NationStates Jolt Archive

we played one match a year against the girls school. It was the only match our school could find enough volunteers for a whole team...

Yeah, tis fun to watch them run towards you, until the one really butch one starts playing on their left wing. Since I played right defence, I usually got smacked down about two minutes later.

Yup.. We'll never know.

But what I generally percieve, (I don't know how true), is that women in general I think are better. But the men, to those that are talented and gifted.. can go way beyond what any women can.

Most Women are better on the average, but some Men are just far supirior and certain things they do.
There is a truth to that and it goes both ways. Like in gymnastics. You can find some incredibly flexable men, but the most flexable is going to be the women. There are some core differences in the makeup and if we pretend they aren't there it's just silly. The mistake is in the valuing.

No, not Ice Hockey. We played on grass. Much softer, and its less likely that someone will take your foot off during a match. I got smacked about so much in defence, i took up a much more gentle sport and position. As a rugby union prop.
Ah...never really played anything but soccer. My hometown was coo coo for soccer so you either played soccer or you sucked. Or you where like me and sucked at soccer...(I was okay, really. Nothing special. I have giant tree trunks for legs so for the first half of the game the opposing coach wouldn't risk me crippling his star forward and would send the ball down the otherside-which was an extra bonus since I'm a lefty. But once I would get burned by someone who decided to risk it all bets where off. And I usually went to the bench.)

Yeah, tis fun to watch them run towards you, until the one really butch one starts playing on their left wing. Since I played right defence, I usually got smacked down about two minutes later.

they didn't have ANY butch ones.

Hence they were crushed by everyone they played.

For thousands of years womyn have been chattel. They have been possessions belonging first to their fathers, then their husbands, and in widowhood, to their sons. Only very recently and only in a few countries have womyn belonged completely to themselves. But shi is still at the mercy of men. Shi is made a victim of violence and rape at the hands of men. Shi is paid less, works harder in the home and outside it than men. Shi makes up 52 per cent of the population, but shi is not represented equaly in any country. Men still control politics and shape societies to their own benefit, leaving womyn to the domestic chores, the child raising and the meaningless games of seduction.

What has man done in all his years of rule but cause countless wars and unspeakable violence? He has made property out of his fellow man, but beneath even the lowest slave has always been womyn. Your patriarchy has soaked the world in blood and it shows no signs of stopping. It is time for womyn to take their chance, and to take back their power. It is time for a matriarchy.

Ummm...about this whole "shi" thing. The primary association is has for me is death, because that's what the word means in Japanese. (Along with 4 and city.)

When I used to play hockey, we'd play one match a season against the girls team. They had to move it to the end of the season because so many of the boys got injured by flying hockey sticks and crunching tackles. One of them smacked me in the hand, breaking two fingers, and I got sent off for swearing at her. She got away with it.

I play mixed hockey on astroturf. Awesome stuff. Some of the guys are better runners, but us girls hold our own reasonably well.

I play mixed hockey on astroturf. Awesome stuff. Some of the guys are better runners, but us girls hold our own reasonably well.

And if you can't, a quick stick to the legs soon slows those pesky boys down right?

For thousands of years womyn have been chattel. They have been possessions belonging first to their fathers, then their husbands, and in widowhood, to their sons. Only very recently and only in a few countries have womyn belonged completely to themselves. But shi is still at the mercy of men. Shi is made a victim of violence and rape at the hands of men. Shi is paid less, works harder in the home and outside it than men. Shi makes up 52 per cent of the population, but shi is not represented equaly in any country. Men still control politics and shape societies to their own benefit, leaving womyn to the domestic chores, the child raising and the meaningless games of seduction.

What has man done in all his years of rule but cause countless wars and unspeakable violence? He has made property out of his fellow man, but beneath even the lowest slave has always been womyn. Your patriarchy has soaked the world in blood and it shows no signs of stopping. It is time for womyn to take their chance, and to take back their power. It is time for a matriarchy.


I think I'll keep my spellings and my patriarchy the same. They suit me nicely.

And beyond that, if you make the assumption that there are some women who wouldn't start wars and do bad shit and there are some women who would start wars and do bad shit, then you must realize that there are also men who wouldn't start wars and do bad shit, just like that. See my point?

For thousands of years womyn have been chattel. They have been possessions belonging first to their fathers, then their husbands, and in widowhood, to their sons. Only very recently and only in a few countries have womyn belonged completely to themselves. But shi is still at the mercy of men. Shi is made a victim of violence and rape at the hands of men. Shi is paid less, works harder in the home and outside it than men. Shi makes up 52 per cent of the population, but shi is not represented equaly in any country. Men still control politics and shape societies to their own benefit, leaving womyn to the domestic chores, the child raising and the meaningless games of seduction.

What has man done in all his years of rule but cause countless wars and unspeakable violence? He has made property out of his fellow man, but beneath even the lowest slave has always been womyn. Your patriarchy has soaked the world in blood and it shows no signs of stopping. It is time for womyn to take their chance, and to take back their power. It is time for a matriarchy.

I am declaring war on you , for you are a nation of amazon fools!!!

You do support a patriarchy if you support any of the current governments in the world. If you do not speak against them you support them.

Funny, but the last time I checked, I had a female governor in my state. I'll bet she's just pumping out all sorts of mysogynistic laws to subjugate the female population as I sit here typing this...

I most certainly do not believe that by putting power completely into the hands of any particular group with an agenda I will be securing equality for everyone. That's just folly.

As it stands now, in my supposedly patriarchal society, it is perfectly acceptable for their to be cards in my local gift store which bash men. Yet, let someone try and make a line of cards which make fun of women and there will be such an uproar over their sexist content, they'll be taken off the shelves. Yep, that certainly is a fine example of the patriarchal stranglehold women in this country are subjected to...oh, no, wait, that's just reverse descrimination.

You know, if women are so great and swell and wonderful and empowered, why HAVEN'T they taken control of the world by now? I mean, they've had a few million years to do it...

You know, if women are so great and swell and wonderful and empowered, why HAVEN'T they taken control of the world by now? I mean, they've had a few million years to do it...

Just possible you might be missing the point...

One word to discribe my reaction to HerPower's thread and idea:

"Make me..."

(Bows respectfully)

...Shi..like hir... is a -HERMAPHRODITE- pronoun, mostly used by FURRY fans.

So, yeah, go on sister, spread the word by suggesting that you have a fuzzy schlong.

Oy.

You make us real feminists look bad.

Equality in all things, the good and the bad, and hopefully the elimination of the bad, for all individuals, according to their individual worth determined without consideration for their birthing conditions.

This is the feminist ideal. All individuals are equal until they prove otherwise by being jackasses.

Women can never rule a country. What if they accidentally menstruate all over some important papers?

Dammit!! You stole my line!!!

(which I stole from The Onion vox pops)

Just possible you might be missing the point...
Oh, there was a point in this thread? I and several dozen other posters must have missed it...

I see every one has done a slambang job on the jokes and trolling (and didn't have to read the whole thread), and about as would be expected on the 'issues', i.e.: people expressing their preferences, beliefs and prejudices (on all sides), without anything like progress or enlightenment taking place.

The difficulty here is that it SEEMS sex is pretty binary: one is either male or female (though I know it's not entirely clear cut for some. No need to raise your hands or anything...).

But we err when we then apply that binary thinking to more complex things like psychological traits, task performance, the many kinds of 'intelligence', etc. People think they can plow through the incredible complexity of human behavior with the dichotomy "male/female" and assign this trait to men, that behavior to women.

Certainly, there are general and statistically significant differences, but overall, it is worse than meaningless to say "men are X" or "women are more z than men".

a) The terms "women" and "men" cover physical and mental characteristics that overlap completely. They encompass all the behaviors and beliefs of all cultures thoughout the world over all human history. Pretty damn vague, even though we are able to say "women" or "men" and kind of know what we mean. The generalizations, as people are attempting to use them here, are useless.

3) The traits/tendencies/qualities we try to attibute to the amorphous generalization of 'men' or 'women' are equally complex. Better bridge players? Less war-like? More likely to beome mathematicians?? Whatever the statistical tendencies HERE and NOW, who can say whether they derive from innate or encultured factors, or from factors external to the individuals entirely. Meaningless.

So if anybody tries to get you into one of those 7-year-old-level "Girls are better than boys!/NO THEY'RE NOT" kind of discussions (not anybody here, surely...), just walk away, because the very terms of the argument preclude any productive result.

For thousands of years womyn have been chattel. They have been possessions belonging first to their fathers, then their husbands, and in widowhood, to their sons. Only very recently and only in a few countries have womyn belonged completely to themselves. But shi is still at the mercy of men. Shi is made a victim of violence and rape at the hands of men. Shi is paid less, works harder in the home and outside it than men. Shi makes up 52 per cent of the population, but shi is not represented equaly in any country. Men still control politics and shape societies to their own benefit, leaving womyn to the domestic chores, the child raising and the meaningless games of seduction.

What has man done in all his years of rule but cause countless wars and unspeakable violence? He has made property out of his fellow man, but beneath even the lowest slave has always been womyn. Your patriarchy has soaked the world in blood and it shows no signs of stopping. It is time for womyn to take their chance, and to take back their power. It is time for a matriarchy.

Right, firstly, stop with the underlining, it's really annoying, if u want to make a point then use italics.
Secondly u seem to be focusing on the fact that women don't act like men to get their power. Why should women act like men, they're different. I'm not saying there shouldn't be equal rights, far from it, but men and woman are different, it's a fact. There have been plenty of woman throughout history (or should that be Herstory?) that have had power, but they didn't have it in the same way as men. The guys got people to obey them by bashing their head in if they dissobeyed, the girls were more manipulating. That's just the way people are, if you want to change it you'd have to go back to the begining of humanity.
Thirdly, if you want to become a politician go ahead. Personally i think the reason that there's not so many women politicians is because most women are too smart to get involved in politics.

PS. i'm a girl

You know, if women are so great and swell and wonderful and empowered, why HAVEN'T they taken control of the world by now? I mean, they've had a few million years to do it...
And they outnumber us. I was wondering the same thing myself. I guess it's those orbital mind control lasers.

(( ZAP ))

Wait. There are no such things as orbital mind control lasers. They are only a myth.

You know, if women are so great and swell and wonderful and empowered, why HAVEN'T they taken control of the world by now? I mean, they've had a few million years to do it...
They will soon... (http://www.exitmundi.nl/giggle.htm) (link)

As to this bit...
And there are more grizzly clues. For example, every now and then, doctors coincidentally stumble upon a woman who has XY for chromosomes -- the ‘male’ combination. Somehow these ladies' X-chromosomes have found a way to disable the Y-chromosome.
There are actually all kinds (http://www.ich.ucl.ac.uk/cmgs/sexrev.htm) of sex-reversal examples.

No, it is to shift the balance of power. Womyn will not have to make men chattel as they have made us chattel. We only want a chance to shape the world for the better. After thousands of years man has not solved his problem of violence, and I am saying that it is time to let womyn try. What have we got to lose?


Ok, a very simple and maybe seemingly strange comment-but make us. When hardcore feminist viewpoints are rejected in the arena of ideas, what then? Cause you can't force us to do it; because, no offense, but I severely doubt that the strongest woman in the world could force her will on me. And I'm a pretty friendly dude. Look at it realistically instead of idealisticall for a moment.

It's kinda funny how this topic has allowed some sexist, reactionary people to come out of the woodwork...

I have to wonder what HerPower thinks about transexuals.
Are women who become men traitors to their gender?
And what of men who become women?

It's kinda funny how this topic has allowed some sexist, reactionary people to come out of the woodwork...


And somewhat disturbing.

And somewhat disturbing.
Yeah, funny in the *shudder* kind of way.

Yeah, funny in the *shudder* kind of way.


Got that right...

Lol, had a bad run of boyfriends Herpower?

Most people grow out of hating the opposite sex at about 12-13...

Seriously, the world would be a boring place indeed if it were only men or only women. Women aren't being "Male apologists," they simply enjoy having men around. Not all wives are being oppressed by their husbands, I think a lot of women would smack you if you said that to their faces.

I think someone needs a caring man.

Most people grow out of hating the opposite sex at about 12-13...


Whoa whoa whoooooa, wait a minute... What the fuck? There's just being indifferent, but hating? Wow.

You've got some issues if you hate the opposite sex like that.

Lighten up, there, champ. I think he just means the "girls are icky" stage of child development. ;)

I think we need to get together some surgeons, sneak up on HerPower, and surgically change her sex. Just to screw with her.

Lighten up, there, champ. I think he just means the "girls are icky" stage of child development. ;)


I certainly hope so... Sheesh.

Simplemente no puedo imaginarme un matriarcado, no soy machista ni nada por el estilo pero aun la humanidad no puede soportar algo de esta naturaleza, yo el Cesar por el Poder que me a dado el Senado y El Sagrado Imperio he dicho.Anterus

I certainly hope so... Sheesh.
Let us not forget the Third Commandment of Internet Forums:

Thou Shalt Not Overreact.

Here endeth the lesson. Go in peace to love and surf the Web. :D

Simplemente no puedo imaginarme un matriarcado, no soy machista ni nada por el estilo pero aun la humanidad no puede soportar algo de esta naturaleza, yo el Cesar por el Poder que me a dado el Senado y El Sagrado Imperio he dicho.Anterus


Que?

Lighten up, there, champ. I think he just means the "girls are icky" stage of child development. ;)Roger that.

Simplemente no puedo imaginarme un matriarcado, no soy machista ni nada por el estilo pero aun la humanidad no puede soportar algo de esta naturaleza, yo el Cesar por el Poder que me a dado el Senado y El Sagrado Imperio he dicho.Anterus

I guess no woman for you then.

Alright... That's good to know!

I reacted that way because I knew some bastards back in my school days who *hated* girls (they did some very bad things... I'll refrain from posting them). So I tend to dislike people who act that way.

Anterus wrote in Spanish? I thought it should have been in Latin.

Whoa whoa whoooooa, wait a minute... What the fuck? There's just being indifferent, but hating? Wow.

You've got some issues if you hate the opposite sex like that.

Knew a girl, sister in law's friend to be exact.. Grew up hating men.

Well, she was sexually abused by her father when she was little. I don't blame her hatred towards men though it's incorrect assumption about all men that way.

But what did Anterus say? Somebody translate?

Alright... That's good to know!

I reacted that way because I knew some bastards back in my school days who *hated* girls (they did some very bad things... I'll refrain from posting them). So I tend to dislike people who act that way.Lol, all good.

Nah, I simply meant how most people learn that someone of the opposite sex may just be a good friend or loving partner, after getting over the monumentous issue of cooties.

But what did Anterus say? Somebody translate?

Heh, this is what Babelfish gave me...

"Simply I cannot imagine matriarcado to me, I am not machista nor nothing of the sort but the humanity cannot even support something of this nature, I Cesar by the Power that me to dice the Senate and the Sacred Empire I have said."

Well, it helped immensely when the oral cooties vaccine finally passed human trials.

Heh, this is what Babelfish gave me...

"Simply I cannot imagine matriarcado to me, I am not machista nor nothing of the sort but the humanity cannot even support something of this nature, I Cesar by the Power that me to dice the Senate and the Sacred Empire I have said."

Well that kinda makes sense. :p Ta.

And I personally prefer a cooty repellant, like Cootieguard.

What about CootieBlock EX? It's rated ACS (anti-cootie shield) 45!

I can do the first bit, but my language is Portuguese not Spanish, so I may get some prepositions wrong etc.

Here goes nothing:

Simplemente no puedo imaginarme un matriarcado, no soy machista ni nada por el estilo pero aun la humanidad no puede soportar algo de esta naturaleza, yo el Cesar por el Poder que me a dado el Senado y El Sagrado Imperio he dicho.

I simply can not imagine myself in a matriarchy. I am not a chauvanist or anything like it but for all of humanity I could not bear something of this nature.
I, Ceasar, do herby declare, by the power granted to me by the Senate and the Holy Empire.

I can do the first bit, but my language is Portuguese not Spanish, so I may get some prepositions wrong etc.

Here goes nothing:

Simplemente no puedo imaginarme un matriarcado, no soy machista ni nada por el estilo pero aun la humanidad no puede soportar algo de esta naturaleza, yo el Cesar por el Poder que me a dado el Senado y El Sagrado Imperio he dicho.

I simply can not imagine myself in a matriarchy. I am not a chauvanist or anything like it but for all of humanity I couls not beare something of this nature.
I, Ceasar, do herby declare, by the power granted to me by the Senate and the Holy Empire.


That sounds about right.

But did he need to use such a huge font? :confused:

What about CootieBlock EX? It's rated ACS (anti-cootie shield) 45!
It gives me hives. The cooties would be better.

But did he need to use such a huge font? :confused:


No.

But did he need to use such a huge font? :confused:
Because speaking Latin in a cool huge font is so cool.

Only I do.

Because speaking Latin in a cool huge font is so cool.


So... That's Latin? Looks thoroughly modernized, for some reason.

Hey, Pot, go back to the Evolution Is thread and vote in my poll. :)

I did :D.

So... That's Latin? Looks thoroughly modernized, for some reason.

It was Spanish, why Ceasar should have been declaiming at full volume in Spanish on an English language forum though is anyone's guess.

So... That's Latin? Looks thoroughly modernized, for some reason.

Thats because its Spanish...

/edit/ I hate you alien born. I hate you. Must of beat me by a few seconds. /edit/

It was Spanish, why Ceasar should have been declaiming at full volume in Spanish on an English language forum though is anyone's guess.


Yeah, thought so. Just somebody above called it Latin.

No offense to you respectable feminists...

"You're average modern feminist is just some raving bitch who sets in her New York penthouse and complains about how bad life is for women, even though she's never worked once in her life!" -Female college student

This was actually sad in the middle of mone of my college seminars and I had to do my damndest not to rofl on the spot.

No offense to you respectable feminists...

"You're average modern feminist is just some raving bitch who sets in her New York penthouse and complains about how bad life is for women, even though she's never worked once in her life!" -Female college student

This was actually sad in the middle of mone of my college seminars and I had to do my damndest not to rofl on the spot.
Whoever said that needs a slap in the face...
And possibly to descend from her high horse into the real world...

Whoever said that needs a slap in the face...
And possibly to descend from her high horse into the real world...


I could push her off... If you don't mind, that is.

She was particularly worked up at the time. Plus she comes from a culture with many strong women, so she sees feminists as kind of false.

I could push her off... If you don't mind, that is.
My pleasure. *steps aside*

For thousands of years womyn have been chattel. They have been possessions belonging first to their fathers, then their husbands, and in widowhood, to their sons. Only very recently and only in a few countries have womyn belonged completely to themselves. But shi is still at the mercy of men. Shi is made a victim of violence and rape at the hands of men. Shi is paid less, works harder in the home and outside it than men. Shi makes up 52 per cent of the population, but shi is not represented equaly in any country. Men still control politics and shape societies to their own benefit, leaving womyn to the domestic chores, the child raising and the meaningless games of seduction.

What has man done in all his years of rule but cause countless wars and unspeakable violence? He has made property out of his fellow man, but beneath even the lowest slave has always been womyn. Your patriarchy has soaked the world in blood and it shows no signs of stopping. It is time for womyn to take their chance, and to take back their power. It is time for a matriarchy.

How be we scrap heirarchy all together. Do you really think women would do any better?

HerPower, what I find derisively horrendous about your proposals is that you assume that all males are patterned after a bestial, raving, homicidal maniac, and that all females are patterned after a loving, caring, motherly modern woman. This Is Not True. In fact, if the world were composed of clones of one man and one woman, the world would be very boring indeed....

I am a man. I have a penis. And a culturally violent nature. I have radical ideas of equality and community. Do you know what gives me those ideas? My MIND. NOT my penis. And My MIND isn't ruled by my GENES.

You know what? POWER CORRUPTS PEOPLE! Any sort of power over others is intriguing, addicting. No matter what gender you are.

And honestly, do you know how vengeful, bitchy, cruel, heartless, and evil women can be? Do you know how honest, caring, compassionate, and open men can be? So you have any idea WHY? Because your equipment makes you as much of a person as the coloring of your hair. Or less. It annoys me to NO END that I am stereotyped by the way my body appears.

For real, women are over half the population of the planet. WHY do you think they are and were oppressed? Because they allowed themselves to be. By the Church. That is what I believe is disgusting. The fact that a woman would champion doctrine that oppresses women.

ANyway, why the fuck am I even responding? Why do I care?

Fuck it. Go have your little militant wet dream. Make sure you squirt a few goot times for me.

But what did Anterus say? Somebody translate?

He said he's not a sexist and that humanity would not be able to deal with a matriarchy.

I can understand female resentment towards males - I'm not the biggest fan of my gender either - but there is a sound reason for women having become the more submissive of the two. Simply put, the men went out and hunted, whilst the women stayed behind and cared for the young/gathered. Ergo, the men probably felt a greater entitlement to a voice, as they were risking their love every day, and in addition they would have had different oppurtunities for coming to conclusions on the hunt than women would have back at the camp.

At any rate, not all societies were terribly sexist. For example, the Vikings gave women equal rights, even so far as to allow the woman to initiate divorce.

Furthermore, today we have democracy and equality acts. I must sadly concede we are not there yet, but we are on the way. In addition, to suppose there ought to be a Matriarchal form of government due to past Male errors is ascribing inherited guilt, which is not a road we want to go down.

For my part, I tend to have the utmost respect for women. A lot of the men I know are indolent wastrels, whilst a lot of the women are strong and amazing people. Nonetheless, there are good men and bad women. *shrugs*

Edit: Question: What is your reasoning for using alternate spellings?

Interesting. This sort of thing makes me glad I'm from the midwest. At leat my little microcosm of it. Let's see. My mother is the top real estate agent in the county. My wife's grandmother is the former owner of a trucking company and the county treasurer, the only Democrat ever to win an election in the county. My wife, in addition to being the mother of my child and the reason I wake up in the morning, is the best carpenter I have ever seen. She puts my grandfather to shame. That man could build anything, god rest him. And we all work together, in a nonheirarchial network of people doing their jobs! No psuedopolitical bullshit about it.

Take a deep breath and step back folks. It all works if you work together.

I must ask, in HerPower's matriarchal utopia how will transsexuals be treated?
Will Male to Female transsexuals have all the rights a privilages of a woman? Will they be considered interior second class women? Or, will they just be considered men with breasts?
Will Female to Male transsexuals maintain the status that they held as women? Will they be grouped with the lowly men? Or, will they be considered inferior to normal women but still superior to men?
Or, will both be third class citizens with no respect from either gender?
What about the intersexed who lack and redily definable gender?

The real problem with gender inequality isn''t that men oppress women or that women oppress men. The problem is that we arbitrailary divide ourselves into two genders based on how we look between the legs.
Instead of seeing each other as men or women we should see each other as people. There should be just one gender that encompases all possible physical mental and spiritual variations.

Take a deep breath and step back folks. It all works if you work together.

Possibly the smartest thing in the whole thread ever.

Im not going to read 17 pages of post, so I'll just comment on the original...

Originally posted by HerPower

For thousands of years womyn have been chattel. They have been possessions belonging first to their fathers, then their husbands, and in widowhood, to their sons. Only very recently and only in a few countries have womyn belonged completely to themselves. But shi is still at the mercy of men. Shi is made a victim of violence and rape at the hands of men. Shi is paid less, works harder in the home and outside it than men. Shi makes up 52 per cent of the population, but shi is not represented equaly in any country. Men still control politics and shape societies to their own benefit, leaving womyn to the domestic chores, the child raising and the meaningless games of seduction.

What has man done in all his years of rule but cause countless wars and unspeakable violence? He has made property out of his fellow man, but beneath even the lowest slave has always been womyn. Your patriarchy has soaked the world in blood and it shows no signs of stopping. It is time for womyn to take their chance, and to take back their power. It is time for a matriarchy.

I agree with almost the entire first paragraph, but I'd like to see one shred of proof that shows that your average woman works harder at her job than the average man does at his.

Hey, how about this...instead of a Patriarchy or a Matriarchy, how about neither? How about actual equality? Oh yeah, I forgot, for most militant feminists (like those who spell women "womyn", like it means something), equality is the last thing on their minds.

You think the world is bloody now? You think men start wars for stupid reasons? Just wait till women run things...

:rolleyes:

I agree with almost the entire first paragraph, but I'd like to see one shred of proof that shows that your average woman works harder at her job than the average man does at his.

Its actually the opposite. Women when working full-time tend to work less hours than men who are also working full time. Women also take more vacations than men and are more likely to quit there job and not seek another for a more than a year for purposes that have nothing to do with education or job training. And of course none of those reasons could possibly be why the "average" woman gets paid less than the "average" man.

I believe HerPower was deleted for being Sinuhue's troll (See Who's Crazier, HerPower or Jesussaves)

For thousands of years womyn have been chattel. They have been possessions belonging first to their fathers, then their husbands, and in widowhood, to their sons. Only very recently and only in a few countries have womyn belonged completely to themselves. But shi is still at the mercy of men. Shi is made a victim of violence and rape at the hands of men. Shi is paid less, works harder in the home and outside it than men. Shi makes up 52 per cent of the population, but shi is not represented equaly in any country. Men still control politics and shape societies to their own benefit, leaving womyn to the domestic chores, the child raising and the meaningless games of seduction.

What has man done in all his years of rule but cause countless wars and unspeakable violence? He has made property out of his fellow man, but beneath even the lowest slave has always been womyn. Your patriarchy has soaked the world in blood and it shows no signs of stopping. It is time for womyn to take their chance, and to take back their power. It is time for a matriarchy.

Ok... i'm not disagreeing that there is alot of sexism out and kicking in the world but i think you are going a little to far. It is just as wrong to discriminate against men as it is to discriminate against women. Just give the guys a break.

Would the world be any better if you changed it from being run by an (admittedly male dominated) mix of men and women to all women?

Would you leave the guys to be lower than the lowest slave?

Men are now also victims of rape.

Some of the inequality comes from the women themselves who maybe would prefer to raise children... although that group does not include me.

Anarchy will just allow the men to rule in more sutle ways. Why shouldn't womyn have a chance to try?

Obviously you don't understand the concept of anarchy. Anarchy implies that humans (so as not use the word "men") will have evolved to the point that they have cast off such absurdities as sexism. Anarchy (at least in the way I see it) is viable only if people have moved beyond selfishness, and are capable to live in respect of one another, as a real community. Anarchy is not conceivable as long as sexism endures, and hence a truly anarchic society would see women be fully equal to men (the term "inequality" would have no meaning).


No one questions the right of men to rule, and yet everyone questions the right of womyn to rule.

An absurd generalisation. As a man, I have to say that, in any election, if the candidate whose ideas and ideals are closest to my own is a woman, I will vote for her without hesitation. If it's a man, I'll vote for him. Gender is simply not a consideration for me.

For thousands of years womyn have been chattel. They have been possessions belonging first to their fathers, then their husbands, and in widowhood, to their sons. Only very recently and only in a few countries have womyn belonged completely to themselves. But shi is still at the mercy of men. Shi is made a victim of violence and rape at the hands of men. Shi is paid less, works harder in the home and outside it than men. Shi makes up 52 per cent of the population, but shi is not represented equaly in any country. Men still control politics and shape societies to their own benefit, leaving womyn to the domestic chores, the child raising and the meaningless games of seduction.

What has man done in all his years of rule but cause countless wars and unspeakable violence? He has made property out of his fellow man, but beneath even the lowest slave has always been womyn. Your patriarchy has soaked the world in blood and it shows no signs of stopping. It is time for womyn to take their chance, and to take back their power. It is time for a matriarchy.
More words for which you might want to revise the spelling.

I understand that the spelling of womyn and shi upset people. Please try to understand that it is very important to me to keep this spelling. It does not change the way the word is pronounced. We don't change words like her to hyr because it doesn't sound right when you say it. Womyn and shi are political words for politcal speech and we don't expect these words to change in dictionaries or anywhere else.
But they are painfull to read ... just like people that mis-spell by accident after a certian point the whole thing is just so hard to read that you give up on it ... I understand making a stand is important to you but this is NOT helping your cause

Oh yeah, I forgot, for most militant feminists (like those who spell women "womyn", like it means something), equality is the last thing on their minds.

It does mean something. It means that the person in question takes exception to the fact that the English language creates it's gender definition for the female, from an abberation of the male.

To be honest - I can see their point.

It does mean something. It means that the person in question takes exception to the fact that the English language creates it's gender definition for the female, form an abberation of the male.

To be honest - I can see their point.
and is not the word for male an abberation of the species (human)?

Besides it is one of thoes bad mis-spelling where the way they chose it does not fit in well with the rest of the language ... if they really wish a different term go for it but doing it with just changing e to y is just annoying to read

Not a bad idea. Just promise to drop the alternative spellings and you've got my vote. :)

And drop the underlined words too. They just make me think of some Xanthippe-like crone, yelling in a scratchy, high-pitched voice.

And drop the underlined words too. They just make me think of some Xanthippe-like crone, yelling in a scratchy, high-pitched voice.
I just keep trying to click on them cause I think they are links :p

Obviously you don't understand the concept of anarchy. Anarchy implies that humans (so as not use the word "men") will have evolved to the point that they have cast off such absurdities as sexism. Anarchy (at least in the way I see it) is viable only if people have moved beyond selfishness, and are capable to live in respect of one another, as a real community. Anarchy is not conceivable as long as sexism endures, and hence a truly anarchic society would see women be fully equal to men (the term "inequality" would have no meaning).

:fluffle: Someone who agrees with me! Hooray! I just got really excited when I saw your post, because it echoed a lot of things I've come to realise recently.

And on the language issue, I think the English language IS masculine-normative (ok, I just made that up) and I think we should gender neutral terms where possible, but it can get silly and detract from an argument!

and is not the word for male an abberation of the species (human)?

Besides it is one of thoes bad mis-spelling where the way they chose it does not fit in well with the rest of the language ... if they really wish a different term go for it but doing it with just changing e to y is just annoying to read

What I appreciate about the 'e to a y' argument, is that the words retain their SPOKEN 'meaning'.

I personally have no objections to 'shi', 'hyr' or 'womyn'... although I do find 'herstory' a little overblown.

Oh - regarding the "man" thing... I seem to recall that 'man' and 'human' both come from the Indo-European root... (manu, maybe?) - which was also biased towards the male gender...)

What I appreciate about the 'e to a y' argument, is that the words retain their SPOKEN 'meaning'.

I personally have no objections to 'shi', 'hyr' or 'womyn'... although I do find 'herstory' a little overblown.
You now what annoys me? MANkind. Yeah, the rest of us are of no consequence... :rolleyes:

You now what annoys me? MANkind. Yeah, the rest of us are of no consequence... :rolleyes:

We have a WONDERFULLY technical language... but it has no 'art'... no 'soul'.

Ungendered, sterile and technical.

Change spellings? A rose is still a rose by any other name? Or something like that at least. A woman even said that, if I'm not mistaken.

But I'll be honest. I love women. I don't mistreat them, i don't consider them inferior and I'm not sexist. And I know absolutely no one who does think like that. Sure, some guys think they're "the bomb", but that has nothing to do with considering women to be inferior. The ones constantly bringing back this goddamned sexism topic is feminists who feel the need to be "important", You want equal rights? No one's going to throw a perfect job at you. You want a good job? Be creative, do things others wouldn't think about. PROVE that you should be employed because of what you can do, not because of what you do (or don't) have.

Second, think back on all the women who made a difference? I won't go back through all of history, but if we're to believe legend, it was thanks to Helen that Troy was attacked by the greeks. It's thanks to that attack that some trojans were forced to flee and found rome. It was thanks to that rome that europe was civilized and it is thanks to that civilization why we are standing here today. Mother Theresa, as another example of a woman who became more than a simple human. There are countless examples for women who went above all segregation to be remembered more than anyone else. Do you know who Helen's father was? I bet the fewest people know who her father was, or who she was even married to in the first place.

But just to understand this completely: you want to get rid of today's governments because they oppress women and replace them with governments that support matriarchy. At the same time, you just want equality, but are pissed off that women have been "oppressed" for thousands of years and want to make up for all those years? mm hmm? o.O

And for a final note on spellings: woman is longer than man. It has more letters and therefor is more. What makes everyone so certain that woman is derived from man and not the other way around? Sure, social structures and language studies, but why are you so intent on seeing the word woman as a politically incorrect word, of sorts, instead of seeing man as a cut off woman. As 3/5 of a woman, if you will?

Change spellings? A rose is still a rose by any other name? Or something like that at least. A woman even said that, if I'm not mistaken.

And for a final note on spellings: woman is longer than man. It has more letters and therefor is more. What makes everyone so certain that woman is derived from man and not the other way around? Sure, social structures and language studies, but why are you so intent on seeing the word woman as a politically incorrect word, of sorts, instead of seeing man as a cut off woman. As 3/5 of a woman, if you will?

The quote you were aiming for is Shakespearean, I suspect... so probably NOT originally a female 'quote'... unless Will is short for Wilma, or Mr S. stole it from someone...

'Woman' was derived from man... or more precisely, from 'wifmann', I believe, in Middle English - meaning "Wife of Man". Thus - the definition implies that a woman has identity ONLY by her association to a male.

'Woman' was derived from man... or more precisely, from 'wifmann', I believe, in Middle English - meaning "Wife of Man". Thus - the definition implies that a woman has identity ONLY by her association to a male.
Who cares where it came from? It is what the word means now that is important - and I suspect that to most people it means precisely what it says, with no subtle overtones of subjugation; really, how many people know about the root of the word, or care if they do?

Who cares where it came from? It is what the word means now that is important - and I suspect that to most people it means precisely what it says, with no subtle overtones of subjugation; really, how many people know about the root of the word, or care if they do?

Well - the huMAN race, and MANkind both bear testament to our gender-biased origins... so I'm sure MOST people who spare a thought, can work out that 'woMAN' is DERIVED from man... even if they DON'T understand the exact etymology.

Well - the huMAN race, and MANkind both bear testament to our gender-biased origins... so I'm sure MOST people who spare a thought, can work out that 'woMAN' is DERIVED from man... even if they DON'T understand the exact etymology.
Well, yes, but what is the point? Who cares? Does it really make any rational person feel superior or inferior, or dominant or subjugated?

And if the answer is yes, surely the people in question just need to ...relax...

Well, yes, but what is the point? Who cares? Does it really make any rational person feel superior or inferior, or dominant or subjugated?

And if the answer is yes, surely the people in question just need to ...relax...

Curious approach... would you use the same approach for words that might be considered racial slurs?

Curious approach... would you use the same approach for words that might be considered racial slurs?
Words that are racial slurs are generally used in a way that is intended to cause offence, and they are probably a bad thing. But people are not doing that when they say "woman". They are not saying "inferior subspecies". Maybe it meant that once, but no longer - it is just a word that means female. And if anyone does mean it in its archaic sense, it just reflects badly on them, not on women - not the word, nor the sex.

Words that are racial slurs are generally used in a way that is intended to cause offence, and they are probably a bad thing. But people are not doing that when they say "woman". They are not saying "inferior subspecies". Maybe it meant that once, but no longer - it is just a word that means female. And if anyone does mean it in its archaic sense, it just reflects badly on them, not on women - not the word, nor the sex.

And, up until a few years ago, '******' was just an 'acceptable' way to describe someone with dark skin.

It didn't really take on it's 'slur' connotation, until AFTER emancipation.

And, up until a few years ago, '******' was just an 'acceptable' way to describe someone with dark skin.

It didn't really take on it's 'slur' connotation, until AFTER emancipation.
I didn't know that. But now I am curious - how did it become a slur? If it was not derogatary to start off with, how did it become so? (Genuine questions, btw, not attacks!!)

And could "woman" not be viewed as the reverse - a word with its origins in a culture of subjugation, that is now innocuous because the culture is largely dead ?

And thank you, by the way- you are distracting me nicely from my essay!!

My POV on the whole "e to y" thing...

"Man", "mankind", and "human" can all be used in a gender-neutral sense, to remind several people in this thread who have seem to have forgotten. "Women" and "woman" can't be used gender-neutrally for some reason or another. Don't ask me why; I'm not a linguist.

I personally prefer the traditional spelling for the sole reason that it's a heck of a lot easier to remember. I don't care if changing the letter is a political thing or whatever...what it is, is CONFUSING.

This is not to say I'm against equal rights for gender or race. It is to say I'm against the radicals who gripe about every little thing that doesn't do their way and who try to make major changes that have no real point whatsoever...like changing one tiny little letter in a word.

Use of the words 'man' or 'mankind' to represent the species as a whole is, I believe, a pretty sad reflection on the English language.

I wouldn't mind giving matriarchy a try. We've given patriarchy long enough, it would make an interesting change.

Use of the words 'man' or 'mankind' to represent the species as a whole is, I believe, a pretty sad reflection on the English language.

I wouldn't mind giving matriarchy a try. We've given patriarchy long enough, it would make an interesting change.

Well use humankind instead then. The onlt reason we still have these words is that its easier to keep them as they are than change them.

Use of the words 'man' or 'mankind' to represent the species as a whole is, I believe, a pretty sad reflection on the English language.

I wouldn't mind giving matriarchy a try. We've given patriarchy long enough, it would make an interesting change.

we don't have a patriarchy in the uk anymore. if women are victimised in their careers or whatever by men, they can use the law. i don't think making laws discriminating against men would be progressive. worrying that when you say "mankind" you're missing out women to me is a sad reflection on the amount of time you've got on your hands. but then I'm not a woman.

Well, we may live in a Patriarchy, but as every guy will tell you...women have the real power.

Well, I instinctively use 'humanity' or 'humankind', so there's no real problem for me. I would also argue that the UK is still a patriarchy. Look where the power lies. It doesn't mater if the laws guarantee equality on paper, we live in a male-dominated society. I don't advocate establishing a matriarchy, but I'd be intrigued to see how one would function. Not every socety need to be perfectly equal, adopt the same economic/political system. So long as you have absolute freedom of movement, you sould be able to find somehwere you're comfortable.

But I'm straying into fluffy utopian ideology territory. Pragmatically, I'm a cynical misanthrope.

Yeah, I know 'an-' is male...

Well, we may live in a Patriarchy, but as every guy will tell you...women have the real power.
In the sexual arena? Where else is that really true, if it's even true there?

I didn't know that. But now I am curious - how did it become a slur? If it was not derogatary to start off with, how did it become so? (Genuine questions, btw, not attacks!!)

And could "woman" not be viewed as the reverse - a word with its origins in a culture of subjugation, that is now innocuous because the culture is largely dead ?

And thank you, by the way- you are distracting me nicely from my essay!!

Ah - always happy to pervert people from their intended purposes. :)

It wasn't REALLY considered derogatory before - because it purely refers to skin tone (as in niger, meaning black... the root of our word 'necromancy', which used to be 'nigromancy'... meaning black magic, basically). I suspect the real 'insult' quality is more about the slavery issue, than about the skin tone... the term became associated with slavery - since it was part of slave-holder patter...

That seems to make sense to me... I don't know if it's ever been SERIOUSLY studied...

The 'woman' thing, though... the word is right there - in your face... and reinforced by our society, and it's phallocentric approach to politics, religions, etc. Plus - our western society and it's obsession with women as 'sluts' and men as 'studs'... which SEEMS to stem from the Adam/Eve story - which reinforces the women-are-broken-men theory.

we don't have a patriarchy in the uk anymore. if women are victimised in their careers or whatever by men, they can use the law. i don't think making laws discriminating against men would be progressive. worrying that when you say "mankind" you're missing out women to me is a sad reflection on the amount of time you've got on your hands. but then I'm not a woman.

I also am not a woman... I believe... yet I can see that our culture has merely painted-over the worst excesses of it's phallocentric nature.

Use of the words 'man' or 'mankind' to represent the species as a whole is, I believe, a pretty sad reflection on the English language.

I wouldn't mind giving matriarchy a try. We've given patriarchy long enough, it would make an interesting change.

Our English language is, unfortunately, gender-neutral ONLY in as much as masculine is neutral, in English.

Which makes anything feminine, an aberration.