circular fashion (therefore, begging the question). You blame same sex couples for what you then conclude is this lapse in masculinity, even though it should have outcome results that are negative if it were in fact the case.
Just...what?
[–] Number1dududuNumber1 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Let's try this again, since it's been 16 hours. You'll have to revisit the thread to read my 3-piece response thanks to character limits.
You either didn't read, ignored, or I am thinking about a different reply where I said that the impact of these things will not be seen for another 25 years, maybe 30. By then it will way too fucking late to rectify things. In the words of Marilyn Monroe "...if we don't conform to societies expectations then who will?"
I said that men raised solely by women are likely to perpetuate the SJW thought train, not that lesbians perpetuate the SJW though train. A man with no male impact on his life is more likely to succumb to the trivial shit that SJW's come up with. This effect can be seen today in what people call 'white knights'. They serve no real purpose except to gather female friends by pandering to their narcissistic tendencies. They back up their 'damsel in distress' hoping that she'll reward him for his efforts with friendship but all she does is use him as an emotional dump. How do I know this? Because that used to be me, a long time ago now. I fucked a word up in that paragraph which makes it read differently to intended.
That last sentence was fucked, it wasn't meant to read that lesbians perpetuate the SJW thought train but that men raised by two women are more likely to subscribe to their (SJW's) views because of their soft spot for women that will no doubt be present.
The following paragraph "In 25 years the world will be a shithole. It will be so politically correct that talking in public is going to be dangerous as any bitch and her bloody vagina will be able to scream RAPE or MISOGYNY and the poor sod who dared talk will get slammed." relates to the above statement that men are more and more likely to jump on board with SJW's principles that it will be impossible to live a normal life without fear of a lawsuit. What about the guys who for arrested for "manspreading" what is that shit? You know what, if a guy is manspreading it's because we have some extra fucking bits between our legs that don't just retract when we close out legs. You know what else? You could just politely ask him to close his legs so you can have a seat. Most men would gladly do so, being glad to have had any relief at all. This was also a bit sexist, I apologise for that as I do get carried away.
[–] Number1dududuNumber1 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
There is a reason that the human race, as retarded and useless as we are, have managed to survive nature to the point of overcoming it. That is because the sexes had roles to play and those roles were filled. Now that we've overcome nature the apparent impact of those roles, or as some people call them 'stereotypes', are diminished to the point that the number of people who are trying to abolish these roles, or 'stereotypes' is increasing at an alarming rate. SJW's talk shit about CIS male privilege, but you know what, every time they talk that shit they are perpetuating the sexist mentality they think they are fighting to abolish. Tell you what, I've never felt entitled due to my race or sex, only people who feel the need to put others down to lift themselves up do. Ie, SJW's
Now hear me out (I ramble a bit here, not entirely relevant), if you make it past that sentence (not you, FCA, since you seem to approaching this reasonably, but to the others that might read this comment who can't see past their nose) academically women can achieve many great things, many times better than their male counterparts. Hell the moon lander was programmed by a woman, that is a mean motherfucking feat to accomplish. But, and here's the kicker, science has proven and will continue to prove that in the physical realm men will always be on top. The reason for this, put simply, is that a mans body is a larger engine than that of a woman. It is capable of taking in more oxygen and distributing that oxygen as required in larger volumes. Sure the are exceptions, but that's exactly what they are. Exceptions. A good example is the current marathon WR's. Men are areound 11 minutes ahead of the ladies. Now, I've never run a marathon and probably never will, but I do run and I know that it is not fucking easy. An 11 minute difference is enormous in the grand scheme of things. The difference must come from somewhere, so either the woman isn't as dedicated, or she doesn't train as much, or she slacks off during her run, eats the wrong diet or whatever. But I highly doubt any of those are the case, because extreme athletes are some crazy fuckers and do crazy shit. I doubt that anyone at that level of performance would slack off in any way shape or form. The reason behind the large gap is the aforementioned engine size. Women just cannot do the same physical work as men for the same length of time at the same intensity and achieve the same results.
In relation to the above paragraph, if the men of the world slowly become sissy little fucks who have no backbone, who will do the hard yards? How many women do you see on construction sites? Not many. You could chalk it up to 'it's a sexist workplace' but there are women out there that have been successful in construction. Why don't you hear about them? Because other women do NOT find them inspirational. Despite the fact that they have done everything the SJW's fight for. Equality, choice, fair treatment these woman have achieved it all and added success to top it off. Why haven't these successful women caused droves of young girl to want to become a fore(wo)man or a builder? Because women do no want to do that work. So, if men over time gradually become sissy bitches and start to develop the same disinclination for the rough working life that leaves men with fucked knees and backs by the age of 45 who will? I go back to the Marilyn Monroe quote "...if we don't conform to societies expectations then who will?" In 25 years we will start to see the impact. In 40 years it will become trouble. By the time I die there will be less men who are willing to do construction work than required.
Those that do work it will earn an assload of money and probably hate other men who prance around puddles and fuss about dog hair on their pants. Why? Because as a construction worker in todays society the people I work for, the clients, have NO fucking idea just how hard it is to do what I do, and I've got the easy side of the coin. I don't sit in machinery all day, or ride a jackhammer or anything like that. I'm an electrician. And no, putting that power point in isn't a 15 minute job that'll cost you $50 on top of the power point you picked up at a hardware store because you think I'd overcharge you for it. It'll cost more like $250 because of all the testing, verification and paperwork involved in making an alteration to an electrical installation.