Religion and sexism

+1

 

It's all a bit odd.
I find it's best to not trust anyone who doesn't eat bacon.

 

Their cultures are heavily influenced by their religion though. Without Islam in the Middle east there would still be problems, however I'm convinced that it would make it a much more tolerant place.
If you have a religion that encourages bigotry, then you can very easily excuse and justify your own bigotry to yourself and others. I'm not singling out Islam here, but it's the only religion that I know of that has a prophet that murdered people for not sharing his religious views and also married a prepubescent girl.

 

So you don't trust me, the Dalai Lama, Leonardo da Vinci, Nicola Tesla, Ghandi, Mark Twain, etc?

 

I think @Azazel post was a tongue-in-cheek remark....

 

of course there is some influence from religion but even within religions there are so many different interpretations. when you consider the different interpretations plus then the different cultures from growing up in such different places it's clear that muslims simply cannot all be lumped into 1 and spoken about like they're all alike.

further to the point i made earlier, it is as silly as me thinking say an anglo male from perth who happens to be catholic is going to think, act and believe just like, for eg, a south indian catholic man in chennai. their cultures are entirely different and all they have in similarity is their religion. apart from that they would have many differences.

no one would ever make the 2nd assumption (rightlfully so) but far too many make the first.

 

Or bacon in cheek?

 

Oh I trust you spludgey, but if one of those dead dudes knocked on my door I'd probably empty a shotgun cartridge or 2 into them. Halloween or not.

 

Hi Esel, I'm enjoying our debate thus far, but in all honesty this seem to be grasping at straws.

In Adam Grant's excellent book 'Give and Take' - a read that I highly recommend to everyone, by the way - he addresses this, sort of. In the book, he relates how graduates negotiate pay and points out that females tended to get lower rates of pay - as you rightly pointed out. However, when they (the women) were given lessons in being more assertive and how to sell their skills and themselves better, they negotiated the same levels of pay that the males did.

When I discuss these sorts of issues with women, I point out to them, as I stated in my earlier post, that if women are equal to men, then they (women) need to prove themselves as such. You (women) need to understand that you don't get to hop off the swingset and come and play in the sandpit with us (men) and demand that we change the way we play to suit you. If you want to play on the same field, you play by our rules. That is the way you earn respect and get ahead.

 

Youre a hoot. do manage any of these conversations with women face to face or is this your online trolling script?

In the interest of this debate about sexisim, would you mind sharing with us your religion and ethnicity pls?

Ta.

 

By the way everyone, the side debate on the gender pay gap has progressed from;

- it doesnt exist. I would know if it was real.

- Ok, the data is there but i dont believe the data

- ok, the data is there, its probably accurate but Its only a little bit of inequality, so its ok.

- to, you dont deserve the same pay because i dont respect you.

 

I havent read 'give and take' but from what ive read, im really surprised that you think its 'excellent'. in this article he describes himself as an 'advocate for women'. How does that fit with your red pill ideology?

'As a man, I don't feel that this is just a woman's issue; it's a social issue. I wish I hadn't waited to become an advocate for women until I became a dad to daughters and the evidence was staring me in the face. But I guess it's better late than never.'

http://www.inc.com/adam-grant/why-i-failed-to-advocate-for-women.html

 

Esel, I thought long and hard about writing this post. I've been debating on various issues with... people who adhere to a certain ideology for years now. An ideology based entirely on emotion, with a complete lack of logic and reason. My extensive knowledge of various issues around this particular ideology comes from doing a lot of research and a lot of reading.

I love science. I always have. With science, there is no room for emotion or speculation. Scientists do their research and produce findings, which are then tested and challenged and if they pass muster, may eventually become theories. Many times over many centuries, those findings have been resisted - sometimes violently, but it doesn't change the fact that they are accurate.

My point is this: my views are unpopular; you can accuse me of any manner of things and you can call me every name under the sun; but I can assure you, my views are based on facts. If those facts get me called a misogynist or a woman hater or a rape apologist or a supporter of domestic violence (I have been called all of these and worse), then so be it. Because you may not like them and they may not fit in with your cognitive dissonance and/or confirmation bias and whilst they certainly aren't politically correct, they are facts.

Facts are undeniable. There's no wiggle room. Something you need to understand is that the voice that is prepared to speak up and use facts to oppose the claims the people of a certain ideology choose to spout is getting louder every day. Thanks to the internet, these facts are available to anyone that wants them and there are a growing number of people willing to do the work necessary to make them easily accessible to everyone who wants to access them.

The leaders of your ideology, people like Anita Sarkessian, Jessica Valenti, Eve Ensler and Amanda Marcotte and their white knight minions can continue to use the 'damsel in distress' trope in an attempt to silence their critics, but it's not going to work. Too many people (both men and women) are tired of the lies and have chosen to use their voices to bring the truth to the public. We will not be silenced.

 

You seem like been through a lot. I will spare you any name calling.
But, the question I really want you go back and think today in your spare time is
whether what you call 'facts' are facts OR the names you been called by are facts?

 

Im not really sure which of my posts you are replying to. Im facinated though.

Are you saying feminism is not compatible with science?

And You still havent answered my questions. The premise of this thread was that there is more sexism and homophobia in islam. You have obviously spent a bit of time with the red pill community. Is it very religious? Are muslims over represented? Do you think the red pill community shares much ideology with the abrahamic religions?

You said you were a big fan of adam grant. But he has written about being a passionate advocate for gender equality and what a mistake it was thAt he didnt comprehend the benefits and his responsibilities earlier. How do you square that with your beliefs? (if red pill is offensive, is there a term you prefer?)

If the only point of his you like is that women need to negotiate for themselves more aggressively, i agree. I made the same point earlier in the thread. The analogy about the sandpit was daft though. And you lost me with the references to knights and damsels.

 

I'm a scientist (before owning a real estate business). There are no facts in science, science only creates a perception on what can be measured and hypothesised within the constraints of the instruments and information available at the time. That changes all the time as new knowledge becomes available - this is growth and evolution of the human mind. There can be no facts, only a perception of what we think is the truth.

At the end of the day, no one can stop you from doing anything anyway no matter what their view point is.

 

Feminism is clearly incompatible with science. Produce any findings that don't fit the feminine imperative and feminists ignore it or call it sexism.

Surely you've heard the 'gender is a social construct' line, no? That statement alone says it all with regards to feminism and science.

I'm atheist and don't spend much time immersed in religious discussion. There are certainly religious elements in The Red Pill community, but they are overwhelmingly Conservative Christian. Just one faction of religious zealots warring with a different faction of religious zealots. Same thing that has been happening for thousands of years. As with most ideologies, religion is going to be represented on some level or another.

I didn't say I was a big fan of Adam Grant, I said his book 'Give and Take' was excellent, which it is. I don't see how his being an advocate for egalitarianism has anything to do with liking the book? I don't have a 'You're either with us or you're against us' view of the world. I have friends that openly identify as feminists. I listen to Bikini Kill. Although I don't take Kathleen Hanna seriously, since Le Tigre licenced their music to Goldmark and Nivea. I respect individuals, not labels.

 

dammit. I'm agreeing with @Mombius Hibachi on a gender issue.

My wife earns more than me. I chose to exit the work force to be primary carer for the kids. When I returned to the workforce 4 years later, I had to take a drop in pay (initially about 50% of my previous pay, bumped up to about 80% after a promotion 3 months later... not accounting for the salary drop from moving Sydney -> Newcastle).

As others have mentioned, on any specific, case by case investigation, you are unlikely to find a disparity, as it is illegal in Australia. The trend is still concerning though. Part of it has to do with this mythical "have it all" concept that gets bandied around. It doesn't exist. Equality in my mind is not just more women in high level positions, it is the equal opportunity for men to be primary carer.

Cheers,
Inertia.