How to spot misogynists and misandrists

[Quantum Quack]

These services are expensive, and even access to birth control is expensive and reports show that those on a low income have difficulty in accessing things like the pill, for example.

Your country is much better at the US (and a lot of other countries in the West) in regards to reproductive healthcare, but like everywhere, including Australia, can do with improvement.


Do you think that a foundation based on sexist ideologies and distinct rules that governed women (gender roles were strict and women were expected to be dutiful and compliant) should be used as a general foundation?

Confucianism is very sexist and it has been shown that even with just a meritocratic system, gender norms still prevailed.

Do you think a system based on merit would be worthy of replacing a system based on gender?

I wasn't aware that Confucian meritocracy philosophy was sexist... sorry about that and thanks...certainly the traditional/cultural use of the philosophy was...

 

[Bells]

Do you think a system based on merit would be worthy of replacing a system based on gender?

I wasn't aware that Confucian meritocracy philosophy was sexist... sorry about that and thanks...certainly the traditional/cultural use of the philosophy was...

Our current system is merit based.

How well do you think is it working?

Sweden, for example and as linked in my previous post, is even more merit based and they have found that gender norms still prevail.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Our current system is merit based.

How well do you think is it working?

Sweden, for example and as linked in my previous post, is even more merit based and they have found that gender norms still prevail.

I am confused obviously...
A patriarchal system that you have repeatedly referred to as being the current status quo can not be by definition a merit based system. It is discriminatory, heavily biased towards favoring men and male dominance.
so I fail to see how you can post what you have posted, with a straight face.....

 

[Quantum Quack]

Our current system is merit based.

How well do you think is it working?

Sweden, for example and as linked in my previous post, is even more merit based and they have found that gender norms still prevail.

edit:
I am confused obviously...
A patriarchal system that you have repeatedly referred to as being the current status quo can not be by definition a fully merit based system. It is discriminatory, heavily biased towards favoring men and male dominance.
so I fail to see how you can post what you have posted, with a straight face.....

 

[Bells]

I am confused obviously...
A patriarchal system that you have repeatedly referred to as being the current status quo can not be by definition a merit based system. It is discriminatory, heavily biased towards favoring men and male dominance.
so I fail to see how you can post what you have posted, with a straight face.....

You really do not understand this subject, do you? Did you not read the link in the previous post about this very subject? Here it is again: https://pub.epsilon.slu.se/13077/1/powell_s_160218.pdf

In a merit based system, people are judged by their merit, yes.. Or that is the ideal.. Now, consider that men are promoted more often than women, not because of their performance, but because they are male and more likely white males over their female and non-white male counterparts.. We are in a merit based system. Supposedly. But, as has been found, the system is so deeply entrenched in patriarchy, that men still dominate when it comes to things like promotions. So it tries to right itself by having quota's - which further moves away from the merit system that is meant to be in place and instead, views non-white males as token hires. Once that quota has been filled, white males will continue to dominate. This this exists within the current "merit" based system. Do you understand now?

The system in place, supports and adheres to its patriarchal core or base, despite being "merit based".

Therefore, the very notion of "merit based" becomes sexist, because the only gender that has benefited thus far, have been white males.

Do you understand now?

 

[Bells]

A patriarchal system that you have repeatedly referred to as being the current status quo can not be by definition a fully merit based system.

You will never have a fully merit based system and it will never work because of the thousands of years of entrenched patriarchy in society.

Men get to decide what system we have in place.

 

[Quantum Quack]

You will never have a fully merit based system and it will never work because of the thousands of years of entrenched patriarchy in society.

Men get to decide what system we have in place.

if you say so...

 

[wegs]

if you say so...

 

[Quantum Quack]

We were discussing** , if that is the appropriate word, the ideal of the Confucian Meritocratic philosophy.
Bells believes that it is sexist and discriminatory. That is her belief.

(**)In an environment of open hostility, animosity, anger and hatred, discussion is almost impossible.

It is also her belief that the meritocratic ideal is impossible. That is her belief. as posted.

You will never have a fully merit based system and it will never work because of the thousands of years of entrenched patriarchy in society.
Men get to decide what system we have in place.

Who am I to challenge ( personal opinion) such self defeating beliefs. -

It would be also off topic.

Notes: None of what I have posted above is to be considered as fact or a claim as it is merely a personal assessment based on observation.

 

[Quantum Quack]

wegs
Further to your thread OP, you may recall the horror story of over 500000 children being rescued from systemic abuse in Romania during the wind up of the Soviet Union.
Content warning:

The night supervisor in the boys’ communist Romanian orphanage caught the fifth graders fighting in their dorm room. As punishment he ordered them to hit each other. Daniel was first. He hesitated and, in the end, barely touched Florin. But Florin didn’t hold back when it was his turn.

“My best friend hit me with so much hate that I got scared,” Rucareanu recalled.​

The supervisors cultivated violence to humiliate and control the children, he said. The older kids hit the smaller ones. The educators beat everybody. The staff preferred to hit them in the face and head.​

https://www.pri.org/stories/2015-12...s-slaughterhouses-souls-now-they-want-justice

I have been attempting to follow some of the survivors since that time with some success...over the years.
The stories told are just plain horrific and not necessary to detail here.

The ability to research the impact of severe child abuse/exploitation/ dehumanization using the scientific method is limited. The ability to research and study the out come of lesser violence against children is also limited.

However my own observation indicate that those children that have been sexually abused are the most likely to form misogynistic and misandrist behaviors. Those who were exposed to non-sexual abuse developed general feelings of hatred towards society in general that had no associated and specific gender bias. (misanthropy)

It is hypothesized that the perverse arousal generated in the child by this abuse entrenches a persistent subconscious craving for more of that pleasure perversion. ( Adrenal focused pleasure seems to be a strong factor ( fear and sex combined)
If one also studies psychological mind control techniques used by the USSR and the West and other anecdotal evidence it is not a stretch to reach the conclusion that I have. Hypothesis: Entrenching a pleasure pain cycle is essential for any mind control technique to succeed.
What prompted my focus shift was the news of "baby farming" for the USA adoption market. Where it was reported that babies and young children were being deliberately deprived of affection to make them compliant and clinging for their prospective buyers. Today the focus is on the predominantly Chinese market that has evolved since their failure of the one child policy.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/world/2019/09/27/baby-farms-vietnam-sex-trafficking/

So yes I agree with the thrust of your OP...

It's important to note that most misogynists and misandrists have dealt with early childhood trauma of some type, and perhaps, this is the mechanism by which they've learned to navigate through life.

Notes: None of what I have posted above is to be considered as fact or a claim as it is merely a personal assessment based on observation.

 

[billvon]

A patriarchal system that you have repeatedly referred to as being the current status quo can not be by definition a fully merit based system.

Sure you can. You can have a 100% merit based system, where each person is evaluated (and placed in positions of power/government/corporate leadership etc) based solely by their merit as determined by a governing body. And that governing body can be all (or almost all) men.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Sure you can. You can have a 100% merit based system, where each person is evaluated (and placed in positions of power/government/corporate leadership etc) based solely by their merit as determined by a governing body. And that governing body can be all (or almost all) men.

and is the criteria used to make that selection also subject to unprejudiced merit evaluation included in that 100% ?
Perhaps asking why I provided the edited version that included the word "fully" would help ...

 

[billvon]

and is the criteria used to make that selection also subject to unprejudiced merit evaluation included in that 100% ?

Absolutely. A panel of men, all doing their level best to accurately apply objective criteria to perform an unprejudiced merit evaluation.

 

[DaveC426913]

Well, as soon as you grant the premise of "men all doing their level best to accurately apply objective criteria to perform an unprejudiced [feat]"
then any system will work, not just Patriarchy.

I think there must be an assumption in place that any governing system that individuals cannot be truly objective and unbiased. Thus, the best system is a matter of limiting the scope of influence of individual bias.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Absolutely. A panel of men, all doing their level best to accurately apply objective criteria to perform an unprejudiced merit evaluation.

and how is this panel of men chosen to be only men?
You have medical training, astute critical thinking, Billvon please do not compromise your integrity with such nonsense.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Well, as soon as you grant the premise of "men all doing their level best to accurately apply objective criteria to perform an unprejudiced [feat]"
then any system will work, not just Patriarchy.

I think there must be an assumption in place that any governing system that individuals cannot be truly objective and unbiased. Thus, the best system is a matter of limiting the scope of influence of individual bias.

the first thing would be to enshrine the unbreakable rule that the criteria selection board be made up of equal numbers of both genders of voting members ( the more members the better to ensure diversity). Perhaps the swing vote in the case of a hung vote being a transgendered..chairperson..or a sophisticated merit based computer algorithm.

There are many ways to ensure that a criterion board establishes a largely unprejudiced and non-discriminatory set of rules/methods over time evolving them to be close to perfection.

 

[Bells]

We were discussing** , if that is the appropriate word, the ideal of the Confucian Meritocratic philosophy.
Bells believes that it is sexist and discriminatory. That is her belief.

(**)In an environment of open hostility, animosity, anger and hatred, discussion is almost impossible.

It is also her belief that the meritocratic ideal is impossible. That is her belief. as posted.



Who am I to challenge ( personal opinion) such self defeating beliefs. -

It would be also off topic.

Notes: None of what I have posted above is to be considered as fact or a claim as it is merely a personal assessment based on observation.

Not just belief or personal opinion. Factual and supported with links which you clearly did not bother to read.

Maybe if you were not so lazy and actually bothered to do even some research, you might not be considered so much of a dishonest troll.

Our current system is "merit" based. The US, for example, adopted a meritocratic system after the assassination of President Garfield in 1881, it was put into law in 1883. Who benefited? White males. Women and minorities were pretty much barred from participating for decades.

When they were admitted or allowed to participate, they were still prevented from participating equally (with white males) solely on merit. To this day, women and minorities are still less likely to be promoted over their white male counterparts. Also paid less wages.

Perfect example of a meritocracy is university and college admissions.. Worked out well, huh?

and how is this panel of men chosen to be only men?
You have medical training, astute critical thinking, Billvon please do not compromise your integrity with such nonsense.

Stop trolling.

the first thing would be to enshrine the unbreakable rule that the criteria selection board be made up of equal numbers of both genders of voting members ( the more members the better to ensure diversity). Perhaps the swing vote in the case of a hung vote being a transgendered..chairperson..or a sophisticated merit based computer algorithm.

There goes the merit based system..

Seriously, just stop.

So yes I agree with the thrust of your OP...

Which has been proven wrong. If you cannot support your argument with actual act, stop posting your opinion in a factual manner as you have been. You have been warned about this repeatedly.

And your repeated comments about the arousal of children (by paedophiles) somehow or other leading to misogyny and misandry.. Please, either support your argument or stop making them. I don't particular care if you add that it's your personal opinion at the bottom.. It clearly does not come across that way. Your repeating it, despite being proven incorrect and tagging 'personal opinion' is bunk. Stop doing it.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Thus, the best system is a matter of limiting the scope of influence of individual bias.

written like a true software programmer! exactly!
It is great to have intelligent discussion for a change...

 

[Quantum Quack]

Not just belief or personal opinion. Factual and supported with links which you clearly did not bother to read.

Maybe if you were not so lazy and actually bothered to do even some research, you might not be considered so much of a dishonest troll.

Our current system is "merit" based. The US, for example, adopted a meritocratic system after the assassination of President Garfield in 1881, it was put into law in 1883. Who benefited? White males. Women and minorities were pretty much barred from participating for decades.

When they were admitted or allowed to participate, they were still prevented from participating equally (with white males) solely on merit. To this day, women and minorities are still less likely to be promoted over their white male counterparts. Also paid less wages.

Perfect example of a meritocracy is university and college admissions.. Worked out well, huh?

When the USA works out how to apply a true merit based system with out prejudice then perhaps it might work out well...

Why are you resisting the obvious?
Perhaps have read of Iceland's relative success...
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/11/why-iceland-ranks-first-gender-equality/
it might lift your hopes a little...

 

[billvon]

and how is this panel of men chosen to be only men?

You asked how a meritocracy and a patriarchy could coexist. I gave you an example. (Indeed, it's an example that we see every single day; if you doubt this google "all male panel.") Do you now wish to retract your request?

the first thing would be to enshrine the unbreakable rule that the criteria selection board be made up of equal numbers of both genders of voting members

So you would choose less-qualified members just because of their gender? And to think you were claiming to fight against sexism . . .

Perhaps the swing vote in the case of a hung vote being a transgendered..chairperson..or a sophisticated merit based computer algorithm.

So you would discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation?

There are many ways to ensure that a criterion board establishes a largely unprejudiced and non-discriminatory set of rules/methods over time . . .

By using prejudice and discrimination to choose the board members? Interesting approach.