andrewsh wrote:What you’re describing is called sexism.
Indeed, but the interesting thing about it here is that the ones championing and implementing policy
here are women. This is not about equality, it's about subjugation.
I'll also caution on the use of the loaded term "sexism". According to popular belief only men are capable of that. I call BS on that count, but will be summarily shouted down by the angry hordes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm very much for equality, but that equality must
be transitive else it's false and we're trading one wrong for another. The latter is a fool's bargain. What I perceive is anything but equality.
Now, perhaps the soft voice of reason is getting shouted down by the shrill voice of demand, and that's wrong -- and it's wrong for an entire collection of reasons. "My ancestors were wronged by your forebears" is no reason to commit another wrong today. The answer is to recognise what went wrong before, contemplate it, and fashion a response that will solve that going forward without wronging the current and future generations. What's really going on is the abject vilification of men -- who are alive today and had precisely nothing to do with their fathers' deeds -- and it's entirely reprehensible.
What the modern batch need to learn is that punishing the children of a generation (and, by proxy, those generations going forward) is not an ethical response. Will they learn that lesson? I rather suspect not, for they're "on a mission".
I used to describe myself as a feminist, and my historical writings here will back that up, but exposure to the rather blunt instrument of the State -- over categorically false charges -- changed that. I remain committed to equality, but I am a staunch opponent of dominion -- of or by one "side" or the other.
Of note here is Brad's observation when he encountered an entirely unwelcome grope -- what would the penalty have been if the roles been reversed? Is that equality? I posit not.