Who do you want pulling your unconscious body out of a house fire?

Don't be a phony. Everybody uses what they've got. Do you know that a taller salesman is almost always more successful than the shorter guy? Shorter people have it hard.

If my choice was Woody Allen or Ronda Rousey, Id have to go with Rousey.


But yes, agreed, certain genders are better at certain things. I dont think anyone would argue that if they really thought it out. (Men are notoriously horrible at giving birth)

Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

Yes we do. But it doesnt make racism or any other deplorable idea any less deplorable.

Ok, so "everybody faces some challenges" is your point.

Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

This is kinda gross, and I suppose now you can say it's hard for women in the workforce because people share the opinion JORR has.

That's sort of what KD seems to be doing in the mind-boggling color argument

I ask you the same question, why is red/pink = girl and blue = boy needed? There has to be some color on a stoplight that means go and some color that means red. There's no such need for gender.

To differentiate between boys and girls. You can't honestly be saying that the very concept of thinking that boys and girls are different is bad.

Should we just get rid of the entire idea of boy or girl? How far are we going on this?

I don't know about you, but I can differentiate between boys and girls without needing to arbitrarily assign a color to them to do it.

Please stop comparing it to racism. It's a bad comparison. I don't think anyone ever wanted to be a slave. Gender roles are a completely different thing.

When did things stop being harder for women JORR?

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

So please explain what is damaging about there also being a color that does that.

...or just say you have no actual answer which is what I suspect.

Just say you have no actual answer for why you need a color to differentiate between a boy and a girl, which is what I expect. My original post said it was idiotic, you're the one who keeps bringing up harm and damage.

Well that's what Im asking. So its not the current racism, its the history of it? Your original question was specific to 2016. And im not talking about gender roles. Im talking about actual sexism in hiring practices.

Let me be more specific.

Is it wrong to not hire a qualified candidate because of their color?
Is it wrong to not hire a qualified candidate because on their gender?


And what about the right to vote?

Its not a 1:1 comparison, as I said initially, but there is come crossover in racism and sexism.

Working-class women have it tremendously hard, I would say.

Nobody can really say what exactly is so hard about being an American woman in 2016. Some of you just know that it is. Not that this manosphere is the right place to ask the question. Maybe Spaulding will show up.

So why is it idiotic?

That's a strange question. I'm not sure they were ever harder. I mean is it harder to take care of the house and kids and basically be subservient to a husband or to be responsible for feeding the entire household? Both things are hard in different ways.

It seems that as a society we have opened up roles to women that were traditionally reserved for men. But there are traditional women's roles that men can never perform. I'm not complaining, just making an observation.

I realize that the modern women feels like she has it better than her grandmother. Maybe she does. She certainly has more choices. But is she happier? I don't know the answer to that. I've certainly read women talking about the pressure they feel to "have it all."

I think you may be misunderstanding what I'm saying. Maybe I haven't articulated it well. I'm not arguing that women haven't been discriminated against in the workplace, nor am I arguing that such a thing is okay. That discrimination has somehow become the focus here and the thing that makes life for a woman "harder" than it is for a man. My point is that there is a long list of things one could cite to argue that men have harder lives, as well as additional components that could be used to make the case for women having it harder. In any case, I find such statements pointless and non-productive, and really, nothing more than whining.

Because there's literally no need to do it.

The sooner we get away from boys wear blue and girls wear pink idiocy the better off we'll be.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.

I think we're better off when we don't assign things to genders for literally no reason. Strong take, I know.

Because literally nothing John McDonough and Jay Blunk do is on accident or by coincidence, the NHL’s quiet announcement that they have concluded their “investigation” of Patrick Kane and have predictably found nothing calls into question a couple other media blips over the past 24 hours.

First, yesterday afternoon the geniuses running the Hawks’ social media department thought it was important to include Patrick Kane and his mother in a tweet acknowledging International Women’s Day, which is insulting and disgusting. And today it leaked that Sports Illustrated will be doing a (regional) cover story on just how much Garbage Dick has had to overcome this year on his way to being the league’s leading scorer and a Hart Trophy front runner. Because John McDonough is very good at his job, these events are not to be viewed as anything other than deliberate and connected.

And the purpose of it is potentially two-fold. At the very least, with any bureaucratic loose ends now tied up with the conclusion of the NHL’s farce of an investigation, which allows McDonough and Blunk to start building a ground game and controlling a narrative ahead of what they figure to be a bright and direct spotlight once again on this team into May and June. The second more stomach-churning purpose is for a potential Masterton Trophy nomination, the NHL’s perseverance award for which every team submits its candidate. It would be a tremendously nauseating and ballsy move on their part, considering recent winners include a widow, a bereaved father, and an MS sufferer. But John McDonough is known for big moves after all.

The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.