I am the first and only Belly here.
examinator yes you may well be right.
But while I have trouble putting it in words my life education has taken me from radical left to center left.
I with every breath believe some true gains have come from left right and center.
But know in my very guts only middle of the road Labor is sale able.
We need new ideas new ways to resolve problems, like me for it or hate me,no answers come from feminism.
Reality is not able to mix with it, no way am I saying women should not have true equality.
In every thing, but like men based on ability.
Story,s in this morning press tell of changing times, young girls bashing others, drunken mob violence.
60 year old women bashed by groups of girls, yet here in this thread feminists tell us women are never wrong.
I again ask, is there any chance this threads subject, that young woman did just what she said she wanted to do then changed her mind 5 days after?
yes there is

LOL, "Naomi Wolf isn't a REAL feminist cos she likes men" from the pynchme.

pynchme:"Also bear in mind that she is American,so my regard of the relevance of her recent witing might reflect my own parochialism."

Does this mean no more links to US radfem misinformation from you? At last! I note that you don't actually refute her points

pychme:" I posted a link earlier with the facts and figures that show that men dominate decision making positions at all levels and in all areas of education."

No, you didn't. The link you posted was to a report that is 7 years out of date and even it had to acknowledge the dominance of women in university student bodies. According to the ABS the latst figures are that there are 90,000 more women studying at tertiary level than men, while 52.6% of all graduate professionals are women. It's useless trying to discuss facts with you, pynchme, because you are simply not up to the job of understanding what you copy and paste.

pynchme:"Female influence in teaching long precedes the advent of feminism."

Her point was in regard to the female influence in curriculum development and in the development of administrative protocols for such aspects as behaviour management. As you point out, men used to dominate, with some negative consequences for girls' education, but now women do, with gross negative outcomes for boys.

IOW, the pendulum has swung too far, which is precisely my point in regard to the current fad for basing all forms of decision-making on feminist dogma. The trouble is that all the women in charge of the bureaucracies and most of the men have feminist ideology as their sole philosophical underpinning and when all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

pynchme:"females' choices have changed as new opportunities have become available to them;"

That is the point, isn't it? Men have not had new opportunities made available to them, but have assisted women to limit the ones that exist already.

The trouble with you Antiseptic is that you lie.

As you have just done now. Plus read back; I hve refuted points. You just choose to ignore them, or you can't comprehend them.

Now go back and read your stats and that report again. Men have not been deprived of or prevented from entering any field of their choice - ever. It's silly, frightened old boys like yourself who is holding them back; while doing nothing whatsoever for your daughter.

Belly: You wouldn't know equality if you fell over it. Equality means that women will do bad things too; just as men always have - and got away with it on the stupid rationale that they are just made that way. Women always have been bad if they were going to be bad; but whereas in the past it might have been a surreptitious dose of arsenic for the old boy; they are now more obvious because their behaviour is less restrained. Nobody here has claimed that all women ae lily white and all men are dark and evil. If you think you "say it like it is" - try also to read it like it is.

[cont]
It is a zero-sum game, in which the gains of feminism have been inevitably at the expense of male opportunity. Men are increasingly being driven into unskilled and semi-skilled work while women are becoming dominant in the professions, especially the new pseudo-professions, such as social work. There appears to be no mechanism to control how far this trend progresses: in fact, the reverse appears to be true. As women gain positions of authority, they encourage the "affirmative action" of hiring more women and no one mentions men till the drains need cleaning. We even have a program of Govt advertising in Qld aimed at pushing boys toward trades.

You have also misrepresented the biological determinism argument. No one is suggesting that cultural conditioning is uninfluential, but it is quite simply not possible to divorce biology from the equation. No matter how my culture accepts homosexuality, I have no desire for sex with men. There are no women playing football at senior level, because the bell curve of female development simply doesn't stretch far enough to meet the minimum requirements in terms of height, muscle mass, etc. No matter how much a woman might like to play, biology prevents her, which is why, of course, football is such a target for the Feminist Axis. As long as it exists, women are going to be aware that "girls can do ANYTHING" is a Furphy, even though they can do a lot of things that boys can't.

If physical development is so strongly a biological product, it's not hard to work out that other aspects of human development and human thought might be influenced. As Naomi Wolf points out, males tend to be linear, hierarchical thinkers, often highly task-focussed, whereas women tend to have a flatter prioritisation and a greater concern for the conditions of their immediate environment, as well as a greater capacity to multi-task. These are general biological differences that skew the "bell curve" you mentioned.

To use an analogy, some cats are bigger than some dogs but noone would suggest that a cat could replace a kelpie.

pynchme:"Men have not been deprived of or prevented from entering any field of their choice "

Men are deprived of choice by the poor educational outcomes they get as boys. Couple that with the biological fact that women bear the babies and you have a situation where many men are unable to improve their educational qualifications as adults because to do so would mean the family would lose income during the process.

You constantly try to justify preferential treatment of women based on the fact that some women were mistreated historically, yet this mistreatment of boys at school level is occurring right now, today, not in the dim,distant past and is creating a skewed society in which men are second-class citizens.

If you were genuine about seeking equality, rather than punishing men for failing to be women, you'd be agitating for better educational conditions for boys.

Belly, you're absolutely right about feminist dogma being a dead end. It is time for a new way of looking at gender issues and to get away from the self-serving entitlement Princesses.

*can anyone seriously suggest that the male is trained to focus on an animal but can't see dust or laundry? Puhleeze*

More likely Pynchme, that many men are not fusspots about every
speck of dust as you seem to be. There is a simple solution.
If you want the place spotless and not a speck of dust anywhere,
then you clean it!