Duck..Duck..Gay?

[SD2011]

Originally Posted by slowmover

How long you going to beat this thing?

As long as I wish...

[SD2011]

Originally Posted by Jarvis

I think I may need to read more to answer that correctly.

Without reading more, I believe there are many groups that are equally oppressed in both. One of the most alarming are children, mostly abroad.

What do I win? a THN 2014 Economics 101 calendar?

Jarvis, I'm not really sure there truly is a right or wrong answer. I personally feel that there are many possible answers each with different perspectives (depending on who is looking/answering/experiencing).

I'm going to go simple on this (because of me, not you all). To me, being "oppressed" is truly in the eyes of the beholder. While some may be more "oppressed" than others, we can all get lost in what "oppression" truly means (again, in the eyes of the beholder).

I do tend to agree that kids, women (on the basis of distribution) are victimized (rather than just oppressed) more than anyone else.

You know, I don't mind you trying to corner me into one political ideology or another (earlier) to help frame things up, but I honestly can't find a single political party that I agree with. I guess I hate parties.

I lived overseas many many years in the military and later (more recently) as a civilian. It warped me in many ways (not all bad). We have a lot to learn. (me especially).

Have a great 2014

[Guest060214]

Originally Posted by SD2011

Jarvis, I'm not really sure there truly is a right or wrong answer. I personally feel that there are many possible answers each with different perspectives (depending on who is looking/answering/experiencing).

I'm going to go simple on this (because of me, not you all). To me, being "oppressed" is truly in the eyes of the beholder. While some may be more "oppressed" than others, we can all get lost in what "oppression" truly means (again, in the eyes of the beholder).

I do tend to agree that kids, women (on the basis of distribution) are victimized (rather than just oppressed) more than anyone else.

You know, I don't mind you trying to corner me into one political ideology or another (earlier) to help frame things up, but I honestly can't find a single political party that I agree with. I guess I hate parties.

I lived overseas many many years in the military and later (more recently) as a civilian. It warped me in many ways (not all bad). We have a lot to learn. (me especially).

Have a great 2014

Same to you.

We all have a lot to learn.

[Guest060214]

Originally Posted by thathottnurse

If that doesn't clearly illustrate it for you then nothing will. The huge differnce in population vs. wealth pretty much speaks for itself. Sorry but you do need to read more. Outlining facts for you does not equate to ramming it down your throat. I didn't realize you were so sensitive. Believe whatever makes you feel better. Caio

There are many forms of oppression throughout history. Social, ethnic, gender, political, economic, healthcare/medicine, human rights, institutional, systemic, psychological, segregation, totalitarianism.....etc

Why you choose economic as being the most important can say a lot about a person. Personal greed comes to mind as one example. As I said, how oppression relates to us individually is how we perceive it exists.

Ethnic cleansing throughout history has to be a biggie. Mass deportations, slave trafficking, child labor, human trafficking for sex or labor.... all are collectively part of the problem. Singling out one specific part and declaring it it the worst is ... ignorant.

...yet, you choose the lack of property ownership by women to be the most oppressive.

Interesting, but equally alarming. Fortunately, not everyone has the same outlook regarding oppression that you do...or the world would be far worse than it is.

Difference of opinions about something like this are important in solving the problem, if it can ever be solved. But to declare the answer and it can never be quantified as "fact" is counterproductive. And ignorant.

To stand on your soapbox and scream "that's a fact" when none exists eliminates you from any further discussions about the topic. It's time to have a seat, shut up, listen and learn.

Happy New Year, and we ALL have a lot to learn. Including you.

[SD2011]

Originally Posted by Jarvis

There are many forms of oppression throughout history. Social, ethnic, gender, political, economic, healthcare/medicine, human rights, institutional, systemic, psychological, segregation, totalitarianism.....etc

Why you choose economic as being the most important can say a lot about a person. Personal greed comes to mind as one example. As I said, how oppression relates to us individually is how we perceive it exists.

Ethnic cleansing throughout history has to be a biggie. Mass deportations, slave trafficking, child labor, human trafficking for sex or labor.... all are collectively part of the problem. Singling out one specific part and declaring it it the worst is ... ignorant.

...yet, you choose the lack of property ownership by women to be the most oppressive.

Interesting, but equally alarming. Fortunately, not everyone has the same outlook regarding oppression that you do...or the world would be far worse than it is.

Difference of opinions about something like this are important in solving the problem, if it can ever be solved. But to declare the answer and it can never be quantified as "fact" is counterproductive. And ignorant.

To stand on your soapbox and scream "that's a fact" when none exists eliminates you from any further discussions about the topic. It's time to have a seat, shut up, listen and learn.

Happy New Year, and we ALL have a lot to learn. Including you.

Actually Jarvis, she is right about title/ownership. It is a male dominated (and very heavily so) world of possession. This comes back to the level or perception of "oppression" and the in the eyes of the beholder position. As men (I guess you're a male poster?) it isn't high on our list because we operate from the dominate position.

Personally, I love a woman in yoga pants or stockings... (crap, I'm distracted again)

[Guest060214]

Originally Posted by SD2011

Actually Jarvis, she is right about title/ownership. It is a male dominated (and very heavily so) world of possession. This comes back to the level or perception of "oppression" and the in the eyes of the beholder position. As men (I guess you're a male poster?) it isn't high on our list because we operate from the dominate position.

Personally, I love a woman in yoga pants or stockings... (crap, I'm distracted again)

It is wealth you are looking at, not gender. We can stretch that further to see that the wealth exists within a certain element, again not quantified to a specific gender. The reality of circumstance has to be considered. A women in an industrialized nation owns far more than a women in a third world nation. Also. the ratio of M/F ownership is vastly different between those two. Is gender the problem or is it something else?

[SD2011]

Originally Posted by Jarvis

It is wealth you are looking at, not gender. We can stretch that further to see that the wealth exists within a certain element, again not quantified to a specific gender. The reality of circumstance has to be considered. A women in an industrialized nation owns far more than a women in a third world nation. Also. the ratio of M/F ownership is vastly different between those two. Is gender the problem or is it something else?

It's everything. But if you collectively look at wealth distribution (by gender, race, etc.) then it becomes pretty apparent. Do I consider title/ownership gaps to be a form of oppression? As a man, no. If I were on the other side of that gender equation I would probably think a bit differently no?

If you go over to therules.org you'll find one of the most interesting sites and videos on wealth distribution and the gaps (overall) that I've ever seen.

(note: I do still love boobies/booties and legs)

[Guest060214]

Originally Posted by SD2011

It's everything. But if you collectively look at wealth distribution (by gender, race, etc.) then it becomes pretty apparent. Do I consider title/ownership gaps to be a form of oppression? As a man, no. If I were on the other side of that gender equation I would probably think a bit differently no?

If you go over to therules.org you'll find one of the most interesting sites and videos on wealth distribution and the gaps (overall) that I've ever seen.

(note: I do still love boobies/booties and legs)

Do you believe that women are the most oppressed group in the history of the world?

[SD2011]

If we were only considering it based on gender, sure. But across the board (race, creed, sex, etc.) nope. I'd have to put kids at the top of the list.

[Guest092216]

Wealth/Property controls everything. Every war in history, every oppression in history is economic in nature. The "reasons" for the wars may be cultural, religious, racist, idealist, etc but the motivation behind the war is lack of opportunity to wealth. One group is holding economic power over another. They may wrap it up as religion or basic human rights but what it boils down to is one group can feed their families more readily than the other and the oppressed group wants be in the same economic advantage. We all have a lot to learn, no argument there. But you sir, have a lot to learn about the roots of oppression and subsequent conflict.

Perhaps you are guilty of the same thing you are accusing others of: the inability to see the oppression because you are not the one being oppressed.

[phildo]

God I love internet forums. They're like talking head cable news shows where everything gets stretched out past wherever it started. Except on the internet nobody gets to talk over anybody else. Like a sort of venue enforced manners system. So when all the ideologies get pulled into cartoons of themselves reaching ever further into hyperbole...poof (not that kind)...everybody gets to take a deep breath and come back around to ethics by dollar bill. On the button, nobody gives a fuck what some famous for being famous redneck celebutante thinks about queers or anything else. What we cared about was the reaction by the ethics by dollar bill machine. Which is repulsive and American as apple pie and has nothing to do with starving children or any other group of ill treated persons throughout recorded history.

But the histrionic displays of hyperbole were, well...histrionic!

Cheaper than cable and more entertaining, and about as informative! Ya'll need to maybe look into content development, get your teeth whitened and go beat your breasts on video blogs! I'd log in!

You're welcome, SD...and whoever posted the hurt feelings form..good work.

Thanks!

[Guest060214]

Originally Posted by SD2011

If we were only considering it based on gender, sure. But across the board (race, creed, sex, etc.) nope. I'd have to put kids at the top of the list.

Agreed. No "group" has been oppressed or exploited as much as children.

Two votes for children, one vote for women.

[Guest060214]

Originally Posted by phildo

I'd log in!


Thanks!

You already have.

[phildo]

Originally Posted by Jarvis

You already have.

Not the video version. Or are you saving that for the dollar a day save the children on another continent infomercial? There are starving children down the street. Over 80 percent of kids in the Irving ISD, over 65 percent of the kids in the Graland ISD (and that's just the one's whose parents were legal enough to sign them up) are on lunch assist. Let's fix our own back yards first. Forget the old Duck, forget who is offended, and shine a light of brotherhood and hope in the dark corners closest to you. The rest of that shit will work itself out.

[Guest060214]

Originally Posted by phildo

There are starving children down the street.

There wouldn't be if women owned more property.