# Female Privilege



## Faithful Wife

Hey gang. This might be a tough one to talk about without flames flying...but I would like to try.

This kind of goes along with my empathy for men threads.

I assume we all know what male privilege is, whether or not we agree it exists or understand it. I think most people have their own ideas about it.

Do you know what female privilege is? 

Ironically, I learned the most about female privilege from a trans woman. She was a man until age 40 or so when she then faced and realized her true gender, she transitioned into living as a woman, and then she had GRS. She reported to me the difference in how she was treated when she was a man and then as a woman. She also told me that in the trans community this is understood and talked about a lot.

Some examples of female privilege:

*Common courtesies that are not given to men, such as opening doors for women or allowing them to have your seat when no other seats are available.

*The assumption that females are more righteous, more kind and more nurturing than men and treating women with this assumption in different ways than we treat men.

*Protection of women and children by men, physically and in other ways, when same protection is not afforded to men. Men are expected to protect themselves.

*The assumption that women are better parents than men and women are treated accordingly.

*Women are afforded more empathy than men are, in general.

*Women are assumed to not be sexual predators or rapists, even though some of them are (in enough numbers to be a danger to society). 

As a feminist, I've come across a bit of backlash about this before. But I think it is important to know where I have privilege where others do not so that I can try to extend that privilege further than myself. To me, although men may have privilege that I don't have, I'm not going to get hung up on that because there is nothing I can do about it. I think maybe the best thing I can do is acknowledge my own privilege.

Honestly, without decent men, women could not survive and thrive. Although so many of us have had no help from men per se, have been assaulted and traumatized and so on, I understand why a woman who has experienced that would feel she has no privilege. But in the bigger picture, I still believe it is true that generally, men protect women, they (physically) build everything in our infra-structures, and they are the only ones who have the power to protect us from indecent men.

Women are capable of everything men are capable of, including building all the roads - - it would just take us longer if suddenly there were no men doing this. We would have to change the way machinery is made so that it would be less difficult for us to use. I fully believe this and know we could survive if we had to.

But I also recognize that it is a privilege that I don't have to try to do those things, because men already do them and are so good at it.

If this goes off the rails, I apologize and hope mods will just shut it down. *But I honestly love and have empathy for both men and women*, while I also see and acknowledge the different types of privilege we have.

Having doors opened for you may not be any big deal and some women may wish men didn't hold doors for them. I understand that position, but it is still true that men hold doors for us because they want to be courteous to us in a way that they are normally not courteous to each other. This matters to me and I appreciate the sentiment.

Ladies, if this rubs you the wrong way I'm happy to expand on my thoughts. I'm not saying we should do anything differently, and I know some of you have never been privileged in this way. Again, it is less about individuals and more about the bigger picture and what happens en masse.


----------



## sokillme

I will give my usual spiel about how we raise are kids because it actually continues into adulthood. 

I think the typical assumption is that boys do not have the capacity to be emotional intelligent and girls are naturally intelligent without any or very little instruction. 

So in that way this kind of prejudges hurts both girls and boys. I think that continues into adulthood. I think the assumption is always that women will be more emotionally in-tuned and smarter in that way, and maybe that is true in a general sense but I think that sometimes unfairly gives them an advantage when it comes to things that would generally take that kind of intellect.

For instance this idea that if women ruled the world they wouldn't behave as men who have up until now ruled the world. I don't believe that. I believe they would behave in exactly the same ways that men have. Some will be great some will suck. Interestingly there have been some high profile cases of infidelity by female senators and government officials in propositions of power. Yet women are seen as the fairer sex, hell the saying in itself is a privilege. 

Generally I don't believe Gender is a determining factor in character, which is NOT what I believed when I was young. I also believed the "Fairer-sex" thing. Probably because I was surrounded by very high character women and some of my traditional male role models, not so much.


----------



## sokillme

On a little different note: 



> Although so many of us have had no help from men per se, have been assaulted and traumatized and so on, I understand why a woman who has experienced that would feel she has no privilege.


Could a man write that sentence about women?



> Although so many of us have had no help from women per se, have been assaulted and traumatized and so on, I understand why a men who has experienced that would feel they has no privilege.


Now I think it's different because up until a very very short amount of time in the history of humanity women have not held any power. But I think if a guy were to write this sentence he would be scoffed at. 

The first part specifically the reaction would be, why do you expect women to do anything for you, do it yourself your a man. Hell I would probably be saying it. But the ability to write that to expect men to help you is a privilege. We don't get that, we are expected to make it on our own AND help women. Now obviously that is a little bit of hyperbole but I say to empathize a point. 

If a man were to say he had been traumatized by women, and all you have to do is read on here to see it can happen, most would say, get over it, man up. I don't think I would be quick to but that would be the general attitude, I specifically think from the women. Again we don't get to do that, not even saying that's wrong but it's true. 

So I think in some ways that shows some privilege, though I think that is changing. As women become more and more the power brokers in the world this will change. The thing is it will be a very small minority that has power and I think most women will resent that they will lose that privilege but not see the benefit of the power. But that will not be unlike most men who also feel like they are judged and at time told how much privilege they have, when a lot of times the truth is some of that privilege is generally held by a small minority of men. Coming to this understand by both men and women is a good thing in my mind. 


I often times feel I am held accountable for things I have absolutely no control over. For instance salary. I have never set anyone's salary but I am still held accountable for that as a collective "man". 

There is more to privilege then gender. 

Interestingly Men have been losing their privilege very slowly (mostly rightfully) over the last century, it will be interesting to see what will happen as women gain privileges and lose others in the process, which is only natural.



> *Common courtesies that are not given to men, such as opening doors for women or allowing them to have your seat when no other seats are available.
> 
> *The assumption that females are more righteous, more kind and more nurturing than men and treating women with this assumption in different ways than we treat men.
> 
> *Protection of women and children by men, physically and in other ways, when same protection is not afforded to men. Men are expected to protect themselves.
> 
> *The assumption that women are better parents than men and women are treated accordingly.
> 
> *Women are afforded more empathy than men are, in general.
> 
> *Women are assumed to not be sexual predators or rapists, even though some of them are (in enough numbers to be a danger to society).


All of these things will go away, and I would expect most women will say it's worth the trade off. Hell a lot of them weren't even true just fairy tales that we have been led to believe. They will go away though. Then it will be all of us on exactly the same playing field.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Faithful Wife said:


> Ironically, I learned the most about female privilege from a trans woman. She was a man until age 40 or so when she then faced and realized her true gender, she transitioned into living as a woman, and then she had GRS. She reported to me the difference in how she was treated when she was a man and then as a woman. She also told me that in the trans community this is understood and talked about a lot.


I forgot to mention another story I read by a trans man. A person who was born a woman and who transitioned into a man. He reported similar differences in how he was treated as a woman and then as a man.

He said that as a man, he was treated by other men as if he were more intelligent and had more relevance in the world. He said that when he was a woman, of course doors were opened, etc. As a man, he saw the immediate and stark difference in how he was treated by everyone. One of those differences being that now women would treat him as suspect sometimes, something he never encountered as a woman.

Just making some more points because I forgot in my OP.


----------



## leftfield

This is a very interesting topic. Thanks for bringing it up. It will cause me to do some thinking and analysis.

For today, I will say that the privileges that have legal consequences/benefits are the ones I find most onerous. Just for an example: If a women becomes pregnant the law says she can decide to keep the baby (and accept everything that entails) or she can choose to have an abortion. If the baby is kept, the man gets no similar choice. This has life long legal and financial consequences. That is a huge privilege IMO.


----------



## aquarius1

As there is privilege in a positive way, there has also been a growing "privilege" for women in negative ways.
Women are now allowed to commit same unfair behaviours on men that we railed against 50 years ago.
Want proof? watch any commercial. 
I become upset here when I see different standards being applied to men vs women. We are all HUMAN BEINGS. We should honour our and each other's presence here on this small blue marble we call Earth.


----------



## uhtred

I've never liked the word "privilege" because it is so loaded. I (removed "don't"), think there are different social expectations for men and women under different conditions.

Take the movie Titanic. (spoiler: the ship sinks) Imagine the ending with the guy floating safely on the raft his girlfriend built while she slowly freezes to death in the water. Doesn't really play as very romantic does it. 

There are a wide range of tradeoffs in how society treats men and women - and no scale to measure who has it "better".

// sorry about the edit that reversed the meaning. Started the sentence one way and then didn't read


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> *I don't think there are different social expectations for men and women under different conditions*.
> 
> .....
> 
> Imagine the ending with the guy floating safely on the raft his girlfriend built while she slowly freezes to death in the water. Doesn't really play as very romantic does it.


But isn't that an example of different expectations for men and women?

Or maybe I didn't quite understand the bolded.


----------



## As'laDain

leftfield said:


> This is a very interesting topic. Thanks for bringing it up. It will cause me to do some thinking and analysis.
> 
> For today, I will say that the privileges that have legal consequences/benefits are the ones I find most onerous. Just for an example: If a women becomes pregnant the law says she can decide to keep the baby (and accept everything that entails) or she choose to have an abortion. If the baby is kept, the man gets no similar choice. This has life long legal and financial consequences. That is a huge privilege IMO.


Not only that, but she can also abandon the baby the day its born in some places without suffering any consequences. In the same locations, a man does not have this right....


----------



## RebuildingMe

You forgot to mention all the “privilege” women have in family court.


----------



## Faithful Wife

RebuildingMe said:


> You forgot to mention all the “privilege” women have in family court.


I believe this is covered in these:

*The assumption that females are more righteous, more kind and more nurturing than men and treating women with this assumption in different ways than we treat men.

*The assumption that women are better parents than men and women are treated accordingly.

*Women are assumed to not be sexual predators or rapists, even though some of them are (in enough numbers to be a danger to society).

though I should also add....

*The assumption that women do not physically and emotionally abuse men and children as much as men do.


----------



## uhtred

I'm just an idiot. 

I started the sentence one way, finished another and didn't re-read. I've edited with a note. I *do* think that there are differences. 

I need to sleep more, or take less drugs or something.......

Sorry about the confusion. 




Faithful Wife said:


> But isn't that an example of different expectations for men and women?
> 
> Or maybe I didn't quite understand the bolded.


----------



## RebuildingMe

I don’t know how to quote properly. It goes beyond just awarding custody. The court is more than likely to award financial help to the woman regardless of whether or not they can prove they need it. Then, women also get privilege when it comes to settling the attorney bills. I’m living it right now and have been for years despite being divorced back in 2004. Excuse my venting.


----------



## SunCMars

I get it, I do.

I just hope women who are slowly losing their privileges does not mean they will also lose their sexuality. Or that men will, in turnera, gain/adopt what sexuality they lose.

That would crush me.


TT 1-


----------



## RebuildingMe

There was also a thread on here recently where a woman refused a paycheck to keep her husband paying alimony. Imagine how fast a man would be in court if the roles were reversed. 

When I think of female privilege, what first comes to mind is dollars and cents. To take it a step further, a woman can sell sex for money, gifts, anything. A man can’t do that.


----------



## Faithful Wife

RebuildingMe said:


> To take it a step further, a woman can sell sex for money, gifts, anything. A man can’t do that.


Hmmm...I don't see this one as privilege. It is a simple free market thing.

A man who is 7'3" can possibly sell his body to the NBA, where as a man who is 5'3" cannot. Because the BUYER decides what the buyer is willing to pay for, not the seller.


----------



## Faithful Wife

RebuildingMe said:


> When I think of female privilege, what first comes to mind is dollars and cents. To take it a step further, a woman can sell sex for money, gifts, anything. *A man can’t do that*.


Also, this isn't true. Gay men buy and sell sex from men all the time.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Yes, maybe there’s just not a lot of buyers for men. A woman of any size, shape or age can always find a sucker to pay their bills if that’s what they seek.


----------



## RebuildingMe

I’d rather keep my day job and keep paying off my ex then choose to have sex with gay men. I guess another privilege I don’t have, lol.


----------



## uhtred

Is that really true? I do agree that in general its easier for women to sell sex if they want, but I think older unattractive women probably can't do so. (if we are talking just sex)






RebuildingMe said:


> Yes, maybe there’s just not a lot of buyers for men. A woman of any size, shape or age can always find a sucker to pay their bills if that’s what they seek.


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> Hmmm...I don't see this one as privilege. It is a simple free market thing.
> 
> A man who is 7'3" can possibly sell his body to the NBA, where as a man who is 5'3" cannot. Because the BUYER decides what the buyer is willing to pay for, not the seller.


Eh, if we are talking about prostitution, things like height don't matter much to men. Hell, to a lot of them, weight doesn't matter either. 

Women have that option simply by being women.


----------



## Faithful Wife

As'laDain said:


> Eh, if we are talking about prostitution, things like height don't matter much to men. Hell, to a lot of them, weight doesn't matter either.
> 
> Women have that option simply by being women.


Again, I don't personally consider it a privilege that I "could" sell sex if I wanted to.

But it is interesting that some men think so.

Also - men DO sell sex, just mostly to other men.


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> Also, this isn't true. Gay men buy and sell sex from men all the time.


Not nearly as common as female prostitutes selling sex to men. It happens, yes, but the market pool is almost a hundred times smaller for them.


----------



## OnTheFly

The Duluth Model is an example of female privilege.


----------



## As'laDain

I really dont like to think of the ability to sell sex for money as a privilege... more of a survival strategy. One that usually works better for women than men.


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> Again, I don't personally consider it a privilege that I "could" sell sex if I wanted to.
> 
> But it is interesting that some men think so.
> 
> Also - men DO sell sex, just mostly to other men.


Yeah, i do t really see it as a privilege either. Im good at hunting in hot climates because i can run a deer down until it over heats. Most women cant do that. 

Privilege isnt the right word. Its just a survival option.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

RebuildingMe said:


> Yes, maybe there’s just not a lot of buyers for men. A woman of any size, shape or age can always find a sucker to pay their bills if that’s what they seek.


An unattractive woman has as much ability to find a "sucker" as an unattractive man. 

Both genders can do this (there is such thing as sugar mamas and women supporting their "baby daddy" who doesn't work)


----------



## bandit.45

Faithful Wife said:


> Women are capable of everything men are capable of, including building all the roads - - it would just take us longer if suddenly there were no men doing this. We would have to change the way machinery is made so that it would be less difficult for us to use. I fully believe this and know we could survive if we had to.


Except when it comes to opening jars. You ladies still seem to have trouble with that.


----------



## As'laDain

If we want to get back to the privilege of being woman, it lies in the fact that most men want to help a woman who needs help, but will often pass up a man who needs the same kind of help.


----------



## As'laDain

I work with a female special operations soldier... and she is tough as nails. She can certainly do pretty much everything the men do. The only issue is that everyone knows she is an extreme exception. She gets better ratings on her NCOER than the men do because we all know just how incredibly outstanding she is... even when she does less than half of us. 

When a man runs two miles in 14 minutes, its average. When a female runs two miles on 14 minutes, she is praised as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Because so few females can do it. 

The female in question cant stand feminists. She is getting out because she hates the double standard. 

It is what it is.


----------



## uhtred

This is one of the reasons I don't like the term "privilege". I think selling their bodies for sex is an option that more women have than do men (though I agree some men have that option). 

The value of that depends on a lot of things. In some situations, like an attractive college girl who is OK with casual sex, the ability to spend an evening having sex with a wealthy gentleman, and make as much as it would take 2 full time weeks to earn flipping burgers could be a big advantage. In other cases while the option exists, it is not at all a desirable one.








Faithful Wife said:


> Again, I don't personally consider it a privilege that I "could" sell sex if I wanted to.
> 
> But it is interesting that some men think so.
> 
> Also - men DO sell sex, just mostly to other men.


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> This is one of the reasons I don't like the term "privilege". I think selling their bodies for sex is an option that more women have than do men (though I agree some men have that option).
> 
> The value of that depends on a lot of things. In some situations, like an attractive college girl who is OK with casual sex, the ability to spend an evening having sex with a wealthy gentleman, and make as much as it would take 2 full time weeks to earn flipping burgers could be a big advantage. In other cases while the option exists, it is not at all a desirable one.


What about the hundred of thousands of men who are paid to be in porn? Is that not selling their bodies?

Also, I am trying to understand...do men *wish they could* sell their bodies directly to women for sex more than they can currently?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy

Faithful Wife said:


> What about the hundred of thousands of men who are paid to be in porn? Is that not selling their bodies?
> 
> Also, I am trying to understand...do men *wish they could* sell their bodies directly to women for sex more than they can currently?


^ You ask a man that they are going to picture getting paid to sleep with hot young women so they need to keep in mind that it would be typically undesirable types. 

Most sex worker consumers are not people that you typically want to sleep with. 

It carries risk of STDs, rape, death, and other assault. 

So when asking men, they have to keep all that in mind.


----------



## Faithful Wife

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> ^ You ask a man that they are going to picture getting paid to sleep with hot young women so they need to keep in mind that it would be typically undesirable types.
> 
> Most sex worker consumers are not people that you typically want to sleep with.
> 
> It carries risk of STDs, rape, death, and other assault.
> 
> So when asking men, they have to keep all that in mind.


That’s why it’s confusing that some men have mentioned it as a female privilege.


----------



## As'laDain

uhtred said:


> This is one of the reasons I don't like the term "privilege". I think selling their bodies for sex is an option that more women have than do men (though I agree some men have that option).
> 
> The value of that depends on a lot of things. In some situations, like an attractive college girl who is OK with casual sex, the ability to spend an evening having sex with a wealthy gentleman, and make as much as it would take 2 full time weeks to earn flipping burgers could be a big advantage. In other cases while the option exists, it is not at all a desirable one.


I agree. Hence why i prefer to call it a survival strategy. Men are good at hunting, women are good at getting men to provide for them. 

One is not better or worse than the other.


----------



## Faithful Wife

As'laDain said:


> Men are good at hunting, women are good at getting men to provide for them.
> 
> .


This might be nit picky. But I think for the most part, men want to provide for their woman (especially in the case of hunting, though I have also known a lot of really great female hunters). Also I feel women want to provide things to their man, not that he is “good at getting her to provide them”. I don’t think overall that we are coercing each other to provide these things. Same way that there is no privilege in the animal kingdom. Males and females do the things nature made them good at, and they need each other for their species to survive. 

Of course there are individual men and women who won’t or don’t provide anything to their partner and then one partner is doing more or all of the providing (of anything).


----------



## RebuildingMe

Every porn I’ve ever seen has twice as many women as men, so chalk another one up for the women. 

Also, my current wife shot a deer right before our twins were born. It was a bucket list item her dad always wanted her to do.


----------



## uhtred

Men in porn are selling their bodies as well. A quick google search suggests that there are about 2X as many women as men in porn, but not a very large gap. I don't know how the number of porn stars compares to the number of other sex workers.

Remember - I specifically didn't use the word "privilege" because I think it confuses the issue. I'm just saying that sex work is an option for more women than for men, regardless of whether they want to take that option. 

I'm sure *some* men wish they could sell their bodies. 


I don't think the issue is somehow comparing "points" for what gender gets more privilege - there is no easy way to weigh the advantages and disadvantages. 





Faithful Wife said:


> What about the hundred of thousands of men who are paid to be in porn? Is that not selling their bodies?
> 
> Also, I am trying to understand...do men *wish they could* sell their bodies directly to women for sex more than they can currently?


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> This might be nit picky. But I think for the most part, men want to provide for their woman (especially in the case of hunting, though I have also known a lot of really great female hunters). Also I feel women want to provide things to their man, not that he is “good at getting her to provide them”. I don’t think overall that we are coercing each other to provide these things. Same way that there is no privilege in the animal kingdom. Males and females do the things nature made them good at, and they need each other for their species to survive.
> 
> Of course there are individual men and women who won’t or don’t provide anything to their partner and then one partner is doing more or all of the providing (of anything).


I dont know how it is nitpicking... i think you are spot on. Women want to provide assistance, they dont want to have to do everything. And most men, when they are actually being men and are at their happiest, want to provide for their women. They want to be the one who goes out into the unknown so that their women won't have to. So that their women can do what makes them happy... which is to provide for their men. 


Despite the wars i have fought in, i do believe that MOST people(not all) would thrive in those roles, and are usually happy when they compliment each other. They would be fierce, compassionate, and understanding. 

To be honest, i have always found the idea of male privilege to be idiotic, just as much as i find the idea of female privilege to be idiotic. 

But that's just me....


----------



## ConanHub

As'laDain said:


> I agree. Hence why i prefer to call it a survival strategy. Men are good at hunting, women are good at getting men to provide for them.
> 
> One is not better or worse than the other.


Ummmm. My line has a lot of celt. Our women hunt and fight.

I do get that during pregnancy that dynamic is at play but only with that caveat in my family.

My female relatives have killed far more game than I have and more than I likely ever will. There are some great men hunters in my family of course and they have female counterparts right along with them.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> Yes, maybe there’s just not a lot of buyers for men. A woman of any size, shape or age can always find a sucker to pay their bills if that’s what they seek.


There might be less of a market but you aren't accurate here.

Average and below average women would have difficulty doing what you are suggesting and attractive men can sell themselves if they want to. 

There are a lot of "suckers" as you call them, on both sides of the gender fence.


----------



## As'laDain

ConanHub said:


> Ummmm. My line has a lot of celt. Our women hunt and fight.
> 
> I do get that during pregnancy that dynamic is at play but only with that caveat in my family.
> 
> My female relatives have killed far more game than I have and more than I likely ever will. There are some great men hunters in my family of course and they have female counterparts right along with them.


And my ancestors had mycenaean blood on their hands. 

I get it. But that's not the world we live in today. 

Growing up, my mother was the one most likely to kill someone...


----------



## Faithful Wife

@uhtred or anyone...

Is there a better word than privilege to describe the list I made in my OP?

As I understand the word, it means benefits you receive due to something you have or who you are that you did not earn.

So in the case of wealth, being born into a wealthy family allows that child privileges they did not “earn”.

People can rightly make the case that even a born wealthy child can go on and earn their own wealth that had nothing to do with their birthright of wealth. Also people born wealthy can be disinherited or can reject or give away their wealth.

But the original birthright to that wealth was there, and for the most part it would seem people like this will have lots of privileges that others will never have because they were not born into it.

Also a person born poor can of course create their own wealth from scratch and many do. Unfortunately they may then be treated as if they were given the wealth if others assume they had wealthy parents. @ReformedHubby who has self made wealth has described to me how some people get really weird about his money and treat him as if he didn’t earn it or that he somehow doesn’t deserve it.

So again, is there another word that works better?

Also, privilege does not mean the person necessarily had a good life due to their privilege.


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> @uhtred or anyone...
> 
> Is there a better word than privilege to describe the list I made in my OP?
> 
> As I understand the word, it means benefits you receive due to something you have or who you are that you did not earn.
> 
> So in the case of wealth, being born into a wealthy family allows that child privileges they did not “earn”.
> 
> People can rightly make the case that even a born wealthy child can go on and earn their own wealth that had nothing to do with their birthright of wealth. Also people born wealthy can be disinherited or can reject or give away their wealth.
> 
> But the original birthright to that wealth was there, and for the most part it would seem people like this will have lots of privileges that others will never have because they were not born into it.
> 
> Also a person born poor can of course create their own wealth from scratch and many do. Unfortunately they may then be treated as if they were given the wealth if others assume they had wealthy parents. @ReformedHubby who has self made wealth has described to me how some people get really weird about his money and treat him as if he didn’t earn it or that he somehow doesn’t deserve it.
> 
> So again, is there another word that works better?
> 
> Also, privilege does not mean the person necessarily had a good life due to their privilege.


I dont typically think about privilege. I grew up so hungry sometimes that i ate the aphids off of weeds. And nowadays, people like to tell me that i have white privilege. Like that somehow made my job easier. There was no privilege. I was poor white trash and spit on, and then i joined the army. And then people are shaking my hand and thanking me for no reason at all. 

There was no privilege in any of it. We can all navigate our own lives to avoid putting ourselves at the mercy of someone else, if we so choose. 

People need to quit worrying about privilege and start thinking about what they can actually do...


----------



## Faithful Wife

As'laDain said:


> I dont typically think about privilege. I grew up so hungry sometimes that i ate the aphids off of weeds. And nowadays, people like to tell me that i have white privilege. Like that somehow made my job easier. There was no privilege. I was poor white trash and spit on, and then i joined the army. And then people are shaking my hand and thanking me for no reason at all.
> 
> There was no privilege in any of it. We can all navigate our own lives to avoid putting ourselves at the mercy of someone else, if we so choose.
> 
> People need to quit worrying about privilege and start thinking about what they can actually do...


Well, I actually want to acknowledge my own privileges because I have evidence that I’m receiving things others are not and that I did nothing to deserve them. I’m not asking anyone else to do similar, this is a choice for myself. I understand a lot of people don’t like the word privilege but that doesn’t change the fact that I receive certain benefits that I did not earn.

I do feel that the privilege I have been granted allows me to be more able to help others who maybe didn’t have it, or even if they did, they may not have ended up in as good of a position as I have and I can still possibly help them.

Maybe we can discuss disadvantage instead? Such as your being hungry in childhood. This definitely put you at a disadvantage in many ways that others who have never been hungry will ever experience. 

Being disadvantaged does not mean you won’t or can’t change your circumstances. But some people are not able to rise above their disadvantages and I think they deserve empathy even if they can’t.


----------



## MEM2020

Yes

And the gender pay gap in sports is big to enormous depending on the sport. 




Faithful Wife said:


> Hmmm...I don't see this one as privilege. It is a simple free market thing.
> 
> A man who is 7'3" can possibly sell his body to the NBA, where as a man who is 5'3" cannot. Because the BUYER decides what the buyer is willing to pay for, not the seller.


----------



## MEM2020

Amen to that Brother.

I always find it odd when men claim that any woman can find a man to ‘take care of her’. This is like equating a drunken bar hookup/ONS with a man loving you, WANTING to live with/provide for / marry you, and that man BEING a decent quality companion, lover and provider. 




ConanHub said:


> There might be less of a market but you aren't accurate here.
> 
> Average and below average women would have difficulty doing what you are suggesting and attractive men can sell themselves if they want to.
> 
> There are a lot of "suckers" as you call them, on both sides of the gender fence.


----------



## ConanHub

As'laDain said:


> And my ancestors had mycenaean blood on their hands.
> 
> I get it. But that's not the world we live in today.
> 
> Growing up, my mother was the one most likely to kill someone...


A good number of women in my family make a lot of money as well?

My cousin was a millionaire in her early 20's and her mom was in her 40's.

Maybe my family is weird. My lady relatives are all sex maniacs, mostly hunters and fighters and equally or more successful financially than their mates.

We are probably one of the exceptions that prove a rule?

Our family's ladies still appreciate men who take care of business and the men in my family are mostly physical powerhouses with good I.Q.s. Maybe I agree with your basic premise?


----------



## FrazzledSadHusband

Faithful Wife said:


> I forgot to mention another story I read by a trans man. A person who was born a woman and who transitioned into a man. He reported similar differences in how he was treated as a woman and then as a man.
> 
> He said that as a man, he was treated by other men as if he were more intelligent and had more relevance in the world. He said that when he was a woman, of course doors were opened, etc. As a man, he saw the immediate and stark difference in how he was treated by everyone. One of those differences being that now women would treat him as suspect sometimes, something he never encountered as a woman.
> 
> Just making some more points because I forgot in my OP.


Don't know why someone would want to become a man. As a man, your much likely to get a punch in the face & be told to suck it up.

Although now that I think of it, the girls in high school were SO mentally cruel & devious to each other in HS, think I could deal with a punch in the face easier.


----------



## ConanHub

FrazzledSadHusband said:


> Don't know why someone would want to become a man. As a man, your much likely to get a punch in the face & be told to suck it up.
> 
> Although now that I think of it, the girls in high school were SO mentally cruel & devious to each other in HS, think I could deal with a punch in the face easier.


I was thinking about mentioning this.

There are some circumstances where women are very catty, disrespectful and kind of *****y to each other. The level of cruelty can get scary.


----------



## uhtred

I don't like the term because it gets used for a variety of different things. 

For example, as a middle aged white male, I'm unlikely to be shot by the police. That isn't a "privilege", it is what should be expected for everyone and the people who do not have that safety are suffering from discrimination.

Then there is money that I inherited so I have a better lifestyle that I would otherwise. That to me is real "privilege". OTOH I came from a family with an alcoholic mother and a father with mental illness, so that was a disadvantage. 

Then there are societal expectations: I am expected to be willing to sacrifice myself to save a woman and not vice-versa - but along with that comes a level of being taken seriously that is denied to many women.

I cannot become pregnant myself, but I do not have the right to abort a baby that I accidentally fathered. that is a difference, not privilege or disadvantage. 


Privilege is too close to "privileged". there are middle aged white men who are living on the streets, who were disabled, etc. So while it may be tempting to say that they have some privilege, they are surely not privileged. 


So I like "differences", "advantages" and "disadvantages" to cover the various issues. Privilege brings to mind yachts and champagne. 





Faithful Wife said:


> @uhtred or anyone...
> 
> Is there a better word than privilege to describe the list I made in my OP?
> 
> As I understand the word, it means benefits you receive due to something you have or who you are that you did not earn.
> 
> So in the case of wealth, being born into a wealthy family allows that child privileges they did not “earn”.
> 
> People can rightly make the case that even a born wealthy child can go on and earn their own wealth that had nothing to do with their birthright of wealth. Also people born wealthy can be disinherited or can reject or give away their wealth.
> 
> But the original birthright to that wealth was there, and for the most part it would seem people like this will have lots of privileges that others will never have because they were not born into it.
> 
> Also a person born poor can of course create their own wealth from scratch and many do. Unfortunately they may then be treated as if they were given the wealth if others assume they had wealthy parents. @ReformedHubby who has self made wealth has described to me how some people get really weird about his money and treat him as if he didn’t earn it or that he somehow doesn’t deserve it.
> 
> So again, is there another word that works better?
> 
> Also, privilege does not mean the person necessarily had a good life due to their privilege.


----------



## ConanHub

uhtred said:


> I don't like the term because it gets used for a variety of different things.
> 
> For example, as a middle aged white male, I'm unlikely to be shot by the police. That isn't a "privilege", it is what should be expected for everyone and the people who do not have that safety are suffering from discrimination.
> 
> Then there is money that I inherited so I have a better lifestyle that I would otherwise. That to me is real "privilege". OTOH I came from a family with an alcoholic mother and a father with mental illness, so that was a disadvantage.
> 
> Then there are societal expectations: I am expected to be willing to sacrifice myself to save a woman and not vice-versa - but along with that comes a level of being taken seriously that is denied to many women.
> 
> I cannot become pregnant myself, but I do not have the right to abort a baby that I accidentally fathered. that is a difference, not privilege or disadvantage.
> 
> 
> Privilege is too close to "privileged". there are middle aged white men who are living on the streets, who were disabled, etc. So while it may be tempting to say that they have some privilege, they are surely not privileged.
> 
> 
> So I like "differences", "advantages" and "disadvantages" to cover the various issues. Privilege brings to mind yachts and champagne.


I like the term "advantaged".


----------



## EleGirl

Faithful Wife said:


> I forgot to mention another story I read by a trans man. A person who was born a woman and who transitioned into a man. He reported similar differences in how he was treated as a woman and then as a man.
> 
> He said that as a man, he was treated by other men as if he were more intelligent and had more relevance in the world. He said that when he was a woman, of course doors were opened, etc. As a man, he saw the immediate and stark difference in how he was treated by everyone. One of those differences being that now women would treat him as suspect sometimes, something he never encountered as a woman.
> 
> Just making some more points because I forgot in my OP.


When Dustin Hoffman did the movie Tootsie, he prepared for it by dressing like a woman and going out in public to do his normal activities. I cannot find quotes of an interview about this anymore, but basically he was shocked at how he was treated as a woman. He talked about being dismissed, being treated as inferior, men being creepy with him.

One of the nephews dressed up as a girl for Halloween when he was in high school. After a day, he had a lot to say about how shocked he was about how differently, and poorly, he was treated when people thought he was a girl.


----------



## MEM2020

Not speaking as a mod

In my experience (on average) women are less inclined and less adept at causing physical injury, and more inclined and more adept than men, when it comes to causing emotional injury. 

I sometimes see women behaving in a way that - if a man did so - would definitely provoke a physical confrontation. But due to social norms - at most they get dirty looks or snide comments. As a man, I am very restrained in what I say to an ill behaved woman. 




ConanHub said:


> I was thinking about mentioning this.
> 
> There are some circumstances where women are very chatty, disrespectful and kind of *****y to each other. The level of cruelty can get scary.


----------



## Faithful Wife

bandit.45 said:


> Except when it comes to opening jars. You ladies still seem to have trouble with that.


I have men in my life who do so many things for me. Even though I’m not married anymore, so I don’t have one at home full time, I have men to help me with anything I need. My adult son does most of it, but I also literally have an entire crew full of strong men with trucks at my company who have moved my mother and I three times now. I can also call on them to help with yard work and general handy man stuff. My exh also helps me a lot still. And my brother although limited in what he can do physically helps me in ways that only he can. I’m truly, truly advantaged this way. Not only compared to men (even though most men can handle any of these tasks themselves but they don’t typically have dozens of other men who will come help them) but also compared to other women, even some who have husbands. I’m filled with appreciation that this is true in my life. I feel bad for others who have no help.

Also in my workplace, the same crew help me with numerous things like moving all my archived boxes around as we change out the year end stuff. Sure that’s just part of their job, but they are happy to help me and they appreciate the things I do to help them, too. There is no real reason that I can’t move the boxes myself (it would just be a lot harder for me and take more time) but if I even tried they would all rush in and tell me they’ve got this.

But opening jars is something I have figured out! You just slide a butter knife under the edge and then give it a slight twist. You can hear the seal pop open and voila! Jar opens as if it was never sealed tight. :smile2:


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> I was thinking about mentioning this.
> 
> There are some circumstances *where women are very chatty*, disrespectful and kind of *****y to each other. The level of cruelty can get scary.


That's some women, it's definitely not all women. 

A person selects the people who they let into their lives. The girls/women I have known are not like that. It's easy to avoid and cut these types of people out of one's life.


----------



## Faithful Wife

EleGirl said:


> When Dustin Hoffman did the movie Tootsie, he prepared for it by dressing like a woman and going out in public to do his normal activities. I cannot find quotes of an interview about this anymore, but basically he was shocked at how he was treated as a woman. He talked about being dismissed, being treated as inferior, men being creepy with him.
> 
> One of the nephews dressed up as a girl for Halloween when he was in high school. After a day, he had a lot to say about how shocked he was about how differently, and poorly, he was treated when people thought he was a girl.


Oh yes I remember those interviews now with Dustin and what he said about the difference in the way he was treated.


----------



## ConanHub

EleGirl said:


> That's some women, it's definitely not all women.
> 
> A person selects the people who they let into their lives. The girls/women I have known are not like that. It's easy to avoid and cut these types of people out of one's life.


I did mention certain circumstances. I have noticed it in the service industry often although Mrs. Conan got some special treatment from a waitress the other day that didn't give me a second glance.:wink2:


----------



## MEM2020

Being good with words, numbers and people sure doesn’t hurt either. 




uhtred said:


> I don't like the term because it gets used for a variety of different things.
> 
> For example, as a middle aged white male, I'm unlikely to be shot by the police. That isn't a "privilege", it is what should be expected for everyone and the people who do not have that safety are suffering from discrimination.
> 
> Then there is money that I inherited so I have a better lifestyle that I would otherwise. That to me is real "privilege". OTOH I came from a family with an alcoholic mother and a father with mental illness, so that was a disadvantage.
> 
> Then there are societal expectations: I am expected to be willing to sacrifice myself to save a woman and not vice-versa - but along with that comes a level of being taken seriously that is denied to many women.
> 
> I cannot become pregnant myself, but I do not have the right to abort a baby that I accidentally fathered. that is a difference, not privilege or disadvantage.
> 
> 
> Privilege is too close to "privileged". there are middle aged white men who are living on the streets, who were disabled, etc. So while it may be tempting to say that they have some privilege, they are surely not privileged.
> 
> 
> So I like "differences", "advantages" and "disadvantages" to cover the various issues. Privilege brings to mind yachts and champagne.


----------



## ConanHub

EleGirl said:


> When Dustin Hoffman did the movie Tootsie, he prepared for it by dressing like a woman and going out in public to do his normal activities. I cannot find quotes of an interview about this anymore, but basically he was shocked at how he was treated as a woman. He talked about being dismissed, being treated as inferior, men being creepy with him.
> 
> One of the nephews dressed up as a girl for Halloween when he was in high school. After a day, he had a lot to say about how shocked he was about how differently, and poorly, he was treated when people thought he was a girl.


When I was 21 I was working in a casino and I weighed far less than I did later. I dressed up as a woman for Halloween and I went all out.

I looked like a woman so much it fooled everyone and it was eye opening. Men were insufferable but I'm probably not use to it and women disrespected me at a higher level than men though the men were less respectful of my personal space.

I was also amazed at how much women go through to pretty themselves up!:surprise:


----------



## Faithful Wife

EleGirl said:


> That's some women, it's definitely not all women.
> 
> A person selects the people who they let into their lives. The girls/women I have known are not like that. It's easy to avoid and cut these types of people out of one's life.


Agree.

Although I’m aware of women being asshats to each other (there’s a certain percentage of all people who are asshats) I’ve never encountered anything like some of the stories (maybe hypothetical?) I’ve heard. Women and men both have been mostly kind to me. Anyone who hasn’t been kind to me have been people I don’t really know. Just the random asshat being an asshat.


----------



## MEM2020

Very few things are more satisfying than doing nice things for a woman you love. Or sometimes a casual passerby.

On the plane to SEA last week, older smaller woman had a large bag. I asked if I could put it into and later take it from the luggage rack above. She said yes, thanked me.




Faithful Wife said:


> I have men in my life who do so many things for me. Even though I’m not married anymore, so I don’t have one at home full time, I have men to help me with anything I need. My adult son does most of it, but I also literally have an entire crew full of strong men with trucks at my company who have moved my mother and I three times now. I can also call on them to help with yard work and general handy man stuff. My exh also helps me a lot still. And my brother although limited in what he can do physically helps me in ways that only he can. I’m truly, truly advantaged this way. Not only compared to men (even though most men can handle any of these tasks themselves but they don’t typically have dozens of other men who will come help them) but also compared to other women, even some who have husbands. I’m filled with appreciation that this is true in my life. I feel bad for others who have no help.
> 
> Also in my workplace, the same crew help me with numerous things like moving all my archived boxes around as we change out the year end stuff. Sure that’s just part of their job, but they are happy to help me and they appreciate the things I do to help them, too. There is no real reason that I can’t move the boxes myself (it would just be a lot harder for me and take more time) but if I even tried they would all rush in and tell me they’ve got this.
> 
> But opening jars is something I have figured out! You just slide a butter knife under the edge and then give it a slight twist. You can hear the seal pop open and voila! Jar opens as if it was never sealed tight. :smile2:


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> Well, I actually want to acknowledge my own privileges because I have evidence that I’m receiving things others are not and that I did nothing to deserve them. I’m not asking anyone else to do similar, this is a choice for myself. I understand a lot of people don’t like the word privilege but that doesn’t change the fact that I receive certain benefits that I did not earn.
> 
> I do feel that the privilege I have been granted allows me to be more able to help others who maybe didn’t have it, or even if they did, they may not have ended up in as good of a position as I have and I can still possibly help them.
> 
> Maybe we can discuss disadvantage instead? Such as your being hungry in childhood. This definitely put you at a disadvantage in many ways that others who have never been hungry will ever experience.
> 
> Being disadvantaged does not mean you won’t or can’t change your circumstances. But some people are not able to rise above their disadvantages and I think they deserve empathy even if they can’t.


The problem with defining it as a privilege or advantage, disadvantage, etc, is that it is all situational. I grew up extremely poor. We can call that a disadvantage, but it gave me a lot of experiences that benefit me greatly in warzones and disaster areas. During hurricanes, where more "advantaged" people lose their minds, im taking apart old printers and making flashlights and lamps that can be recharged by hand. Or stringing batteries together to power a radio so that i can still communicate when all the cell phone towers go down. 

I doubt most women experience much female privilege in a group of women who are constantly trying to stab each other in the back...

I guess, if we want the conversation to have any actual meaning, we should probably focusing on areas where it is an advantage to be female, and contrast them with situations where it is an advantage to be male. Acknowledging those differences is good, just so long as everyone realizes that nobody has it any easier in life than the next person. 

A specific example that has nothing to do with gender is dyslexia. Im extremely dyslexic, which has made it difficult to learn to read other languages, but it is probably a big part of the reason i am better than most at _speaking_ foreign languages. 

I guess the biggest issue i have with these discussions is that most people like to dismiss the disadvantages that others deal with by pointing at their specific advantages.


----------



## aine

It also depends in which culture you are in. Culture has a huge bearing on the roles of men and woman and hence the issues you speak of. I dont need a man to open a door for me but I would like to be paid the same as my male colleague who is in the same position as me and does alot less work. I do not need a man to change my car tyre or take my car to the service centre, but I do need a man to see me for my innate qualities whether is is my H or my colleagues, not my age, my weight or how I look.
I was at a work dinner the other night and my boss asked for my number to send me some information quickly. I normally do not give my personal number to anyone and I said so but he said it would only be for this and respect my privacy. Anyway another senior colleague jokingly said 'ah that is how you get the phone numbers of the pretty girls.' I could have been flattered, but I am by no means 'a girl' I in my early 50s! and I was thinking WTF! A man would never say that to a female boss about a male subordinate, e.g. 'that is how you get the young men's numbers...." I didn't like it but some people think that that **** is fine.


----------



## Faithful Wife

As'laDain said:


> The problem with defining it as a privilege or advantage, disadvantage, etc, is that it is all situational. I grew up extremely poor. We can call that a disadvantage, but it gave me a lot of experiences that benefit me greatly in warzones and disaster areas. During hurricanes, where more "advantaged" people lose their minds, im taking apart old printers and making flashlights and lamps that can be recharged by hand. Or stringing batteries together to power a radio so that i can still communicate when all the cell phone towers go down.
> 
> I doubt most women experience much female privilege in a group of women who are constantly trying to stab each other in the back...
> 
> I guess, if we want the conversation to have any actual meaning, we should probably focusing on areas where it is an advantage to be female, and contrast them with situations where it is an advantage to be male. Acknowledging those differences is good, just so long as everyone realizes that nobody has it any easier in life than the next person.
> 
> A specific example that has nothing to do with gender is dyslexia. Im extremely dyslexic, which has made it difficult to learn to read other languages, but it is probably a big part of the reason i am better than most at _speaking_ foreign languages.
> 
> I guess the biggest issue i have with these discussions is that most people like to dismiss the disadvantages that others deal with by pointing at their specific advantages.


I am afraid to compare advantages between men and women because that never ends well here. But anyone can discuss what they would like to discuss.

Also I think I understand your last sentence, but I also don’t want to conflate advantage and disadvantages, if that makes sense. I guess to me it seems like most people want to talk only about their disadvantages and they don’t even acknowledge their advantages. In a case like yours, it honestly sounds like you may have never had any true advantages, other than a sharp mind. So I can understand where you are coming from. But others who certainly have advantages don’t seem willing to discuss them. They just want to discuss the disadvantages.

Which makes me wonder, is no one appreciative of their advantages at all? It just doesn’t seem like something people want to discuss. Like I said in your case you sound like you honestly didn’t have any so I get why there’s nothing to be appreciative about. But we certainly all know people who are greatly advantaged.

But it’s whatever, I guess. I wanted to look at the advantage perspective and kind of discuss how it plays out for us, but as I said people can discuss whatever they want.

It would be curious and also probably frightening and sad if we all listed our specific disadvantages somewhere. I’ve read some really really sad back ground stories here (including people on this thread). Horror stories of abuse and poverty and war and people dying and being abandoned. That’s why I can’t imagine trying to mix that discussion in with discussion on advantages. 

I’ve only recently come to put together some things that happened to me in childhood that are still affecting me now and how they were a disadvantage. But like many others I feel I just “overcame” it, because we have to just plow through things and grow up. And the advantages I had did not and could not make any difference to the disadvantage. They were separate stand alone things.

Anyways just babbling now....


----------



## WorldsApart

Here's one for your list: Effective immunity from false claims in sexual assault.
For example: https://www.ksl.com/article/46635920/utah-man-exonerated-of-sexual-assault-after-nearly-15-years-in-prison

Few if any District Attorneys would ever agree to prosecute the woman for making this kind of false claim.


----------



## uhtred

There was also a horrible case where a man spent over a decade in prison as a child molester because his 13 year old step daughter accused him. There was no evidence, but the jury couldn't believe that a 13 year old could know enough to make up the accusation (apparently having not heard of the internet). She recanted after he spent 10 years in prison.

I think false clams should be punished severely. That said, there are going to be a lot of cases where an accusation cannot be proven true - but also cannot be proven false. I don't know if the public can deal well with that. 




WorldsApart said:


> Here's one for your list: Effective immunity from false claims in sexual assault.
> For example: https://www.ksl.com/article/46635920/utah-man-exonerated-of-sexual-assault-after-nearly-15-years-in-prison
> 
> Few if any District Attorneys would ever agree to prosecute the woman for making this kind of false claim.


----------



## Faithful Wife

I’m going to request that if anyone wants to discuss false charges that they open a separate thread.

It is an important topic, but there are also victims of actual rape and abuse here and I don’t think it’s fair to them (or me) to discuss the false reports. It’s just a separate topic. If someone opens a thread on that topic I will join also and share my thoughts.

Thanks.


----------



## WorldsApart

Faithful Wife said:


> I’m going to request that if anyone wants to discuss false charges that they open a separate thread.
> 
> It is an important topic, but there are also victims of actual rape and abuse here and I don’t think it’s fair to them (or me) to discuss the false reports. It’s just a separate topic. If someone opens a thread on that topic I will join also and share my thoughts.
> 
> Thanks.


certainly happy to not discuss actual false charges here, but it is a form of "Privilege" extended to women.


----------



## bandit.45

Faithful Wife said:


> But opening jars is something I have figured out! You just slide a butter knife under the edge and then give it a slight twist. You can hear the seal pop open and voila! Jar opens as if it was never sealed tight. :smile2:


 We don't need no stinkin' butter knife.


----------



## Faithful Wife

bandit.45 said:


> We don't need no stinkin' butter knife.


I admit it must feel awesome to be incredibly strong.


----------



## bandit.45

Faithful Wife said:


> I admit it must feel awesome to be incredibly strong.


No. Actually it's skeletal mechanics. Men's hands are built differently.


----------



## Faithful Wife

bandit.45 said:


> No. Actually it's skeletal mechanics. Men's hands are built differently.


I was thinking about my exes, who were all truly incredibly strong, and how I used to admire watching them do something amazing that would require at least 3 women to accomplish.

Not necessarily opening jars, because yeah his hands are also just bigger and even though I have man hands, they still aren’t THAT big. 

I remember being a small child and seeing my mother do normal adult things but they were things that seemed so difficult that I didn’t really believe I would ever be as strong as she was. Then I grew taller and stronger than her by the time I was in 5th grade (she is pixie sized) and all of a sudden I felt sooooo strong and capable. 

But then I realized no matter how I tried or how much older I got, I would never be as strong as my brother. At the time I was like “this sucks and is unfair!” I just really wanted to be able to do anything I wanted without needing help. 

But...then puberty came and I started feeling tingly about these young guys I was hanging around specifically because they were bigger and stronger than me.

After that I thought “oh I get it, God made us this way on purpose”. 0


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Agree.
> 
> Although I’m aware of women being asshats to each other (there’s a certain percentage of all people who are asshats) I’ve never encountered anything like some of the stories (maybe hypothetical?) I’ve heard. Women and men both have been mostly kind to me. Anyone who hasn’t been kind to me have been people I don’t really know. Just the random asshat being an asshat.


 @Faithful Wife feel free to kick me off this thread but I might have something to offer here with my observations of my wife's large cadre of female friends through her sexual assault journey.

A full 90+% of them abandoned her. Close friends, casual friends, friends that were victimized by the same guy and friends that didn't know her at all. The vast majority just went cold on their relationship as soon as they found out about it. She had a very (very!) large circle of friends consisting of multiple friend groups. From a pure relationship perspective, she was usually part of the 'core' group of friends and perceived in somewhat as someone to be admired... that I think was actually jealousy, in part.

There's a component there of her being smart (academically inclined), successful (we're very fortunate financially), extremely fit (she was a top-tier elite triathlete, yogi, runner, strength training, etc.) She has the nice clothes and the purses and shoes with names I don't understand. Etc. I brag, but seriously she's pretty awesome. 

For some of those "friends," I don't think they were friends at all. They were jealous, and when she faltered after the assault, they pushed her down even further. They saw their shot to knock somebody off of some imaginary pedestal, and they took it. They seemed pretty hierarchical about it, almost like a clique in high school, only with 30 and 40 year olds. So that sucked.

Others just didn't like their good time ruined. "Have a good time, all the time" seems to be their motto. These are the ones that just didn't want their buzz ruined, so they just stopped talking to her.

A few others thought she had brought it on herself, or it didn't happen at all, that kind of thing. Victim blaming. Which I was ready for from the guys but not the girls. In fact, I didn't get it from a single guy. But I was so surprised that other smart, successful, educated women would actually blame her for what this guy did. Or think she'd lie about it for some reason.

I always thought there was this sisterhood of women, you know? I guess I kinda held you guys on a pedestal that way myself. I thought women had each other's back in general. Boy was I wrong.

And as I look around at work and in other places... I have to say I see the same thing. My experience is that men only grudgingly support each other if it's not too much trouble unless you're good buddies and then they'll give you the shirt off their back. But my experience with women is shockingly that a lot of the emotional intimacy that I thought was there... wasn't there at all. Or even if it is, it can be used against each other.

It's wild. I honestly think that women have it far harder than men do. Or at least in my experience. I had no idea. I wish it were different. Maybe for you it is - honestly I hope so.


----------



## Marduk

I’ll also add the following: https://hbr.org/2019/09/the-metoo-backlash

I’ve seen this happen as well, in terms of contextualizing “female privilege...”

A side effect of more women coming forward regarding sexual harassment in the workplace is that they’re being excluded from social events, their managers have less 1-1s with them out of fear, and they aren’t always provided the same kind of social inclusion as men with laughing, joking, etc. 

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t seem to be the lot in life for women sometimes.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> I always thought there was this sisterhood of women, you know? I guess I kinda held you guys on a pedestal that way myself. I thought women had each other's back in general. Boy was I wrong.
> 
> And as I look around at work and in other places... I have to say I see the same thing. My experience is that men only grudgingly support each other if it's not too much trouble unless you're good buddies and then they'll give you the shirt off their back. But my experience with women is shockingly that a lot of the emotional intimacy that I thought was there... wasn't there at all. Or even if it is, it can be used against each other.
> 
> It's wild. I honestly think that women have it far harder than men do. Or at least in my experience. I had no idea. I wish it were different. Maybe for you it is - honestly I hope so.


I do remember you saying this on your "come back" thread. Yikes!!!! :frown2:

I can't relate and of course, and exceedingly happy that this has not been my experience. My sisters have always had my back, slapped me around when I needed it, and been there for all the ups and downs. Over the years, maybe a friend falls off the map or whatever, I'm never sure why when that happens. People just change and move on sometimes. But no drama or fireworks.

I do take your word for this! Possibly since I am introverted I don't end up with groups of extroverted girlfriends, and they do seem to be a bit more trouble. I have one long time gf who is the total life of the party type, extroverted to the point of insanity, and prone to drama. She has had fall outs with OTHER groups of women who I don't know well. I would hear her stories of meeting such and such awesome chick, now they are going out together a lot, now she is meeting all of awesome chick's friends and all of them are grouping all over town. I could always see it coming long before she did. One of them would get weird about something the other did and then like dominoes, they would all fall over each other in a heap of drama. Then the inevitable "I hate those women now, will never hang out with them again!" This went on for many years and she went through lots of those groups. However, we are older now and she is happy to just be with her man, have me her long term friend around, and focuses on herself and her goals.

I'm super glad your wife got to see the real deal with these *****es. Ugh!


----------



## bandit.45

Faithful Wife said:


> I was thinking about my exes, who were all truly incredibly strong, and how I used to admire watching them do something amazing that would require at least 3 women to accomplish.
> 
> Not necessarily opening jars, because yeah his hands are also just bigger and even though I have man hands, they still aren’t THAT big.
> 
> I remember being a small child and seeing my mother do normal adult things but they were things that seemed so difficult that I didn’t really believe I would ever be as strong as she was. Then I grew taller and stronger than her by the time I was in 5th grade (she is pixie sized) and all of a sudden I felt sooooo strong and capable.
> 
> But then I realized no matter how I tried or how much older I got, I would never be as strong as my brother. At the time I was like “this sucks and is unfair!” I just really wanted to be able to do anything I wanted without needing help.
> 
> But...then puberty came and I started feeling tingly about these young guys I was hanging around specifically because they were bigger and stronger than me.
> 
> After that I thought “oh I get it, God made us this way on purpose”. 0


Women make life inside their bodies and push a baby out through an opening the size of a golfball. 

Not a man on Earth could handle that kind of trauma.


----------



## Marduk

bandit.45 said:


> Women make life inside their bodies and push a baby out through an opening the size of a golfball.
> 
> Not a man on Earth could handle that kind of trauma.


I don't think we'd do it more than once, that's for sure. Kids are nice and all, but the human species can die out before I'd probably do that twice.


----------



## bandit.45

Any guy with the nads to say he can understand what it would be like to be a woman in today's world needs to watch this video. 






Men don't know d!ck, and those who say they do need to STFU.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I do remember you saying this on your "come back" thread. Yikes!!!! :frown2:
> 
> I can't relate and of course, and exceedingly happy that this has not been my experience. My sisters have always had my back, slapped me around when I needed it, and been there for all the ups and downs. Over the years, maybe a friend falls off the map or whatever, I'm never sure why when that happens. People just change and move on sometimes. But no drama or fireworks.
> 
> I do take your word for this! Possibly since I am introverted I don't end up with groups of extroverted girlfriends, and they do seem to be a bit more trouble. I have one long time gf who is the total life of the party type, extroverted to the point of insanity, and prone to drama. She has had fall outs with OTHER groups of women who I don't know well. I would hear her stories of meeting such and such awesome chick, now they are going out together a lot, now she is meeting all of awesome chick's friends and all of them are grouping all over town. I could always see it coming long before she did. One of them would get weird about something the other did and then like dominoes, they would all fall over each other in a heap of drama. Then the inevitable "I hate those women now, will never hang out with them again!" This went on for many years and she went through lots of those groups. However, we are older now and she is happy to just be with her man, have me her long term friend around, and focuses on herself and her goals.
> 
> I'm super glad your wife got to see the real deal with these *****es. Ugh!


I will say, as awesome as my wife is, she isn't always great at picking friends. I mean, look at her EA. Same goes with these girls. Most of them I didn't like, and none of them I was close to. Didn't like any of their husbands, either. Weren't sincere people, you know? They might have been fun to hang out with or whatever, but they didn't seem real to me. I have few close friends, but those guys I could literally show up with nothing and they'd put me up forever, no questions asked. I'd do the same for them.

She's down to those very long term, very close friends, and I think that's awesome. They're actually good people, even when they annoy me (she comes from a very different socioeconomic background than I do). But I do trust them.


----------



## bandit.45

Finding a real friend... a REAL friend... is something many people never get to experience.


----------



## Faithful Wife

bandit.45 said:


> Any guy with the nads to say he can understand what it would be like to be a woman in today's world needs to watch this video.
> 
> ...
> 
> Men don't know d!ck, and those who say they do need to STFU.


Someone else just posted this in another thread.

And as I noted in that thread, we have men tell us all the time that we should be flattered by this, that we only call men creepy if we don't find them attractive, and that men would LOVE to be desired so much by women that women on the street cat call him.


----------



## WorldsApart

Marduk said:


> I’ll also add the following: https://hbr.org/2019/09/the-metoo-backlash
> 
> I’ve seen this happen as well, in terms of contextualizing “female privilege...”
> 
> A side effect of more women coming forward regarding sexual harassment in the workplace is that they’re being excluded from social events, their managers have less 1-1s with them out of fear, and they aren’t always provided the same kind of social inclusion as men with laughing, joking, etc.
> 
> Damned if you do, damned if you don’t seem to be the lot in life for women sometimes.


Absolutely true from a risk management perspective, it's not worth your job.


----------



## bandit.45

Faithful Wife said:


> Someone else just posted this in another thread.
> 
> And as I noted in that thread, we have men tell us all the time that we should be flattered by this, that we only call men creepy if we don't find them attractive, and that men would LOVE to be desired so much by women that women on the street cat call him.


Yeah I just saw that. 

Effing hell... and I thought I was so clever.

Anyway, there is a time to compliment a woman and a time to keep your mouth shut. Most men don't know how to keep their mouths shut.


----------



## Faithful Wife

WorldsApart said:


> Absolutely true from a risk management perspective, it's not worth your job.


It's just that I think @Marduk is actually showing empathy for women when he posted this. He is saying hey look, women get harassed for centuries, we finally have a moment when enough men are called to task on this that the seas start changing in workplaces, and then women are *punished* yet again. It is like it has always been: if we speak up we get slapped down one way or another.

And although I can understand that men now have to behave in ways they didn't used to, I don't really feel sorry for men in this particular issue. I think most men are decent and don't harass women, by the way.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Someone else just posted this in another thread.
> 
> 
> 
> And as I noted in that thread, we have men tell us all the time that we should be flattered by this, that we only call men creepy if we don't find them attractive, and that men would LOVE to be desired so much by women that women on the street cat call him.



I’ve had that happen though. I mean, I’m sure many of us did, especially in high school or university. The cute girl thinks you’re a creep for saying hello but the hot guy leers at her and takes her home. I’ve certainly had that happen. 

Just like I have gone to a party, saw a girl get mad at a guy for bringing her a drink to break the ice, and then she was naked on a pile of coats in the hosts bedroom an hour later with me. 

And then reversing it, I’ve done that myself. I remember in my 20s walking into a cowboy bar (ugh) and getting my ass grabbed. I was mad about it for the length of time it took me to turn around and realize that she was hot. I didn’t do anything with her, but I would have been open to it at the time. 

I’m not saying that women only think men are creeps if they’re unattractive; certainly hot guys can be creeps as much or more as anybody else. And certainly women have to deal with a lot more BS there than men do in general - and given the threat of violence it’s certainly higher stakes for women. 

But I do think both genders give more slack to people they’re attracted to than they do those they aren’t. Because they’re flattered more or want to have sex with them. And that’s probably baffling and infuriating to unattractive guys that see that and think the rules are different for them because they lost the genetic lottery, say. 

I think that’s a component. Nothing is ever a totally level playing ground. Context is for kings.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> I’ve had that happen though. I mean, I’m sure many of us did, especially in high school or university. The cute girl thinks you’re a creep for saying hello but the hot guy leers at her and takes her home. I’ve certainly had that happen.
> 
> Just like I have gone to a party, saw a girl get mad at a guy for bringing her a drink to break the ice, and then she was naked on a pile of coats in the hosts bedroom an hour later with me.
> 
> And then reversing it, I’ve done that myself. I remember in my 20s walking into a cowboy bar (ugh) and getting my ass grabbed. I was mad about it for the length of time it took me to turn around and realize that she was hot. I didn’t do anything with her, but I would have been open to it at the time.
> 
> I’m not saying that women only think men are creeps if they’re unattractive; certainly hot guys can be creeps as much or more as anybody else. And certainly women have to deal with a lot more BS there than men do in general - and given the threat of violence it’s certainly higher stakes for women.
> 
> But I do think both genders give more slack to people they’re attracted to than they do those they aren’t. Because they’re flattered more or want to have sex with them. And that’s probably baffling and infuriating to unattractive guys that see that and think the rules are different for them because they lost the genetic lottery, say.
> 
> I think that’s a component. Nothing is ever a totally level playing ground. Context is for kings.


I can't argue with any of this, but I think it would be safer for men to just assume they should wait for some kind of cue from her that she thinks you are cute or she is interested BEFORE you make moves in her direction. 

Again, I'm not actually insulted or bothered by a dude who is just hollering out the window at me from a truck, as long as he's still moving there's no harm. I won't even see his face most likely. And I think most women feel like me. We aren't going to go around upset about something like this. So it is unfair to act as if we are making mountains of molehills when we really aren't (not saying you are doing this).

And as women, if we are single and interested we will usually give you some idea of this, whereas if we are not interested, this is plain as well. Can't men just use their eyes and intuition about this?


----------



## Marduk

WorldsApart said:


> Absolutely true from a risk management perspective, it's not worth your job.



The point is that you should treat women like human beings, just like anybody else. 

Whenever I’ve caught myself telling a somewhat inappropriate joke to a group at work and then felt bad about it... when I asked some of those women if I blew it, they were like “are you kidding?” Or “why would that be inappropriate?” 

I think they just want to be seen as regular people first, but now they’re getting it on both ends. Certainly being excluded may be better than being assaulted, but you shouldn’t have to choose one or the other. 

And men are still the problem here, because in those moments where I check myself, it’s out of fear or seeing them as women instead of just colleagues.


----------



## Fozzy

Sorry for coming in so late in the thread (and having only read the opening post) but just wanted to relay that I just came from the gas station and there were 5 guys (4 outside coming in and myself going out) all holding the door for each other and nobody would go first. Chivalry is not dead.


----------



## WorldsApart

Faithful Wife said:


> It's just that I think @Marduk is actually showing empathy for women when he posted this. He is saying hey look, women get harassed for centuries, we finally have a moment when enough men are called to task on this that the seas start changing in workplaces, and then women are *punished* yet again. It is like it has always been: if we speak up we get slapped down one way or another.
> 
> And although I can understand that men now have to behave in ways they didn't used to, I don't really feel sorry for men in this particular issue. I think most men are decent and don't harass women, by the way.


While the vast majority of men don't harass women, it's in their best interest to ensure they're never in the situation where they can be accused. Because that's all it takes- just the mere claim that something happened and you're out of a job, and a potentially destroyed career.

Go ahead and not feel sorry for men in this issue- it's created a zero tolerance environment where we're forced to protect ourselves, and destroying trust.


----------



## Faithful Wife

WorldsApart said:


> Go ahead and not feel sorry for men in this issue.


You can count on that.


----------



## WorldsApart

Faithful Wife said:


> You can count on that.


I'll leave this thread with a personal story- 14 years ago I helped launch a new company as the lead software developer. In 18 months we hit $40 Million a month in sales, $80 Million at 36 months. At that point there was a fallout in senior management, and a new CIO was brought in. Sold the board on a new platform, implemented it, and sent me out the door with a nice severance package the day it was supposed to launch. 30 days later it was a smoking ruin, and they asked me to come back in to get my system running again.

Except I had to have an escort anywhere I went in the building. I eventually I found out that after I left, a sexual harassment complaint was filed, but they refused to let me defend myself because I was no longer an employee, and the filer "wasn't comfortable discussing it". And while I was able to consult for a short period of time, I could never work there again.

I've always been 100% professional in the workplace, but I'll never put myself in a position to have my career yanked out from underneath me.


----------



## Faithful Wife

WorldsApart said:


> I'll leave this thread with a personal story- 14 years ago I helped launch a new company as the lead software developer. In 18 months we hit $40 Million a month in sales, $80 Million at 36 months. At that point there was a fallout in senior management, and a new CIO was brought in. Sold the board on a new platform, implemented it, and sent me out the door with a nice severance package the day it was supposed to launch. 30 days later it was a smoking ruin, and they asked me to come back in to get my system running again.
> 
> Except I had to have an escort anywhere I went in the building. I eventually I found out that after I left, a sexual harassment complaint was filed, but they refused to let me defend myself because I was no longer an employee, and the filer "wasn't comfortable discussing it". And while I was able to consult for a short period of time, I could never work there again.
> 
> I've always been 100% professional in the workplace, but I'll never put myself in a position to have my career yanked out from underneath me.


This is unfortunate and I'm not saying you or anyone deserves this.

I *do* feel sorry for anyone who is hit with any kind of bogus crap like this you have described.

I *do not* feel sorry for the average man in the workplace who simply has to be a little more professional. If he chooses to also get all weird and avoid all women completely, that's his choice.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

WorldsApart said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's just that I think @Marduk is actually showing empathy for women when he posted this. He is saying hey look, women get harassed for centuries, we finally have a moment when enough men are called to task on this that the seas start changing in workplaces, and then women are *punished* yet again. It is like it has always been: if we speak up we get slapped down one way or another.
> 
> And although I can understand that men now have to behave in ways they didn't used to, I don't really feel sorry for men in this particular issue. I think most men are decent and don't harass women, by the way.
> 
> 
> 
> While the vast majority of men don't harass women, it's in their best interest to ensure they're never in the situation where they can be accused. Because that's all it takes- just the mere claim that something happened and you're out of a job, and a potentially destroyed career.
> 
> Go ahead and not feel sorry for men in this issue- it's created a zero tolerance environment where we're forced to protect ourselves, and destroying trust.
Click to expand...

The Pence Principle is invaluable in todays workplace.


----------



## Faithful Wife

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> The Pence Principle is invaluable in todays workplace.


You know by now what I think of you. Do you honestly think I value your opinion on this or any subject at this point? But of course, you are free to say what you want here and you’re going to do exactly that.

I am not going to respond to your points anymore because I’m not going to get myself banned over your nonsense.

I still hope the men at TAM will call you out when you say some of the horrible things you say, but it won’t be me doing it anymore.

Buh bye.


----------



## Marduk

WorldsApart said:


> While the vast majority of men don't harass women, it's in their best interest to ensure they're never in the situation where they can be accused. Because that's all it takes- just the mere claim that something happened and you're out of a job, and a potentially destroyed career.
> 
> 
> 
> Go ahead and not feel sorry for men in this issue- it's created a zero tolerance environment where we're forced to protect ourselves, and destroying trust.



Since 97+% of claims from women are not false allegations, and more than 90+ of the claims are ignored, how about we deal with the problem of men being falsely accused when it actually becomes a large scale problem. 

Not saying it doesn’t happen, but I am saying the issue is so lopsided towards being a problem for women that it strikes me as yet another way that men try to keep all the power and yet have their poor little egos protected.


----------



## heartsbeating

MEM2020 said:


> Very few things are more satisfying than doing nice things for a woman you love. Or sometimes a casual passerby.
> 
> On the plane to SEA last week, older smaller woman had a large bag. I asked if I could put it into and later take it from the luggage rack above. She said yes, thanked me.


As far as chivalry goes, I was on a flight last year without Batman. I was reaching up to get my case down, when a (taller) man nearby offered to get it down for me. I accepted and thanked him.. and admittedly, stretched the friendship to ask if he would mind getting the case next to mine as well for the girl who sat next to me. I'd seen her struggle a bit to get her case up, and she was still seated as the aisle was full. He kindly said, 'No problem' and got her case down too. I handed across to her and she thanked us both. 

Leaving the hardware store and about to carry items to my car, when the man in line behind me offered to help carry it for me. I accepted the offer and thanked him. Mind you, this was before I'd watched Mind Hunters!... but I took it as a considerate gesture and appreciated the help.


----------



## hptessla

leftfield said:


> This is a very interesting topic. Thanks for bringing it up. It will cause me to do some thinking and analysis.
> 
> For today, I will say that the privileges that have legal consequences/benefits are the ones I find most onerous. Just for an example: If a women becomes pregnant the law says she can decide to keep the baby (and accept everything that entails) or she can choose to have an abortion. If the baby is kept, the man gets no similar choice. This has life long legal and financial consequences. That is a huge privilege IMO.


It has huge emotional and social consequences too.


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> I am afraid to compare advantages between men and women because that never ends well here. But anyone can discuss what they would like to discuss.
> 
> Also I think I understand your last sentence, but I also don’t want to conflate advantage and disadvantages, if that makes sense. I guess to me it seems like most people want to talk only about their disadvantages and they don’t even acknowledge their advantages. In a case like yours, it honestly sounds like you may have never had any true advantages, other than a sharp mind. So I can understand where you are coming from. But others who certainly have advantages don’t seem willing to discuss them. They just want to discuss the disadvantages.
> 
> Which makes me wonder, is no one appreciative of their advantages at all? It just doesn’t seem like something people want to discuss. Like I said in your case you sound like you honestly didn’t have any so I get why there’s nothing to be appreciative about. But we certainly all know people who are greatly advantaged.
> 
> But it’s whatever, I guess. I wanted to look at the advantage perspective and kind of discuss how it plays out for us, but as I said people can discuss whatever they want.
> 
> *It would be curious and also probably frightening and sad if we all listed our specific disadvantages somewhere. I’ve read some really really sad back ground stories here (including people on this thread). Horror stories of abuse and poverty and war and people dying and being abandoned. That’s why I can’t imagine trying to mix that discussion in with discussion on advantages.*
> 
> I’ve only recently come to put together some things that happened to me in childhood that are still affecting me now and how they were a disadvantage. But like many others I feel I just “overcame” it, because we have to just plow through things and grow up. And the advantages I had did not and could not make any difference to the disadvantage. They were separate stand alone things.
> 
> Anyways just babbling now....


hmm... interesting thing to think about.

im not entirely sure if i could list all of mine correctly, because the way i view them would be different than the way others would view them. for instance, im always the smallest person on an the team when i deploy. not always the shortest, but always the skinniest. i also usually have the heaviest ruck sack. to put it in perspective, i am 67 inches tall and weigh 128 pounds, and i work with green berets. it doesnt really matter how much i work out, i dont really gain mass. 

most people would call that a disadvantage, but i dont see it that way. i dont need nearly as much food and water as the GBs do, and its easy to stay in shape well enough to be able to outpace them in a ruck march. i also only eat one meal a day, and have done so since i was a kid. so when we are out on long missions, i can go quite a while without eating before it starts to bother me. instead of thinking about going three days without food, i think of it as missing three meals, etc. 

my size is also one of the things i mention every time i hear someone say they dont want to serve with women in combat because "a 130 pound woman is not going to be able to carry me if i get shot." because, truth is, she WILL be able to so long as she trains her body and prepares for it. unfortunately though, women are being allowed into combat roles, but they are only required to pass the combat fitness test once. after that, there is no incentive to maintaining that level of fitness, so most of the ones i know dont. 

advantages and disadvantages are just a fact of life. its when we start pointing other peoples advantages out and use it as a tool to guilt them that we go wrong... like this whole "white privilege" thing. there are a lot of intelligent people out there, but im probably going to stop listening to them if i hear them tell me that my life was easy because i am white. 

i have also been accused of transphobia because i didnt want to date someone who happened to be trans. i have been called racist because i didnt want to date someone who happened to be black. im a white heterosexual male the grew up in the south, came from poverty, and who likes guns. the people who made those accusations had already made up their mind about me without really knowing anything about me. 

this is something i had to explain to my last girlfriend. she is a big supporter of black lives matter, went to their rallies, marches, etc. she asked me why i wasnt a big fan of the movement. she was overweight and black, so she knew i wasnt racist. i told her that the second people use my race to dismiss my opinion and experiences, it shuts down communication completely, and i see it happening way too often in BLM proponents. then she watched some videos and watched for it. she was honestly surprised at how incredibly frequent it happens. 

the male privilege thing does the same thing way too often. people use it to dismiss the experiences and opinions of men. discussing female privilege has the same risk... that men will use it to dismiss the experiences and opinions of women. 

i gotta give you kudos though. you started this conversation off with the intent to recognize the advantages you have as a result of being female. as you said, its not often people want to talk about their advantages. ill have to chat with my girlfriend about this one. she would probably have a lot of insight on the topic, considering she is a trans woman about to go through GRS in a few days...


----------



## Faithful Wife

@As’laDain 

I was hoping you would ask for her input.


----------



## As'laDain

ill ask if she has any thoughts on the matter, but it might be awhile. she has been super anxious lately...


----------



## Red Sonja

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> The Pence Principle is invaluable in todays workplace.


Great! If only (all) men would practice this principle then maybe I will never get cornered alone in a conference room, at a work party (etc.) ever again. /sarcasm

Not bloody likely.


----------



## MEM2020

My favorite real world experience was with Harry. On paper, he had about the best resume I’d ever seen. 

He came in to run our office - it was my first job out of school so he fooled me for a month or so. 1/3 of the professional staff quit in Harry’s first 8 months. He then made a visit to our HQ in Mountain View. There he met Melissa - the CEOs Executive Assistant. 

I had met Melissa a couple times. She was terrific. Harry sexually harassed her. I don’t know what exactly he did - only that he was fired for cause on the spot. No severance. Which apparently caused his wife to call HR and when she got stonewalled by HR and then legal she figured it out and divorced him. 




Faithful Wife said:


> This is unfortunate and I'm not saying you or anyone deserves this.
> 
> I *do* feel sorry for anyone who is hit with any kind of bogus crap like this you have described.
> 
> I *do not* feel sorry for the average man in the workplace who simply has to be a little more professional. If he chooses to also get all weird and avoid all women completely, that's his choice.


----------



## MEM2020

Normally I don’t take pleasure in the woes of another person. 

I apologize for telling this story backwards. I should have started with this: 

A couple months after he was hired as the VP in charge of the whole office - four of us were sitting in a conference room. Me, Harry, a highly skilled and very immature senior software developer and a functional specialist named Patricia. The senior SW guy started talking some sexual trash to Pat - who was a good person and fully vaccinated against male hijinks. 

Anyway I told the SW guy that there was a company policy on sexual harassment. Then I looked at Harry. Who remained silent. The SW guy kept going since he was senior to me and his boss was clearly - clearly indifferent. After I said that there was a company policy on harassment the third time, Pat just shook her head slightly. Which was code for - it’s pointless don’t bother. 

Anyway by the time of the incident above I had discovered that Harry was a narcissistic jerk. But THAT put him in a special bucket. Which was why I was not alone in my happiness when the Melissa incident happened. 





MEM2020 said:


> My favorite real world experience was with Harry. On paper, he had about the best resume I’d ever seen.
> 
> He came in to run our office - it was my first job out of school so he fooled me for a month or so. 1/3 of the professional staff quit in Harry’s first 8 months. He then made a visit to our HQ in Mountain View. There he met Melissa - the CEOs Executive Assistant.
> 
> I had met Melissa a couple times. She was terrific. Harry sexually harassed her. I don’t know what exactly he did - only that he was fired for cause on the spot. No severance. Which apparently caused his wife to call HR and when she got stonewalled by HR and then legal she figured it out and divorced him.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Marduk said:


> Since 97+% of claims from women are not false allegations, and more than 90+ of the claims are ignored, how about we deal with the problem of men being falsely accused when it actually becomes a large scale problem.
> 
> Not saying it doesn’t happen, but I am saying the issue is so lopsided towards being a problem for women that it strikes me as yet another way that men try to keep all the power and yet have their poor little egos protected.


By what metric or evidence do we come to the conclusion that "90+ of the claims are ignored?"

Everywhere I've been in my entire adult life (and I'm not exactly young here) any claim is immediately addressed and the accused is treated as guilty right from the get-go. Even when he is exonerated, he carries that stigma thereafter.


----------



## uhtred

What is the Pence Principal?

Parkinson's law is quite valuable, as is the Peter principal.




UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> The Pence Principle is invaluable in todays workplace.


----------



## uhtred

One problem with harassment and assault is that there are a large number of claims that while true, cannot be proven. That leaves a tradeoff between punishing the innocent and letting the guilty go free. 

Again surveillance will fix this. Universal surveillance is sort of like nuclear weapons - it can fix a huge range of problems - but tends to create even larger ones.






Marduk said:


> Since 97+% of claims from women are not false allegations, and more than 90+ of the claims are ignored, how about we deal with the problem of men being falsely accused when it actually becomes a large scale problem.
> 
> Not saying it doesn’t happen, but I am saying the issue is so lopsided towards being a problem for women that it strikes me as yet another way that men try to keep all the power and yet have their poor little egos protected.


----------



## Marduk

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> By what metric or evidence do we come to the conclusion that "90+ of the claims are ignored?"
> 
> 
> 
> Everywhere I've been in my entire adult life (and I'm not exactly young here) any claim is immediately addressed and the accused is treated as guilty right from the get-go. Even when he is exonerated, he carries that stigma thereafter.



They are everywhere if you care to look. 

I serve with several groups which deal with such things. 

Take a look. You might be surprised by what you find.


----------



## Marduk

uhtred said:


> One problem with harassment and assault is that there are a large number of claims that while true, cannot be proven. That leaves a tradeoff between punishing the innocent and letting the guilty go free.
> 
> 
> 
> Again surveillance will fix this. Universal surveillance is sort of like nuclear weapons - it can fix a huge range of problems - but tends to create even larger ones.



Surveillance is not the answer. 

Believing victims is. On many levels.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Marduk said:


> uhtred said:
> 
> 
> 
> One problem with harassment and assault is that there are a large number of claims that while true, cannot be proven. That leaves a tradeoff between punishing the innocent and letting the guilty go free.
> 
> 
> 
> Again surveillance will fix this. Universal surveillance is sort of like nuclear weapons - it can fix a huge range of problems - but tends to create even larger ones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surveillance is not the answer.
> 
> Believing victims is. On many levels.
Click to expand...

Which one is the victim?


----------



## wilson

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> By what metric or evidence do we come to the conclusion that "90+ of the claims are ignored?"


I took that more about claims that would be considered things like minor or boorish. For example, a guy may make regular comments about women's appearance, such as nice hair or nice outfit, which are frequently not appreciated. But if women brought those complaints forward, the manager (also a man) might try to minimize the behavior or tell the woman to just accept it. The manager might say something like "Joe is saying you look nice? Well, you do look nice. I don't see the problem with that. Just ignore him."

Lots of people in the workplace are very bad about reading social cues. Even outside of any sort of sexual issue, some people are just clueless. How many times have we be stuck in the hallway as some coworker drones on about some nonsense like what refrigerator to buy? If we went to our manager to say something like "Joe chats too much.", likely that complaint wouldn't go anywhere. The manager wouldn't talk to Joe or anything unless the problem was really blatant and excessive.

So I often feel that if a woman makes a complaint, that complaint is valid even if it seems minor. If the guy was good at reading social cues, there would not be the complaint. For example, he would complement the appearance those women who appreciate those comments, and he would not complement those women who were not receptive. But I also think that the stigma can be sometimes be unfairly severe for the man, since the assumption is often that the offense was something severe rather than clueless or boorish behavior.


----------



## uhtred

Universal surveillance is coming whether we like it or not. (and I don't, but I can't escape it). That will make this next part meaningless. 

"believing victims" is not a simple issue. General belief is fine - If a woman tells me she was assaulted, I believe her. But, if I'm on a jury and about to ruin a man's life, I want more than someone's word. (which I apply to any sort of crime).

For me, "beyond a reasonable doubt" means < 1%, hopefully a lot less. False claims are rare, but I don't think there is evidence that they are that rare. 






Marduk said:


> Surveillance is not the answer.
> 
> Believing victims is. On many levels.


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> Universal surveillance is coming whether we like it or not.


I'm all for it and I can't understand anyone who isn't. If you are law abiding, surveillance can possibly help you OR someone you know by capturing your attacker on video. This is currently happening now and is helping with a lot of cases. I just read one the other day about a man and his lover who plotted to kill his wife, and he was seen in a truck by a camera coming and going to the house where his wife was murdered at that time of day, even though he supposedly had an alibi.


----------



## Marduk

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Which one is the victim?


When a rapist goes free, we all are.

When the system condones and supports their behaviour, we all are.

When we think that's OK... we all are.


----------



## Marduk

uhtred said:


> Universal surveillance is coming whether we like it or not. (and I don't, but I can't escape it). That will make this next part meaningless.
> 
> "believing victims" is not a simple issue. General belief is fine - If a woman tells me she was assaulted, I believe her. But, if I'm on a jury and about to ruin a man's life, I want more than someone's word. (which I apply to any sort of crime).
> 
> For me, "beyond a reasonable doubt" means < 1%, hopefully a lot less. False claims are rare, but I don't think there is evidence that they are that rare.


Again, acknowledge the bias.

The woman's life was ruined. And yet you jump to the defence of the guy that did it "just in case."

Systemic bias against women.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Well, here's a potential "on the other hand" I'm sure I'm not alone in.

I get touched on the shoulders and arms all the time by females, even patted on my (flat) stomach. New meets, existing co-workers, same.

None if the guys touch me the same way.

Now, it never ever dawned on me to "say something" much less bring it to a manager.

It's a non-issue, so why try and make a big deal about it.

No, I'm not saying it's ok to do the same to a female, but it apparently does ho both ways but a guy wouldn't bring it up without trepidation about doing so.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Why is it the NYT had to "retreat, and clarify", and remove their tweets about Kavanaugh this past weekend?

Because they use bad information to slander Kavanaugh in a big way for political future use, the left quickly jumped on, yet NYT had to admit they were in error.

Too late, created another big hoopla with tremendous negatives for a man's reputation.


----------



## Marduk

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Well, here's a potential "on the other hand" I'm sure I'm not alone in.
> 
> I get touched on the shoulders and arms all the time by females, even patted on my (flat) stomach. New meets, existing co-workers, same.
> 
> None if the guys touch me the same way.
> 
> Now, it never ever dawned on me to "say something" much less bring it to a manager.
> 
> It's a non-issue, so why try and make a big deal about it.
> 
> No, I'm not saying it's ok to do the same to a female, but it apparently does ho both ways but a guy wouldn't bring it up without trepidation about doing so.


It may be a non-issue to you, and that's your right because it's your body. You get to control access to it.

It may be a big issue to others, including women, and that should be their right to make it an issue, because it's their body.

That is the whole point.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Nowhere did I disagree with the fact a woman shouldn't be improperly addressed or touched, but highlighting it can go both ways.

Just for arguements sake, bear in mind some women use their sexuality for career advancement. It does indeed happen.


----------



## Marduk

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Nowhere did I disagree with the fact a woman shouldn't be improperly addressed or touched, but highlighting it can go both ways.
> 
> Just for arguements sake, bear in mind some women use their sexuality for career advancement. It does indeed happen.


So do some men. I know I've charmed a few female executives in my time. What does that have to do with anything?


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

It has to do with my being entertained by your stating the obvious in what would be the best, though you really should add "in a perfect world" to comments.

I'm trying to get some "in the world we have, here are some practical steps to get closer to best possible" comments.

Not "universal surveillance will solve all our problems" type comments. Without acknowledging universal surveillance (insert idea here) will add unique problems to solve, but here are those solutions...in a practical way, etc.

You have a good mind and I believe good intentions and some thoughts I agree with but can flesh out good ideas integration with trw a bit more. 

No harm no foul. Just interesting conversation.


----------



## Red Sonja

MEM2020 said:


> A couple months after he was hired as the VP in charge of the whole office - four of us were sitting in a conference room. Me, Harry, a highly skilled and very immature senior software developer and a functional specialist named Patricia. The senior SW guy started talking some sexual trash to Pat - who was a good person and *fully vaccinated against male hijinks*.


Yeah, me too ... fully vaccinated.

This has happened to me so many times in my career that I lose count. 

I am not easily offended (especially by these types of idiots) however I have almost zero-tolerance for bull**** at work. The way I always handled this type of nonsense was to stand up and say “Let me know when the frat-party is over and we’ll have our meeting” and then walk out.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Well, here's a potential "on the other hand" I'm sure I'm not alone in.
> 
> I get touched on the shoulders and arms all the time by females, even patted on my (flat) stomach. New meets, existing co-workers, same.
> 
> None if the guys touch me the same way.
> 
> Now, it never ever dawned on me to "say something" much less bring it to a manager.
> 
> It's a non-issue, so why try and make a big deal about it.
> 
> No, I'm not saying it's ok to do the same to a female, but it apparently does ho both ways but a guy wouldn't bring it up without trepidation about doing so.


This happens to my exh all the time, and he quickly moves away from them before they can touch him because he feels it isn’t appropriate and he doesn’t want strangers touching him. If a woman kept trying after he made it clear he doesn’t want her to, he would definitely go to HR, with no trepidation.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> Hey gang. This might be a tough one to talk about without flames flying...but I would like to try.
> 
> This kind of goes along with my empathy for men threads.
> 
> I assume we all know what male privilege is, whether or not we agree it exists or understand it. I think most people have their own ideas about it.
> 
> Do you know what female privilege is?
> 
> Ironically, I learned the most about female privilege from a trans woman. She was a man until age 40 or so when she then faced and realized her true gender, she transitioned into living as a woman, and then she had GRS. She reported to me the difference in how she was treated when she was a man and then as a woman. She also told me that in the trans community this is understood and talked about a lot.
> 
> Some examples of female privilege:
> 
> *Common courtesies that are not given to men, such as opening doors for women or allowing them to have your seat when no other seats are available.
> 
> *The assumption that females are more righteous, more kind and more nurturing than men and treating women with this assumption in different ways than we treat men.
> 
> *Protection of women and children by men, physically and in other ways, when same protection is not afforded to men. Men are expected to protect themselves.
> 
> *The assumption that women are better parents than men and women are treated accordingly.
> 
> *Women are afforded more empathy than men are, in general.
> 
> *Women are assumed to not be sexual predators or rapists, even though some of them are (in enough numbers to be a danger to society).
> 
> As a feminist, I've come across a bit of backlash about this before. But I think it is important to know where I have privilege where others do not so that I can try to extend that privilege further than myself. To me, although men may have privilege that I don't have, I'm not going to get hung up on that because there is nothing I can do about it. I think maybe the best thing I can do is acknowledge my own privilege.
> 
> Honestly, without decent men, women could not survive and thrive. Although so many of us have had no help from men per se, have been assaulted and traumatized and so on, I understand why a woman who has experienced that would feel she has no privilege. But in the bigger picture, I still believe it is true that generally, men protect women, they (physically) build everything in our infra-structures, and they are the only ones who have the power to protect us from indecent men.
> 
> Women are capable of everything men are capable of, including building all the roads - - it would just take us longer if suddenly there were no men doing this. We would have to change the way machinery is made so that it would be less difficult for us to use. I fully believe this and know we could survive if we had to.
> 
> But I also recognize that it is a privilege that I don't have to try to do those things, because men already do them and are so good at it.
> 
> If this goes off the rails, I apologize and hope mods will just shut it down. *But I honestly love and have empathy for both men and women*, while I also see and acknowledge the different types of privilege we have.
> 
> Having doors opened for you may not be any big deal and some women may wish men didn't hold doors for them. I understand that position, but it is still true that men hold doors for us because they want to be courteous to us in a way that they are normally not courteous to each other. This matters to me and I appreciate the sentiment.
> 
> Ladies, if this rubs you the wrong way I'm happy to expand on my thoughts. I'm not saying we should do anything differently, and I know some of you have never been privileged in this way. Again, it is less about individuals and more about the bigger picture and what happens en masse.


This is a very well-known effect in psychology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_are_wonderful_effect


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> @uhtred or anyone...
> 
> Is there a better word than privilege to describe the list I made in my OP?
> 
> As I understand the word, it means benefits you receive due to something you have or who you are that you did not earn.
> 
> So in the case of wealth, being born into a wealthy family allows that child privileges they did not “earn”.
> 
> People can rightly make the case that even a born wealthy child can go on and earn their own wealth that had nothing to do with their birthright of wealth. Also people born wealthy can be disinherited or can reject or give away their wealth.
> 
> But the original birthright to that wealth was there, and for the most part it would seem people like this will have lots of privileges that others will never have because they were not born into it.
> 
> Also a person born poor can of course create their own wealth from scratch and many do. Unfortunately they may then be treated as if they were given the wealth if others assume they had wealthy parents. @ReformedHubby who has self made wealth has described to me how some people get really weird about his money and treat him as if he didn’t earn it or that he somehow doesn’t deserve it.
> 
> So again, is there another word that works better?
> 
> Also, privilege does not mean the person necessarily had a good life due to their privilege.


I think "privilege" is a good word for what you are describing.


----------



## tech-novelist

MEM2020 said:


> Yes
> 
> And the gender pay gap in sports is big to enormous depending on the sport.


It depends on how big the audience is for each sport.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> I guess to me it seems like most people want to talk only about their disadvantages and they don’t even acknowledge their advantages. In a case like yours, it honestly sounds like you may have never had any true advantages, other than a sharp mind. So I can understand where you are coming from. But others who certainly have advantages don’t seem willing to discuss them. They just want to discuss the disadvantages.
> 
> Which makes me wonder, is no one appreciative of their advantages at all? It just doesn’t seem like something people want to discuss. Like I said in your case you sound like you honestly didn’t have any so I get why there’s nothing to be appreciative about. But we certainly all know people who are greatly advantaged.


I appreciate the advantages I had when growing up.

They were not financial. When I was a child, my mother told me that we weren't poor, we just didn't have any money.

I went to an expensive school, but it was on a scholarship plus a work-study grant and loans (that I paid back).

My greatest advantages probably were:
1. My mother was a tireless advocate for me and against anyone who would disrespect me or hassle me.
2. My IQ is about 4 SD above average, which makes most intellectual problems easy for me. (This was also a disadvantage at times in school due to bullying by other students and even teachers.)

I have had a great life and still have meaningful work to do.


----------



## Marduk

tech-novelist said:


> I appreciate the advantages I had when growing up.
> 
> 
> 
> They were not financial. When I was a child, my mother told me that we weren't poor, we just didn't have any money.
> 
> 
> 
> I went to an expensive school, but it was on a scholarship plus a work-study grant and loans (that I paid back).
> 
> 
> 
> My greatest advantages probably were:
> 
> 1. My mother was a tireless advocate for me and against anyone who would disrespect me or hassle me.
> 
> 2. My IQ is about 4 SD above average, which makes most intellectual problems easy for me. (This was also a disadvantage at times in school due to bullying by other students and even teachers.)
> 
> 
> 
> I have had a great life and still have meaningful work to do.



Wow, we had very similar upbringings. 

Thanks for sharing this.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Can anyone explain to me what would be wrong or bad about having surveillance everywhere or nearly everywhere in public? What is the downside?


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> You know by now what I think of you. Do you honestly think I value your opinion on this or any subject at this point? But of course, you are free to say what you want here and you’re going to do exactly that.
> 
> I am not going to respond to your points anymore because I’m not going to get myself banned over your nonsense.
> 
> I still hope the men at TAM will call you out when you say some of the horrible things you say, but it won’t be me doing it anymore.
> 
> Buh bye.


I hope you know me well enough not to think that I'm being misogynistic when I say the following:

If I were to go back to an office environment these days, I would make certain never to be alone with a woman. This is not because I have ever been accused of inappropriate conduct, but because the current environment is so hazardous for men.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm all for it and I can't understand anyone who isn't. If you are law abiding, surveillance can possibly help you OR someone you know by capturing your attacker on video. This is currently happening now and is helping with a lot of cases. I just read one the other day about a man and his lover who plotted to kill his wife, and he was seen in a truck by a camera coming and going to the house where his wife was murdered at that time of day, even though he supposedly had an alibi.


Imagine a future society in which being LGBT is illegal.
Are you still in favor of total surveillance?


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Marduk said:


> They are everywhere if you care to look.


Maybe where you live. 

I thought people were better behaved in Canada? (that was not a snark, it was genuinely sincere)


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Imagine a future society in which being LGBT is illegal.
> Are you still in favor of total surveillance?


Um....I have no idea how or why this is relevant. Can you not explain why it would be a bad thing right now, the way things are?


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Can anyone explain to me what would be wrong or bad about having surveillance everywhere or nearly everywhere in public? What is the downside?



A reasonable expectation of privacy.


----------



## Marduk

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Maybe where you live.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought people were better behaved in Canada? (that was not a snark, it was genuinely sincere)




We’re just as bad as anybody else. 

We just tend to apologize about it more.


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> I hope you know me well enough not to think that I'm being misogynistic when I say the following:
> 
> If I were to go back to an office environment these days, I would make certain never to be alone with a woman. This is not because I have ever been accused of inappropriate conduct, but because the current environment is so hazardous for men.


Tech, do you honestly think women don’t actually ever face sexual harassment and that all charges are false?

Can you answer without pointing back to false charges?


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> Um....I have no idea how or why this is relevant. Can you not explain why it would be a bad thing right now, the way things are?


Because once it is in place it would be almost impossible to get rid of it.
That's why it's relevant.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> A reasonable expectation of privacy.


If you are in public, privacy to do what?


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Because once it is in place it would be almost impossible to get rid of it.
> That's why it's relevant.


Since I don’t see it as a bad thing, not getting rid of it still doesn’t make it unwanted, for me.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> Tech, do you honestly think women don’t actually ever face sexual harassment and that all charges are false?
> 
> Can you answer without pointing back to false charges?


Of course women do face sexual harassment; I've never maintained otherwise. If a man is guilty, he should be punished appropriately.

But surely you agree that there are false accusations as well.

Such accusations can destroy a man's career and there is no penalty for the false accuser even if the false accusation is uncovered.

Obviously the person most at risk of a false accusation is the innocent man.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> Since I don’t see it as a bad thing, not getting rid of it still doesn’t make it unwanted, for me.


Even if you know that it could be used against you in the future?
Okay.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Marduk said:


> We’re just as bad as anybody else.
> 
> We just tend to apologize about it more.


I know. I have a Canadian friend who is always sharing stories of corporate greed and government corruption in Canada, especially in and around BC/Vancouver where he's from. I'm actually over being shocked at this point. 

But at least from my travels, it seems like the gen pop is significantly nicer/better behaved than us Yanks.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> If you are in public, privacy to do what?



Let’s say I’m walking into a sex shop, a swingers event, or imbibing in legal cannabis and don’t generally want that known simply because it’s not your business?


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Of course women do face sexual harassment; I've never maintained otherwise. If a man is guilty, he should be punished appropriately.
> 
> But surely you agree that there are false accusations as well.
> 
> Such accusations can destroy a man's career and there is no penalty for the false accuser even if the false accusation is uncovered.
> 
> Obviously the person most at risk of a false accusation is the innocent man.


I don’t actually believe the false charges are as prevalent as some of you seem to assume, and I do believe that harassment happens much more than some of you seem to assume.

If women whined about actual harassment they have experienced here as much as men whine about potential false charges, it would get old, even to me. And the false charges narrative is so whined about that I am really tired of hearing it.

There was one guy on this thread who shared HIS OWN actual story of false charges. I don’t mind when men share their own actual stories. I just wish the rest of the men would stop throwing it around.

It would be great for you guys to make a thread about false charges, which I have already asked. Then you can all discuss it in one place, and I for one would not go to that thread to deny any of you your fears. You could all discuss the things you do to protect yourselves and so on.

I’m not denying that you guys feel fear. You get to fear whatever you want.

It’s just that you don’t seem to ever acknowledge the real charges and the creeps who lose their jobs because they should have.

So in that light, why do you guys think we want to discuss the false charges? I get that some of you guys definitely want to discuss it. But what’s the point of discussing it with women? It always comes across like “because of you lying trashy women poor men are victims once again”. And again, meanwhile you don’t seem to ever discuss the actual non false charges. So again....why exactly talk to women about it?


----------



## Marduk

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> I know. I have a Canadian friend who is always sharing stories of corporate greed and government corruption in Canada, especially in and around BC/Vancouver where he's from. I'm actually over being shocked at this point.
> 
> 
> 
> But at least from my travels, it seems like the gen pop is significantly nicer/better behaved than us Yanks.



Lol, my old boss is European and she used to say Canadians aren’t nice... they’re just polite while they punch you in the face. And then apologize afterward.


----------



## uhtred

First - I think there are some huge upsides to universal surveillance. I think it would greatly reduce a variety of crimes, especially sex crimes. That really is good.

So, the downsides - I see a few:

We still have a society were people are judged badly for things that are actually legal, and are allowed to get away with things that are illegal. Consider the effects on a male political candidate who it is revealed likes to cross dress for sex. Or consider the financial impact of receiving tickets for every time you exceeded the speed limit in the last 5 years. (The corollary of this, they they can be used as threats to compel behavior). 

A full data base of peoples behavior and interactions online and offline could be a very dangerous weapon in a coup. It would be possible to identify the majority of "trouble makers" and their friends, as opposed to those who would go along meekly (the great majority). The trouble makers could be rounded up as a first step.

Depending on who had access to the data base it could be used to blackmail politicians.


Another issues is that it would be essentially permanent. Its easy to forget that society's ideas of what is acceptable behavior change with time There is a great risk in the ability judge people based on their behavior decades ago. Sometimes old movies are fascinating because they often reveal very different attitudes to a variety of things. 

Finally I worry about machine learning crunching on the data and determining who is "likely" to commit crimes. It would likely be right the majority of the time, but not always. People could find themselves denied jobs, investigated by the police etc because there (completely legal) behavior happened to match a pattern common among a certain type of criminal. Think of a greatly expanded equivalent of the no-fly list. 


None of that matters. Its happening now, and the public is not sufficiently concerned to stop it. 





Faithful Wife said:


> Can anyone explain to me what would be wrong or bad about having surveillance everywhere or nearly everywhere in public? What is the downside?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Let’s say I’m walking into a sex shop, a swingers event, or imbibing in legal cannabis and don’t generally want that known simply because it’s not your business?


Well I hope you realize, there ARE already cameras at every sex shop, pot shop, and swingers events. They must have these for the security of the patrons and employees.

I have personally done all three and could give a rip who has my image on camera. In fact, if I see the camera, I wink at it and blow it a kiss on my way in. :x


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> First - I think there are some huge upsides to universal surveillance. I think it would greatly reduce a variety of crimes, especially sex crimes. That really is good.
> 
> So, the downsides - I see a few:
> 
> We still have a society were people are judged badly for things that are actually legal, and are allowed to get away with things that are illegal. Consider the effects on a male political candidate who it is revealed likes to cross dress for sex. Or consider the financial impact of receiving tickets for every time you exceeded the speed limit in the last 5 years. (The corollary of this, they they can be used as threats to compel behavior).
> 
> A full data base of peoples behavior and interactions online and offline could be a very dangerous weapon in a coup. It would be possible to identify the majority of "trouble makers" and their friends, as opposed to those who would go along meekly (the great majority). The trouble makers could be rounded up as a first step.
> 
> Depending on who had access to the data base it could be used to blackmail politicians.
> 
> 
> Another issues is that it would be essentially permanent. Its easy to forget that society's ideas of what is acceptable behavior change with time There is a great risk in the ability judge people based on their behavior decades ago. Sometimes old movies are fascinating because they often reveal very different attitudes to a variety of things.
> 
> Finally I worry about machine learning crunching on the data and determining who is "likely" to commit crimes. It would likely be right the majority of the time, but not always. People could find themselves denied jobs, investigated by the police etc because there (completely legal) behavior happened to match a pattern common among a certain type of criminal. Think of a greatly expanded equivalent of the no-fly list.
> 
> 
> None of that matters. Its happening now, and the public is not sufficiently concerned to stop it.


Well as an official member of “the public”, I say bring it on.


----------



## As'laDain

these discussions always make me cringe...

reminds me of some experiences from when i was studying arabic at the defense language institute. one day, one of our military language instructors just stopped showing up to teach class. then we had CID come in and one buy one interview everyone in the class, asking if we had ever seen anything inappropriate from the MLI, and specifically about his interactions with a particular female soldier. long story short, she made some allegations against him that were proven false in order to get him switched out for another military language instructor because he did not recommend that her chain of command put her in a 10 week post class. they only put people in that class when they are REALLY close to passing, but missed it by a few points. she absolutely bombed it... the command moved her to a different school and put her in the post class anyway. she failed it again when she retested. i later found out the investigation ruled the complaint "unfounded". meaning, it was false. 

later on, when she was forced to pick a different MOS and went to AIT, she filed another complaint against her AIT platoon sergeant. a female coworker of mine who i work with today was in her same class and told me the story... she filed the complaint after receiving a counseling for showing up to work an hour late. how did my coworker know? she was the soldiers battle buddy. in TRADOC, a student cannot talk to a cadre by themselves. they ALWAYS have to have a battle buddy. this is to protect both the soldier and the cadre. in this case, my coworker relayed, during the investigation, the threat that the other soldier made to the cadre of filing a complaint if he wrote her up. what did the company do? they switched platoon sergeants around. 

after i got to my next unit, i was interviewed again. same student, different military language instructor. apparently, she filed complaints against both of our male MLI's, but it took so long to get to the second one that they had to track us down in different units. 

i recently re-enlisted. one of the positions i was offered was Military Language Instructor at DLI. i remembered that story and called down there to get a feel for how the MLI's were faring. i hope i never go there. of the 12 i talked to, the only two that had not received SHARP related accusations, or at least been accused of inappropriate relationships with female students, were the two brand new ones who had not started teaching yet. 

this all happened back in 2013-14, back when Obama declared that fighting sexual harassment and assault was our number one mission in the army, more important than the fight in Afghanistan, so people were running around losing their heads a lot. i remember three different incidents where all of the males in my company were pulled aside and lectured because someone, somewhere, didnt like a sexist joke someone made. i found those lectures to be fairly pointless because they wouldnt tell us anything about the actual incident... where it happend, who made the joke, who was offended by it, etc. they certainly did tell us that we, as men, had failed to create a safe work environment for our females. i probably would have cared a lot more about those lectures if i had any clue what i could actually do about it. as it was, they wouldnt tell us where the problem actually was.

i know false allegations is a hot bed topic, but... well, its one of those things i usually have to make a mental effort not to think about. i have seen its affects... another example would be my uncle. he came back home from overseas when he was in the navy and met my aunt because my grandparents were fostering. my aunt and uncle decided to foster kids as well, they had a passion for that kind of thing. well, a girl they were fostering didnt like my uncle throwing away her weed, so she filed a false report against him, one she redacted less than a year later. my aunt was present that night and saw everything that happened... she is the one who told me the story. he lost everything, and committed suicide a couple years later. 

yes, rape and sexual assault are huge problems. but convicting people, or assuming they are guilty without evidence, is NOT the way to go about solving that problem. 

i think the Amy is doing the best they can by simply moving people around when they are falsely accused. i think they could probably do more to discourage false allegations, but if i ever see the Army re-enacting the salem witch trials, ill get out. 

ultimately, i dont think there can ever be a perfect solution. there will always be too many unknowns. we should always seek to improve, but recognize that we are striving for an ideal that may not be able to exist.


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Even if you know that it could be used against you in the future?
> Okay.


It could also help me if I or anyone I loved were assaulted or abducted. 

I’m not worried about anything being held against me. If I break the law, I deserve to get caught.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Well I hope you realize, there ARE already cameras at every sex shop, pot shop, and swingers events. They must have these for the security of the patrons and employees.
> 
> I have personally done all three and could give a rip who has my image on camera. In fact, if I see the camera, I wink at it and blow it a kiss on my way in. :x



And that’s good and that’s you. And surprises me not at all. 

That might not be everybody else, and that’s the problem. 

There’s a big difference between a camera inside at a store, say, and a camera sitting out front - you opt into the store’s camera by walking in the door. You don’t get an option to opt out of ones monitoring public places.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> It could also help me if I or anyone I loved were assaulted or abducted.
> 
> 
> 
> I’m not worried about anything being held against me. If I break the law, I deserve to get caught.



If you’re in America I’d be pretty worried if I were you. Some of the Supreme Court nominations recently are terrifying.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> And that’s good and that’s you. And surprises me not at all.
> 
> That might not be everybody else, and that’s the problem.
> 
> There’s a big difference between a camera inside at a store, say, and a camera sitting out front - you opt into the store’s camera by walking in the door. You don’t get an option to opt out of ones monitoring public places.


I’m still not understanding. These stores are called on all the time when a crime occurs anywhere near the entrance, and the surveillance is turned over to police because many times the street can be seen far away and the all sides of the door. Other stores, banks, parking lots, are the same. If police need to see the footage, they will get the footage.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> I don’t actually believe the false charges are as prevalent as some of you seem to assume, and I do believe that harassment happens much more than some of you seem to assume.
> 
> If women whined about actual harassment they have experienced here as much as men whine about potential false charges, it would get old, even to me. And the false charges narrative is so whined about that I am really tired of hearing it.
> 
> There was one guy on this thread who shared HIS OWN actual story of false charges. I don’t mind when men share their own actual stories. I just wish the rest of the men would stop throwing it around.
> 
> It would be great for you guys to make a thread about false charges, which I have already asked. Then you can all discuss it in one place, and I for one would not go to that thread to deny any of you your fears. You could all discuss the things you do to protect yourselves and so on.
> 
> I’m not denying that you guys feel fear. You get to fear whatever you want.
> 
> It’s just that you don’t seem to ever acknowledge the real charges and the creeps who lose their jobs because they should have.


I specifically acknowledged that there are real charges in the post of mine that you quoted, and that men who are guilty should be punished appropriately.

But it's your thread and you should decide what is appropriate to discuss.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> If you’re in America I’d be pretty worried if I were you. Some of the Supreme Court nominations recently are terrifying.


Yes, of course.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I’m still not understanding. These stores are called on all the time when a crime occurs anywhere near the entrance, and the surveillance is turned over to police because many times the street can be seen far away and the all sides of the door. Other stores, banks, parking lots, are the same. If police need to see the footage, they will get the footage.



My point is that by walking through the door of a sex shop I’m consenting to whatever rules are in place there, including being recorded. 

By walking out my front door, I’m not sure I’m consenting to being recorded everywhere I go. 

To extend your logic, everyone’s email, private conversations, phone records, and posting history should be accessible to law enforcement at all times. Is that the case?

The panopticon?


----------



## uhtred

(this is about universal surveillance)

Many would agree with you.


It may depend on how likely you think it is that an extreme government of one form or the other could end up in power. With the current split in US politics, there is a strong sense of the"other side" being evil. I could imagine the government that comes to power using this to try to crush their enemies. Think McCarthyism, or its liberal mirror, with the ability to know what everyone has done all of the time in the past. 

Just think of the things posted on this site being made public and identified with real names. Consider the porn watching / erotica reading habits of people being revealed. Could the public really deal with learning that a female presidential candidate enjoyed watching well endowed black male porn?

Keep in mind that a lot of sex crimes happen in private places like bedrooms, so for this to be effective at stopping those, it needs to be quite universal.

Personally I think the disadvantages substantially outweigh the advantages, but I do recognize the advantages. 












Faithful Wife said:


> Well as an official member of “the public”, I say bring it on.


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> I specifically acknowledged that there are real charges in the post of mine that you quoted, and that men who are guilty should be punished appropriately.
> 
> But it's your thread and you should decide what is appropriate to discuss.


I would just like to not have to discuss false charges, and wish men would open a thread about it where they are free to examine the topic.

I wish when women talked about harassment, men would not come in and talk about false charges. When they do, it always looks like they are dismissing actual charges and just want to be victims themselves.

If men would make a separate post to discuss, it would be much easier for them to gain the empathy they are apparently after.

I don’t care if men don’t want to discuss actual harassment, but always bringing up false charges in response is just weird.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> My point is that by walking through the door of a sex shop I’m consenting to whatever rules are in place there, including being recorded.
> 
> By walking out my front door, I’m not sure I’m consenting to being recorded everywhere I go.
> 
> To extend your logic, everyone’s email, private conversations, phone records, and posting history should be accessible to law enforcement at all times. Is that the case?
> 
> The panopticon?


Well yes, if you are accused of certain crimes, all of your digital footprint will be accessible to law enforcement.


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> Can anyone explain to me what would be wrong or bad about having surveillance everywhere or nearly everywhere in public? What is the downside?


i dont see many downsides to it. thats kinda what the army already institutes in TRADOC, they just do it the most practical way possible... always have at least two junior soldiers in the presence of a cadre member, and always have at least two of each when conducting any kind of business where people might get upset. counselings, in particular. 

i dont think most organizations have to deal with the same level of false accusations as TRADOC units do. i have never seen one in any regular unit, but after seeing what i did in TRADOC, i dont really want to ever serve in a TRADOC unit...


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Well yes, if you are accused of certain crimes, all of your digital footprint will be accessible to law enforcement.




Who watches the watchers?


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> (this is about universal surveillance)
> 
> Many would agree with you.
> 
> 
> It may depend on how likely you think it is that an extreme government of one form or the other could end up in power. With the current split in US politics, there is a strong sense of the"other side" being evil. I could imagine the government that comes to power using this to try to crush their enemies. Think McCarthyism, or its liberal mirror, with the ability to know what everyone has done all of the time in the past.
> 
> Just think of the things posted on this site being made public and identified with real names. Consider the porn watching / erotica reading habits of people being revealed. Could the public really deal with learning that a female presidential candidate enjoyed watching well endowed black male porn?
> 
> Keep in mind that a lot of sex crimes happen in private places like bedrooms, so for this to be effective at stopping those, it needs to be quite universal.
> 
> Personally I think the disadvantages substantially outweigh the advantages, but I do recognize the advantages.


I should have guessed that the porn we watch is what most people are actually worried about their privacy for, lol.

I’m discussing public surveillance on streets, not computers.


----------



## As'laDain

i do want to say this...

i have seen more unreported instances than false accusations. hell, i have experienced several that i never reported...


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Who watches the watchers?


I just don’t think like this. I’m not afraid of anyone in law enforcement being able to find out what I was doing on a street corner, and I am happy that in some cases this could help find my body if I was dragged into a van. My family would appreciate at least knowing who killed me. I’m not all hung up on if they would also see me scratch my ass or pick my nose or watch porn on my phone.


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> I just don’t think like this. I’m not afraid of anyone in law enforcement being able to find out what I was doing on a street corner, and I am happy that in some cases this could help find my body if I was dragged into a van. My family would appreciate at least knowing who killed me. I’m not all hung up on if they would also see me scratch my ass or pick my nose or watch porn on my phone.


Thats pretty much how i see it. 

In my job, i REALLY wish they would put recording devices in our work place so that they can hold people accountable... but, that would require the creation of an entirely new MOS with a whole bunch of people who would have to have TS clearances. OR, as i suggested to our regimental commander, create an appointed duty for our own guys that already possess TS clearances. Then, when footage and audio needs to be reviewed from inside a secure facility, they already know who can review it and relay facts to the investigation. 

Its a lot of red tape to cut through because of the sensitive nature of our jobs.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> I just don’t think like this. I’m not afraid of anyone in law enforcement being able to find out what I was doing on a street corner, and I am happy that in some cases this could help find my body if I was dragged into a van. My family would appreciate at least knowing who killed me. I’m not all hung up on if they would also see me scratch my ass or pick my nose or watch porn on my phone.




Sure, but what about the Gay kid that hasn’t come out?

What about family companies that would fire you if they knew you were smoking weed?

What if you just didn’t want anybody to know something?

You don’t have to do anything wrong to want privacy. 

And if I’m remembering my philosophy correctly, “who watches the watchers” was a fundamental flaw with the panopticon.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Sure, but what about the Gay kid that hasn’t come out?
> 
> What about family companies that would fire you if they knew you were smoking weed?
> 
> What if you just didn’t want anybody to know something?
> 
> You don’t have to do anything wrong to want privacy.
> 
> And if I’m remembering my philosophy correctly, “who watches the watchers” was a fundamental flaw with the panopticon.


It seems like you are assuming there would be someone there watching the footage all day long everywhere. That’s not how it works. They pull it up if they need to because a crime has occurred and they hope to find clues from it.

No one has time to actually sit and watch 24 hours a day surveillance and no one is paid to do that.

If I am in public, there is nothing I don’t want anyone to know, in fact, I would feel much safer if “someone” did know where I am. Currently, no one would even know I am missing because if I didn’t come home, no one would know this until the next day when I don’t turn up at work. Too late by then.


----------



## As'laDain

Marduk said:


> Sure, but what about the Gay kid that hasn’t come out?
> 
> What about family companies that would fire you if they knew you were smoking weed?
> 
> What if you just didn’t want anybody to know something?
> 
> You don’t have to do anything wrong to want privacy.
> 
> And if I’m remembering my philosophy correctly, “who watches the watchers” was a fundamental flaw with the panopticon.


thats an excellent example to highlight how we live in an imperfect world... its always a give and take.


----------



## As'laDain

Faithful Wife said:


> It seems like you are assuming there would be someone there watching the footage all day long everywhere. That’s not how it works. They pull it up if they need to because a crime has occurred and they hope to find clues from it.
> 
> No one has time to actually sit and watch 24 hours a day surveillance and no one is paid to do that.
> 
> If I am in public, there is nothing I don’t want anyone to know, in fact, I would feel much safer if “someone” did know where I am. Currently, no one would even know I am missing because if I didn’t come home, no one would know this until the next day when I don’t turn up at work. Too late by then.


they wouldnt review the footage until you didnt show up the next day... 

but i guess they would at least have a lead once they did.


----------



## Faithful Wife

As'laDain said:


> they wouldnt review the footage until you didnt show up the next day...
> 
> but i guess they would at least have a lead once they did.


Right so that at least my family may get some peace of mind.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> Sure, but what about the Gay kid that hasn’t come out?


Their fears are ruling their life.



Marduk said:


> What about family companies that would fire you if they knew you were smoking weed?


That person needs to find a new job that works for them and thus everyone else.



Marduk said:


> What if you just didn’t want anybody to know something?


You haven't yet overcome your fears.



Marduk said:


> You don’t have to do anything wrong to want privacy.


Fear is a terrible thing to hang your hat on.



Marduk said:


> And if I’m remembering my philosophy correctly, “who watches the watchers” was a fundamental flaw with the panopticon.


There's only one watcher.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Their fears are ruling their life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That person needs to find a new job that works for them and thus everyone else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You haven't yet overcome your fears.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fear is a terrible thing to hang your hat on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's only one watcher.



None of those decisions are anybody’s but theirs. And that’s the point. 

None of it will work anyway, unless everybody’s homes - including their bedrooms - are also under surveillance. 

Most victims of sexual assault know and trust their attacker, and it usually happens in either her home or his.


----------



## As'laDain

Marduk said:


> *Sure, but what about the Gay kid that hasn’t come out?
> *
> What about family companies that would fire you if they knew you were smoking weed?
> 
> What if you just didn’t want anybody to know something?
> 
> You don’t have to do anything wrong to want privacy.
> 
> And if I’m remembering my philosophy correctly, “who watches the watchers” was a fundamental flaw with the panopticon.


Hmm... 

You got me thinking with the bolded question. Polyamory is still against the rules in the army. Right now, its more or less a don't ask don't tell thing, but its never been written into policy. And, if this were 2009, i could get kicked out based on the old DADT policy because the person i am involved with is phenotypically male. I probably wouldn't get in trouble for polyamory unless i admitted to having sex with someone other than my wife. 

My girlfriend looks and sounds female, so i personally dont feel any issues with being attracted to her, but i get your point. 

Like i said, there really aren't any perfect solutions...

I have learned some pretty good policy ideas from my time in the army though. They arent perfect, but i think they work better than our current legal system. 


Just throwing this out there... about 1 in 4 accusations are found to be unfounded in the department of defense. So false accusations ARE a problem, but they represent only a quarter of all cases. 

So, i do like the way the army does things a lot more than our current civilian legal system.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> None of it will work anyway.


Now you are on to something. Keep following that thought process. What will work?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> None of those decisions are anybody’s but theirs. And that’s the point.
> 
> None of it will work anyway, unless everybody’s homes - including their bedrooms - are also under surveillance.
> 
> Most victims of sexual assault know and trust their attacker, and it usually happens in either her home or his.


Totally agree that most assault occurs out of public. But I still want public surveillance because I feel it protects us all and that any loss of privacy is still lost by simply going out in public anyway. People can film you, follow you around, creep you, or what ever. And lots and lots of public and private surveillance cameras are already there. Every step you take in any mall is being recorded. That’s already happening and possible to happen to anyone the minute they step outside. So it would seem that people who are super wrapped up in having their privacy should already be worried.


----------



## As'laDain

ugh... 

that moment when you want to explain how people might be able to understand you but you doubt anyone would believe you anyway...

frustrating is not the right word.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

As'laDain said:


> ugh...
> 
> that moment when you want to explain how people might be able to understand you but you doubt anyone would believe you anyway...
> 
> frustrating is not the right word.


Fear is the right word. Let it go. Try us. If not here, go to my thread and post it. I'll listen and do my best to understand. I have no reason not to believe you.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Now you are on to something. Keep following that thought process. What will work?




I wish I knew.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Totally agree that most assault occurs out of public. But I still want public surveillance because I feel it protects us all and that any loss of privacy is still lost by simply going out in public anyway. People can film you, follow you around, creep you, or what ever. And lots and lots of public and private surveillance cameras are already there. Every step you take in any mall is being recorded. That’s already happening and possible to happen to anyone the minute they step outside. So it would seem that people who are super wrapped up in having their privacy should already be worried.




I’m mostly with you but wanted to provide a contrarian viewpoint.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> I wish I knew.


Signed consent forms would help, but I always get laughed out of town when I say that.


----------



## As'laDain

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Fear is the right word. Let it go. Try us. If not here, go to my thread and post it. I'll listen and do my best to understand. I have no reason not to believe you.


i recently found out im a medical anomaly, so i see things different. split brain, split person split body, just... split. 

it explains a LOT about my life, everything from (false) seizures as a child to the way i emotionally respond to things. addictions, sleep disorders, lots of things. 

i dont feel like chatting any more about it here. this thread has kinda burnt me out.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> I wish I knew.


You already touched on it. Keep following that thought. What if? All the what ifs you listed, how are we trying to solve them? Fear based solutions. What are we doing to keep these fear based solutions from happening? Injecting our own fears. 

What if.... what if we just opened ourselves completely with one another? What if we all overcame that fear? What if we worked tirelessly to make a connection with everyone we come in contact with? Could be something as small as a smile as you pass one another. What would happen if we exposed our fears to each other? Made those connections. What would happen? What if we could overcome fear...


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Totally agree that most assault occurs out of public. But I still want public surveillance because I feel it protects us all and that any loss of privacy is still lost by simply going out in public anyway. People can film you, follow you around, creep you, or what ever. And lots and lots of public and private surveillance cameras are already there. Every step you take in any mall is being recorded. That’s already happening and possible to happen to anyone the minute they step outside. So it would seem that people who are super wrapped up in having their privacy should already be worried.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m mostly with you but wanted to provide a contrarian viewpoint.
Click to expand...

Gotcha.

Do most people feel this way about public privacy? I really don’t know. It makes me feel safer. I did understand your points, I just wonder how wide spread that feeling is.

Here in the US there are already lots and lots of cameras so I’m good with it and wish there were more.


----------



## attheend02

Faithful Wife said:


> Gotcha.
> 
> Do most people feel this way about public privacy? I really don’t know. It makes me feel safer. I did understand your points, I just wonder how wide spread that feeling is.
> 
> Here in the US there are already lots and lots of cameras so I’m good with it and wish there were more.


I would prefer anonymity. Privacy is probably the only time that the term "conservative" applies to me. 

I do not trust the government with that kind of information. As well as any private communication system.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> You already touched on it. Keep following that thought. What if? All the what ifs you listed, how are we trying to solve them? Fear based solutions. What are we doing to keep these fear based solutions from happening? Injecting our own fears.
> 
> 
> 
> What if.... what if we just opened ourselves completely with one another? What if we all overcame that fear? What if we worked tirelessly to make a connection with everyone we come in contact with? Could be something as small as a smile as you pass one another. What would happen if we exposed our fears to each other? Made those connections. What would happen? What if we could overcome fear...



There would always be limits. 

For example, should the state watch your children in the bathroom? In their bedroom?

Should you get to surveil your wife all day? Watch the sex she had years ago with someone else before she met you?

Should I get to watch my boss smoke pot in his own living room? Should I get to watch the PM take a dump?

As liberating as total transparency seems... I worry it only gives us ways to judge each other and become more puritanical.


----------



## MEM2020

The black mirror.....




Marduk said:


> There would always be limits.
> 
> For example, should the state watch your children in the bathroom? In their bedroom?
> 
> Should you get to surveil your wife all day? Watch the sex she had years ago with someone else before she met you?
> 
> Should I get to watch my boss smoke pot in his own living room? Should I get to watch the PM take a dump?
> 
> As liberating as total transparency seems... I worry it only gives us ways to judge each other and become more puritanical.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> There would always be limits.
> 
> For example, should the state watch your children in the bathroom? In their bedroom?
> 
> Should you get to surveil your wife all day? Watch the sex she had years ago with someone else before she met you?
> 
> Should I get to watch my boss smoke pot in his own living room? Should I get to watch the PM take a dump?
> 
> As liberating as total transparency seems... I worry it only gives us ways to judge each other and become more puritanical.


You are operating under the assumption that judgement would come. If we are all open and honest, judgement no longer works. 

All those things you listed are irrational fears. You spotted the flaw, who watches the watchers? You didn't follow through with your question though. 

There's only one watcher. The rest are simply observers.


----------



## MEM2020

The lives of others

German flick. Outstanding 





TheDudeLebowski said:


> You are operating under the assumption that judgement would come.  If we are all open and honest, judgement no longer works.
> 
> All those things you listed are irrational fears. You spotted the flaw, who watches the watchers? You didn't follow through with your question though.
> 
> There's only one watcher. The rest are simply observers.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> You are operating under the assumption that judgement would come. If we are all open and honest, judgement no longer works.
> 
> All those things you listed are irrational fears. You spotted the flaw, who watches the watchers? You didn't follow through with your question though.
> 
> There's only one watcher. The rest are simply observers.



Totally disagree. 

This is essentially what Catholicism said with the inquisition. 

That didn’t turn out so great.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> Totally disagree.
> 
> This is essentially what Catholicism said with the inquisition.
> 
> That didn’t turn out so great.


Did they practice what they were preaching? How many religious people actually do?


----------



## farsidejunky

Faithful Wife said:


> I don’t actually believe the false charges are as prevalent as some of you seem to assume, and I do believe that harassment happens much more than some of you seem to assume.
> 
> 
> 
> If women whined about actual harassment they have experienced here as much as men whine about potential false charges, it would get old, even to me. And the false charges narrative is so whined about that I am really tired of hearing it.
> 
> 
> 
> There was one guy on this thread who shared HIS OWN actual story of false charges. I don’t mind when men share their own actual stories. I just wish the rest of the men would stop throwing it around.
> 
> 
> 
> It would be great for you guys to make a thread about false charges, which I have already asked. Then you can all discuss it in one place, and I for one would not go to that thread to deny any of you your fears. You could all discuss the things you do to protect yourselves and so on.
> 
> 
> 
> I’m not denying that you guys feel fear. You get to fear whatever you want.
> 
> 
> 
> It’s just that you don’t seem to ever acknowledge the real charges and the creeps who lose their jobs because they should have.
> 
> 
> 
> So in that light, why do you guys think we want to discuss the false charges? I get that some of you guys definitely want to discuss it. But what’s the point of discussing it with women? It always comes across like “because of you lying trashy women poor men are victims once again”. And again, meanwhile you don’t seem to ever discuss the actual non false charges. So again....why exactly talk to women about it?


Sticking to my commitment to not share my _opinion_ in what could even be remotely political, I would like to share my experience.

I had just arrived at Fort Stewart, GA, in 1997, and was going to various locations on post to in-process. 

One stop took me to a female Sergeant (one very significant rank above me at the time). I thought I knew her, and asked her if she had been stationed in Germany. She said no, and said her only duty stations had been stateside. My next comment was something akin to, "You remind me of another I knew in Germany. She was a great gal."

She lost her mind. Stood me at parade rest. Chewed my ass for using a "sexist, derogatory term". Communicated with my incoming commander that I was using inappropriate language with her. 

I was subsequently counseled and no longer recommended for promotion for the year I spent at that installation. 

I literally reenlisted to leave for several reasons, chief among them that I was now erroneously labeled a sexual harassment problem....because I used the word "gal", which is not derogatory where I am from in any way, shape, or form. It probably isn't derogatory where she was from, either. 

Needless to say it has shaped my opinion on some matters being discussed here.

ETA: I think it pertinent to add that I was a victim of sexual assault (by a male) while passed out after having had too much to drink. I came to and realized things were already fully in progress so to speak. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## As'laDain

farsidejunky said:


> Sticking to my commitment to not share my _opinion_ in what could even be remotely political, I would like to share my experience.
> 
> I had just arrived at Fort Stewart, GA, in 1997, and was going to various locations on post to in-process.
> 
> One stop took me to a female Sergeant (one very significant rank above me at the time). I thought I knew her, and asked her if she had been stationed in Germany. She said no, and said her only duty stations had been stateside. My next comment was something akin to, "You remind me of another I knew in Germany. She was a great gal."
> 
> She lost her mind. Stood me at parade rest. Chewed my ass for using a "sexist, derogatory term". Communicated with my incoming commander that I was using inappropriate language with her.
> 
> I was subsequently counseled and no longer recommended for promotion for the year I spent at that installation.
> 
> I literally reenlisted to leave for several reasons, chief among them that I was now erroneously labeled a sexual harassment problem....because I used the word "gal", which is not derogatory where I am from in any way, shape, or form. It probably isn't derogatory where she was from, either.
> 
> Needless to say it has shaped my opinion on some matters being discussed here.
> 
> ETA: I think it pertinent to add that I was a victim of sexual assault (by a male) while passed out after having had too much to drink. I came to and realized things were already fully in progress so to speak.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


ugh... that reminds me of a time i was at Fort Polk, when i was still in the 82nd. i soluted a female major and said "All the way, ma'am!" 

she proceeded to scream at me for a few minutes and bring me and my whole squad to our first sergeant. she thought "all the way" had some kind of sexual meaning. needless to say, she had never been around paratroopers before. fortunately, she dropped it after our first sergeant explained that it was the standard greeting of the day, to which the proper response was "Airborne!"

and this is why i cringe when these discussions pop up...


----------



## Faithful Wife

farsidejunky said:


> ETA: I think it pertinent to add that I was a victim of sexual assault (by a male) while passed out after having had too much to drink. I came to and realized things were already fully in progress so to speak.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


Did you report it?


----------



## Faithful Wife

attheend02 said:


> I would prefer anonymity. Privacy is probably the only time that the term "conservative" applies to me.
> 
> I do not trust the government with that kind of information. As well as any private communication system.


Ok but....isn’t it already generally understood that “the government”, namely law enforcement, can look at your digital footprint if you are charged with or suspected of certain crimes?

So to me that says, “the government” already has access to all of that now. And although it’s nice to think that they would need a warrant to get it, I’m thinking if “they” want it, they have hackers who can get anything from someone like me.

So they already have access to it.

Now I’m making the next step in my mind to, do I care? Meh. They so far haven’t done anything to me, even if they are looking at all my secret BBC folders right now. What am I afraid that could happen? I’m just saying if they want to know what I am doing online, they can find that out.

I don’t think “they” care what I’m doing. I’m sure if I did certain kinds of things they might start to care and follow me around the internet. I’m not going to lose any sleep over that. It’s too late. It’s all out there and they can see it all.

It would be nice to think we have ultimate privacy but I think those days are over.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> Did you report it?


Question of our lives right there. What would happen if we all dropped fear and were open and honest with one another? Where would the wrong doers go? Where could they possibly hide?


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> What am I afraid that could happen?


:smile2: yes! Where is the fear? Is it rational? Can you really control life to ease your fears? Would you feel better if you just let go of hope and fear?

Answers: inside of me. No. No. 100% without question.


----------



## As'laDain

fear is an emotion. you cannot drop fear any more than you can stop fire from hurting when you touch it. 

the best you can do is accept it and do what you have to do anyway.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

As'laDain said:


> fear is an emotion. you cannot drop fear any more than you can stop fire from hurting when you touch it.
> 
> the best you can do is accept it and do what you have to do anyway.


The only thing to fear is fear itself. Really the only way is to release it. Bring it into the light. Fear will always be there. When you experience fear, overcome it quickly. Reach out and others will help you. It doesn't ever not work. Accepting fear is never the answer. It never works either. It breeds more fear and terrible coping mechanisms. Until one day you realize your entire life is ruled by fear. Accepting this is the same as giving up. You don't seem like a quitter to me. Why would you ever give in to fear? 

Btw, ever seen video of those monks who burned themselves alive in protest? They didn't look like they were hurting to me. Looked like they were quite peaceful as a matter of fact.

ETA: you don't accept fear and do what you have to do anyway. Thats called overcoming your fears to do what you must do.


----------



## As'laDain

TheDudeLebowski said:


> The only thing to fear is fear itself. Really the only way is to release it. Bring it into the light. Fear will always be there. When you experience fear, overcome it quickly. Reach out and others will help you. It doesn't ever not work. Accepting fear is never the answer. It never works either. It breeds more fear and terrible coping mechanisms. Until one day you realize your entire life is ruled by fear. Accepting this is the same as giving up. You don't seem like a quitter to me. Why would you ever give in to fear?
> 
> Btw, ever seen video of those monks who burned themselves alive in protest? They didn't look like they were hurting to me. Looked like they were quite peaceful as a matter of fact.
> 
> ETA: you don't accept fear and do what you have to do anyway. Thats called overcoming your fears to do what you must do.


Ruled by it? Hardly. I accept fear, fear is ok. Its just an experience. Im not going to try to avoid it or numb it away. I would rather just accept it and get on with my life.


----------



## farsidejunky

Faithful Wife said:


> Did you report it?


No. 

I vaguely remember sliding down the door as the key simply wouldn't work, then looking up at the room number and realizing I had the third door on the right on the second floor. My room was third on the third.

I vaguely remember him helping me up.

I didn't report it due to too much shame for allowing myself to get so drunk that I passed out leaning against the wrong barracks room door on the wrong floor. That drunk. 

Also, this was just a few years into don't ask, don't tell. You want to talk about privilege...females in the military had the ability to report at that time without having to worry about it going...an entirely different direction. I have no idea what it is like now. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky

Now I'm going to step back. My last post is too much like a political opinion. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## MEM2020

Oh man

Sorry




farsidejunky said:


> Sticking to my commitment to not share my _opinion_ in what could even be remotely political, I would like to share my experience.
> 
> I had just arrived at Fort Stewart, GA, in 1997, and was going to various locations on post to in-process.
> 
> One stop took me to a female Sergeant (one very significant rank above me at the time). I thought I knew her, and asked her if she had been stationed in Germany. She said no, and said her only duty stations had been stateside. My next comment was something akin to, "You remind me of another I knew in Germany. She was a great gal."
> 
> She lost her mind. Stood me at parade rest. Chewed my ass for using a "sexist, derogatory term". Communicated with my incoming commander that I was using inappropriate language with her.
> 
> I was subsequently counseled and no longer recommended for promotion for the year I spent at that installation.
> 
> I literally reenlisted to leave for several reasons, chief among them that I was now erroneously labeled a sexual harassment problem....because I used the word "gal", which is not derogatory where I am from in any way, shape, or form. It probably isn't derogatory where she was from, either.
> 
> Needless to say it has shaped my opinion on some matters being discussed here.
> 
> ETA: I think it pertinent to add that I was a victim of sexual assault (by a male) while passed out after having had too much to drink. I came to and realized things were already fully in progress so to speak.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

As'laDain said:


> Ruled by it? Hardly. I accept fear, fear is ok. Its just an experience. Im not going to try to avoid it or numb it away. I would rather just accept it and get on with my life.


Perhaps "ruled by fear" is a tad hyperbolic. How about, heavily influenced by fear? You and I are both on an anonymous forum, yet we still keep secrets. 

Nobody gets on with their life when they accept fear. What you are describing is recognizing this fear, and ignoring it in order to overcome it. That's not accepting isht! You are overcoming it. Give yourself credit where its due.



farsidejunky said:


> Now I'm going to step back. My last post is too much like a political opinion.


Sounded like a man opening his heart up to others is what it sounded like to me.


----------



## uhtred

It may be difficult to know what effects your lack of privacy have had. It could be what adds and what prices you see for good - once sellers have enough information on your purchasing habits. It could be being denied for a job that has any security implications (which these days means any job that involves interacting with children). It could mean more scrutiny at the border, or more careful review of your taxes.


I see the no-fly-list as the example. People on it are not told why they are on it, and there is no practical way to get off. 

Embarrassing sexual things are probably only a problem if someone runs for public office and the info gets leaked. I think this is likely to be worse for female candidates because society is still not completely comfortable with highly sexual women. 




Faithful Wife said:


> Ok but....isn’t it already generally understood that “the government”, namely law enforcement, can look at your digital footprint if you are charged with or suspected of certain crimes?
> 
> So to me that says, “the government” already has access to all of that now. And although it’s nice to think that they would need a warrant to get it, I’m thinking if “they” want it, they have hackers who can get anything from someone like me.
> 
> So they already have access to it.
> 
> Now I’m making the next step in my mind to, do I care? Meh. They so far haven’t done anything to me, even if they are looking at all my secret BBC folders right now. What am I afraid that could happen? I’m just saying if they want to know what I am doing online, they can find that out.
> 
> I don’t think “they” care what I’m doing. I’m sure if I did certain kinds of things they might start to care and follow me around the internet. I’m not going to lose any sleep over that. It’s too late. It’s all out there and they can see it all.
> 
> It would be nice to think we have ultimate privacy but I think those days are over.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Did they practice what they were preaching? How many religious people actually do?


The problem is that somebody somewhere actually is going to.

Look at the abortion debate in the US. I'm astounded at the number of women soundly in the "pro life" camp. Legal abortions are teetering on the edge. Imagine it becoming illegal federally.

And then imagine the panopticon scenario then.


----------



## Marduk

farsidejunky said:


> ETA: I think it pertinent to add that I was a victim of sexual assault (by a male) while passed out after having had too much to drink. I came to and realized things were already fully in progress so to speak.


Far... I'm so sorry, man.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Ok but....isn’t it already generally understood that “the government”, namely law enforcement, can look at your digital footprint if you are charged with or suspected of certain crimes?
> 
> So to me that says, “the government” already has access to all of that now. And although it’s nice to think that they would need a warrant to get it, I’m thinking if “they” want it, they have hackers who can get anything from someone like me.
> 
> So they already have access to it.
> 
> Now I’m making the next step in my mind to, do I care? Meh. They so far haven’t done anything to me, even if they are looking at all my secret BBC folders right now. What am I afraid that could happen? I’m just saying if they want to know what I am doing online, they can find that out.
> 
> I don’t think “they” care what I’m doing. I’m sure if I did certain kinds of things they might start to care and follow me around the internet. I’m not going to lose any sleep over that. It’s too late. It’s all out there and they can see it all.
> 
> It would be nice to think we have ultimate privacy but I think those days are over.


It's mathematically impossible to provide anyone a backdoor or access at all without it creating a vulnerability that can be exploited.

There are no fundamentally secure keys. Just harder and harder locks to pick. If the police can get access, eventually so can anyone.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Question of our lives right there. What would happen if we all dropped fear and were open and honest with one another? Where would the wrong doers go? Where could they possibly hide?


Having been through it, you're trusting that a society will support you... when it doesn't. 

It's far, far easier for everyone to turn a blind eye to it and hope that it goes away.

I'm not saying that he should or shouldn't report it. The more people that do, the more it's hard to ignore.

It's just that there's unlikely to be any consequence for the guy that did it. Only .3% of those that commit this crime are ever brought to justice in Canada. I'm sure the US isn't that different.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> The problem is that somebody somewhere actually is going to.
> 
> Look at the abortion debate in the US. I'm astounded at the number of women soundly in the "pro life" camp. Legal abortions are teetering on the edge. Imagine it becoming illegal federally.
> 
> And then imagine the panopticon scenario then.


Why does it astound you that people, especially women who have carried their own children to term, would be against abortion? You aren't making any sense here buddy. I dont think you have invested any time in listening to the other side if you have zero clue why some women would be against abortion.


----------



## Marduk

farsidejunky said:


> I didn't report it due to too much shame for allowing myself to get so drunk


So very common for victims of both genders.

I'm so sorry, man. ****. **** him.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> Having been through it, you're trusting that a society will support you... when it doesn't.
> 
> It's far, far easier for everyone to turn a blind eye to it and hope that it goes away.
> 
> I'm not saying that he should or shouldn't report it. The more people that do, the more it's hard to ignore.
> 
> It's just that there's unlikely to be any consequence for the guy that did it. Only .3% of those that commit this crime are ever brought to justice in Canada. I'm sure the US isn't that different.


Right. We are lost. Your solution is more of the same. More wondering around in the desert. So be it for those who give in to their hopes.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Why does it astound you that people, especially women who have carried their own children to term, would be against abortion? You aren't making any sense here buddy. I dont think you have invested any time in listening to the other side if you have zero clue why some women would be against abortion.


Because the abortion debate really doesn't have much to do with children. I mean, children in cages, children in the foster system, dramatically underfunded education systems and inaccessible health care. Children in poverty everywhere in industrialized nations.

If you want to help children, that's where you help children. Real children, not hypothetical maybe children.

Abortion isn't about children. It's about control over women's bodies. If a woman is pregnant and is against abortion, she doesn't have to have one. 

But she should not have any control over another woman's reproductive organs.

And there's a very uncomfortable chapter you should read in Freakonomics about the affect of abortion on children in society, and society in general.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Right. We are lost. Your solution is more of the same. More wondering around in the desert. So be it for those who give in to their hopes.


I wasn't aware I offered a solution to anything except some ideas about the justice system in another thread.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> Because the abortion debate really doesn't have much to do with children. I mean, children in cages, children in the foster system, dramatically underfunded education systems and inaccessible health care. Children in poverty everywhere in industrialized nations.
> 
> If you want to help children, that's where you help children. Real children, not hypothetical maybe children.
> 
> Abortion isn't about children. It's about control over women's bodies. If a woman is pregnant and is against abortion, she doesn't have to have one.
> 
> But she should not have any control over another woman's reproductive organs.
> 
> And there's a very uncomfortable chapter you should read in Freakonomics about the affect of abortion on children in society, and society in general.


A lot of words but you still haven't said anything that relates to what the other side is saying. You are injecting your own fears into the situation. Control over your own body has been granted already. Control over another's life has never been. So the way they see it, it's you guys who want to control. Control when and where and how and why. Eugenics and all the rest of it. You had control of your womb, you will have that control back once new life is no longer being carried. From my perspective, it's the pro-choice people who are out to control. Beyond that, they inject fear to gain their control. Just as you are doing right now.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> I wasn't aware I offered a solution to anything except some ideas about the justice system in another thread.


You offered up your fears for all of us to see. They speak volumes. Weather you realize this or not, I can't do anything about that. 

"Remember I will always love you, as I claw your f***ing throat away. It will end no other way"

Love you brother. Maybe it's best we just drop this for now? It's a thread jack after all.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> A lot of words but you still haven't said anything that relates to what the other side is saying. You are injecting your own fears into the situation. Control over your own body has been granted already. Control over another's life has never been. So the way they see it, it's you guys who want to control. Control when and where and how and why. Eugenics and all the rest of it. You had control of your womb, you will have that control back once new life is no longer being carried. From my perspective, it's the pro-choice people who are out to control. Beyond that, they inject fear to gain their control. Just as you are doing right now.



Respectfully, you don’t have any idea where I’m coming from and none of it is fear based. 

Your argument is profoundly irrational. My body makes cells all the time and they are mine. 

Just like a fertilized cell in a woman’s body is hers. 

No pro choice people are telling anyone to get an abortion to my knowledge. Only pro life people are telling others what to do. 

This is all a false dilemma and in fact is an attempt to control women. 

Respectfully, I think your position is one of fear. Fear that women get to decide their own destiny and make their own moral choices, and you don’t get a say in that. 

If you want to help children, go ahead. 

If you want to control women’s autonomy, then say so. Don’t hide behind other things.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> Respectfully, you don’t have any idea where I’m coming from and none of it is fear based.
> 
> Your argument is profoundly irrational. My body makes cells all the time and they are mine.
> 
> Just like a fertilized cell in a woman’s body is hers.
> 
> No pro choice people are telling anyone to get an abortion to my knowledge. Only pro life people are telling others what to do.
> 
> This is all a false dilemma and in fact is an attempt to control women.
> 
> Respectfully, I think your position is one of fear. Fear that women get to decide their own destiny and make their own moral choices, and you don’t get a say in that.
> 
> If you want to help children, go ahead.
> 
> If you want to control women’s autonomy, then say so. Don’t hide behind other things.


I dont want to control anything. I've never even voted :smile2:


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I dont want to control anything. I've never even voted :smile2:



I guess you’re pro-choice then.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> I guess you’re pro-choice then.


I am more than you know. I'm also too stupid to see big picture. It has to be placed at my feet in order for me to see. 

My only thing I would say is both sides need to stop talking at each other. Lots of words, nobody is saying s**t! Talk TO each other. I think some of your fears are controlling your own narrative, and their fears controlling theirs. Lots of words. Nobody is talking. Bums me out man.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I am more than you know. I'm also too stupid to see big picture. It has to be placed at my feet in order for me to see.
> 
> 
> 
> My only thing I would say is both sides need to stop talking at each other. Lots of words, nobody is saying s**t! Talk TO each other. I think some of your fears are controlling your own narrative, and their fears controlling theirs. Lots of words. Nobody is talking. Bums me out man.



Again, I disagree. Pro life needs to stop talking, and stop lying to people that it’s about children or whatever stuff they invent to make it sound ok. 

One is literally “a woman has the right to choose” the other is literally “no she doesn’t.”

There’s no conversation required. There is an absence of conversation required so that women get to have the space to choose for themselves. 

I also find it fascinating that the pro-life camp isn’t fighting for the rights of frozen embryos, fighting for the rights of children in poverty, fighting for the rights of children in cages at the border. Fighting for sex education for young women and fighting for access to contraceptives. 

Because none of those things have to do with taking away a woman’s autonomy. In fact, some of those things give women even more autonomy, and I’m sure that’s terrifying to some. And that’s what it’s really about. 

Just like it’s mixed in heavily with the topics on this thread.


----------



## CraigBesuden

Marduk said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am more than you know. I'm also too stupid to see big picture. It has to be placed at my feet in order for me to see.
> 
> 
> 
> My only thing I would say is both sides need to stop talking at each other. Lots of words, nobody is saying s**t! Talk TO each other. I think some of your fears are controlling your own narrative, and their fears controlling theirs. Lots of words. Nobody is talking. Bums me out man.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, I disagree. * Pro life needs to stop talking*, and stop lying to people that it’s about children or whatever stuff they invent to make it sound ok.
> 
> One is literally “a woman has the right to choose” the other is literally “no she doesn’t.”
> 
> There’s no conversation required. *There is an absence of conversation required * so that women get to have the space to choose for themselves.
> 
> I also find it fascinating that the pro-life camp isn’t fighting for the rights of frozen embryos, fighting for the rights of children in poverty, fighting for the rights of children in cages at the border. Fighting for sex education for young women and fighting for access to contraceptives.
> 
> Because none of those things have to do with taking away a woman’s autonomy. In fact, some of those things give women even more autonomy, and I’m sure that’s terrifying to some. And that’s what it’s really about.
> 
> Just like it’s mixed in heavily with the topics on this thread.
Click to expand...

Your unwillingness to recognize that there are two (or more) sides to political issues, and desire to silence those who disagree with you, is remarkable.

The “right to choose” to which you refer is an intentionally deceptive term. You are referring to a “right” to kill other human beings. Perhaps they’re not persons, but they are human beings.

From John Rawls’ “original position,” behind the veil of ignorance and not knowing which human being you might end up becoming, nobody would vote to allow the killing of healthy unborns because that unborn victim might be you. The support for abortion rights, then, is an abrogation of justice held by those making bad faith arguments from a position of privilege.


----------



## Marduk

CraigBesuden said:


> Your unwillingness to recognize that there are two (or more) sides to political issues, and desire to silence those who disagree with you, is remarkable.
> 
> The “right to choose” to which you refer is an intentionally deceptive term. You are referring to a “right” to kill other human beings. Perhaps they’re not persons, but they are human beings.
> 
> From John Rawls’ “original position,” behind the veil of ignorance and not knowing which human being you might end up becoming, nobody would vote to allow the killing of healthy unborns because that unborn victim might be you. The support for abortion rights, then, is an abrogation of justice held by those making bad faith arguments from a position of privilege.


There is one side.

Either women get to choose for themselves, or they don't. The term "Pro Life" is itself a lie, because it's not about life at all. It's about autonomy. It's systematized misogyny. 

I like that you use the term "unborn" when you're referring to a fertilized cell that neither has consciousness, intelligence, or anything but a theoretical personhood.

I wonder if you're as fussed by actual children in actual poverty or actual cages as you are these hypothetical children? That "victim" can't be me, because it wasn't me. And if it was me, I wouldn't be here to talk about it. Are you my hero now? You should really look into the anthropic principle before you attempt to be my saviour.

Are you also as fussed by the multitude of fertilized cells that are currently frozen in institutions around the world? Are those "unborns" also worthy of your unending desire to see them fully expressed?

Are you also as fussed with the worldwide conflicts that your armies take part in? Worldwide poverty and starvation? What about climate change and all the potential to impact other hypothetical and real children?

Either you support women's autonomy over their own bodies, or you don't. This isn't about whether you support abortion or not. It's about it not being your choice at all what someone else does.

And I suspect that's the problem - a projection of an ideal where you don't think women get to choose what they do with their own reproductive system. You're just trying to hide behind "but what about the children" in an attempt to make it not what it is. Systemic denial of a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Marduk said:


> CraigBesuden said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your unwillingness to recognize that there are two (or more) sides to political issues, and desire to silence those who disagree with you, is remarkable.
> 
> The “right to choose” to which you refer is an intentionally deceptive term. You are referring to a “right” to kill other human beings. Perhaps they’re not persons, but they are human beings.
> 
> From John Rawls’ “original position,” behind the veil of ignorance and not knowing which human being you might end up becoming, nobody would vote to allow the killing of healthy unborns because that unborn victim might be you. The support for abortion rights, then, is an abrogation of justice held by those making bad faith arguments from a position of privilege.
> 
> 
> 
> There is one side.
> 
> Either women get to choose for themselves, or they don't. The term "Pro Life" is itself a lie, because it's not about life at all. It's about autonomy. It's systematized misogyny.
> 
> I like that you use the term "unborn" when you're referring to a fertilized cell that neither has consciousness, intelligence, or anything but a theoretical personhood.
> 
> I wonder if you're as fussed by actual children in actual poverty or actual cages as you are these hypothetical children? That "victim" can't be me, because it wasn't me. And if it was me, I wouldn't be here to talk about it. Are you my hero now? You should really look into the anthropic principle before you attempt to be my saviour.
> 
> Are you also as fussed by the multitude of fertilized cells that are currently frozen in institutions around the world? Are those "unborns" also worthy of your unending desire to see them fully expressed?
> 
> Are you also as fussed with the worldwide conflicts that your armies take part in? Worldwide poverty and starvation? What about climate change and all the potential to impact other hypothetical and real children?
> 
> Either you support women's autonomy over their own bodies, or you don't. This isn't about whether you support abortion or not. It's about it not being your choice at all what someone else does.
> 
> And I suspect that's the problem - a projection of an ideal where you don't think women get to choose what they do with their own reproductive system. You're just trying to hide behind "but what about the children" in an attempt to make it not what it is. Systemic denial of a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body.
Click to expand...

When does life exist for you? Do you support late term abortions? Would you be willing to sit in on one and watch as it happens?


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> There is one side.
> 
> Either women get to choose for themselves, or they don't. The term "Pro Life" is itself a lie, because it's not about life at all. It's about autonomy. It's systematized misogyny.
> 
> I like that you use the term "unborn" when you're referring to a fertilized cell that neither has consciousness, intelligence, or anything but a theoretical personhood.
> 
> I wonder if you're as fussed by actual children in actual poverty or actual cages as you are these hypothetical children? That "victim" can't be me, because it wasn't me. And if it was me, I wouldn't be here to talk about it. Are you my hero now? You should really look into the anthropic principle before you attempt to be my saviour.
> 
> Are you also as fussed by the multitude of fertilized cells that are currently frozen in institutions around the world? Are those "unborns" also worthy of your unending desire to see them fully expressed?
> 
> Are you also as fussed with the worldwide conflicts that your armies take part in? Worldwide poverty and starvation? What about climate change and all the potential to impact other hypothetical and real children?
> 
> Either you support women's autonomy over their own bodies, or you don't. This isn't about whether you support abortion or not. It's about it not being your choice at all what someone else does.
> 
> And I suspect that's the problem - a projection of an ideal where you don't think women get to choose what they do with their own reproductive system. You're just trying to hide behind "but what about the children" in an attempt to make it not what it is. Systemic denial of a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body.


You dont want to talk, I understand. At least do us all a favor then and stop suspecting others intent with your own ego driven fears. You can always ask, and find out. Whenever you are ready to talk, people are willing to have the conversation. As long as you suspect the worst as a first instinct, you are in no position to open your own mouth. Judge not less ye be judged. You are making a fool of yourself right now my friend.


----------



## Marduk

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> When does life exist for you? Do you support late term abortions? Would you be willing to sit in on one and watch as it happens?


If I were to find myself somehow pregnant, my determination would be when I felt that the foetus had achieved consciousness. This probably happens somewhere around the 5 month mark according to what I've read, but I'd probably say up until about 3 months.

Again, if I were the one pregnant. That's not likely to occur, because I don't have a uterus.

Do you make a habit of watching surgical operations for entertainment? See any good kidney transplants lately?


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> You dont want to talk, I understand. At least do us all a favor then and stop suspecting others intent with your own ego driven fears. You can always ask, and find out. Whenever you are ready to talk, people are willing to have the conversation. As long as you suspect the worst as a first instinct, you are in no position to open your own mouth. Judge not less ye be judged. You are making a fool of yourself right now my friend.


Says the zen guy... that's being suspiciously judgemental and projecting a lot about fear. In fact, how about you do me a favour and stop telling me what I'm feeling like you're some kind of messiah that can see into my soul?

If you don't want to talk about it, feel free.

All I'm saying is that if you're pro-life, then call it for what it is: denial of a woman's right to choose what she does with herself. And if you're going to actually be "pro-life" about children, then there are a helluva lot of ways to help actual children instead of telling women what to do about theoretical ones.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Marduk, I couldn’t disagree with you more on every one of your positions. To me, it seems that your are relentless, post 100 times a day and your views are at odds with just about every male on this site. What are you getting out of all of this? That the more you spew the more you are right? In the end, you don’t have to convince anyone but yourself.


----------



## Marduk

RebuildingMe said:


> Marduk, I couldn’t disagree with you more on every one of your positions. To me, it seems that your are relentless, post 100 times a day and your views are at odds with just about every male on this site. What are you getting out of all of this? That the more you spew the more you are right? In the end, you don’t have to convince anyone but yourself.


Am I not supposed to respond to posts directed at me now?

I will call out misogyny whenever I see it, especially when it comes to women’s autonomy, consent, and personhood. That’s what I get out of it - that I won’t let it go without it being called out.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Marduk said:


> UpsideDownWorld11 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When does life exist for you? Do you support late term abortions? Would you be willing to sit in on one and watch as it happens?
> 
> 
> 
> If I were to find myself somehow pregnant, my determination would be when I felt that the foetus had achieved consciousness. This probably happens somewhere around the 5 month mark according to what I've read, but I'd probably say up until about 3 months.
> 
> Again, if I were the one pregnant. That's not likely to occur, because I don't have a uterus.
> 
> Do you make a habit of watching surgical operations for entertainment? See any good kidney transplants lately?
Click to expand...

I could watch a kidney transplant with a clear conscience, I don't know how any pro-choice person could watch a late term abortion and come away without a changed perspective. At some point you have to define when its no longer just one person but two. Your red line is 5 months based on some arbitrary guidelines of what people think may be true. There is still enough grey around there that would make most people morally sick.


----------



## MaiChi

Faithful Wife said:


> Hey gang. This might be a tough one to talk about without flames flying...but I would like to try.
> 
> This kind of goes along with my empathy for men threads.
> 
> I assume we all know what male privilege is, whether or not we agree it exists or understand it. I think most people have their own ideas about it.
> 
> Do you know what female privilege is?
> 
> Ironically, I learned the most about female privilege from a trans woman. She was a man until age 40 or so when she then faced and realized her true gender, she transitioned into living as a woman, and then she had GRS. She reported to me the difference in how she was treated when she was a man and then as a woman. She also told me that in the trans community this is understood and talked about a lot.
> 
> Some examples of female privilege:
> 
> *Common courtesies that are not given to men, such as opening doors for women or allowing them to have your seat when no other seats are available.
> 
> *The assumption that females are more righteous, more kind and more nurturing than men and treating women with this assumption in different ways than we treat men.
> 
> *Protection of women and children by men, physically and in other ways, when same protection is not afforded to men. Men are expected to protect themselves.
> 
> *The assumption that women are better parents than men and women are treated accordingly.
> 
> *Women are afforded more empathy than men are, in general.
> 
> *Women are assumed to not be sexual predators or rapists, even though some of them are (in enough numbers to be a danger to society).
> 
> As a feminist, I've come across a bit of backlash about this before. But I think it is important to know where I have privilege where others do not so that I can try to extend that privilege further than myself. To me, although men may have privilege that I don't have, I'm not going to get hung up on that because there is nothing I can do about it. I think maybe the best thing I can do is acknowledge my own privilege.
> 
> Honestly, without decent men, women could not survive and thrive. Although so many of us have had no help from men per se, have been assaulted and traumatized and so on, I understand why a woman who has experienced that would feel she has no privilege. But in the bigger picture, I still believe it is true that generally, men protect women, they (physically) build everything in our infra-structures, and they are the only ones who have the power to protect us from indecent men.
> 
> Women are capable of everything men are capable of, including building all the roads - - it would just take us longer if suddenly there were no men doing this. We would have to change the way machinery is made so that it would be less difficult for us to use. I fully believe this and know we could survive if we had to.
> 
> But I also recognize that it is a privilege that I don't have to try to do those things, because men already do them and are so good at it.
> 
> If this goes off the rails, I apologize and hope mods will just shut it down. *But I honestly love and have empathy for both men and women*, while I also see and acknowledge the different types of privilege we have.
> 
> Having doors opened for you may not be any big deal and some women may wish men didn't hold doors for them. I understand that position, but it is still true that men hold doors for us because they want to be courteous to us in a way that they are normally not courteous to each other. This matters to me and I appreciate the sentiment.
> 
> Ladies, if this rubs you the wrong way I'm happy to expand on my thoughts. I'm not saying we should do anything differently, and I know some of you have never been privileged in this way. Again, it is less about individuals and more about the bigger picture and what happens en masse.


Personally I do not see those you list as privileges for women. They are more like control methods. 
In some countries I have worked, women are permanently at risk from men's behaviours. 

Once it gets a little dark, women can be raped by the same man who during light time opened the door.
Women cannot safely live alone in the house whereas men can
Women are less likely to get a job than men
Women a less likely to get Hire purchase agreement than men
Women are asked to bring a marriage certificate or a husband if they want to be sterilised
Women are more likely to be car jacked by men than men
Domestic violence has more female victims than males
In many countries women are owned by men the same way people own a dog or cat. 
Women have infinitely less privileges than men and what little privileges they may have, such as in western countries as mentioned, are so few compared to those for men, that it is not worth considering them. 

It is always better to be a man, all factors considered.


----------



## Faithful Wife

MaiChi said:


> Personally I do not see those you list as privileges for women. They are more like control methods.
> In some countries I have worked, women are permanently at risk from men's behaviours.
> 
> Once it gets a little dark, women can be raped by the same man who during light time opened the door.
> Women cannot safely live alone in the house whereas men can
> Women are less likely to get a job than men
> Women a less likely to get Hire purchase agreement than men
> Women are asked to bring a marriage certificate or a husband if they want to be sterilised
> Women are more likely to be car jacked by men than men
> Domestic violence has more female victims than males
> In many countries women are owned by men the same way people own a dog or cat.
> Women have infinitely less privileges than men and what little privileges they may have, such as in western countries as mentioned, are so few compared to those for men, that it is not worth considering them.
> 
> It is always better to be a man, all factors considered.


Some of the things you are describing are what are considered male privilege.

I didn't write the post about male privilege, though and it is a separate topic. It is not a topic I have found most people here can discuss without it turning into a war.

I had a couple of threads about empathy for men here a while back. Those went pretty well. But I am not sure if I started a thread about empathy for women (empathy by men for women about the items you listed and many others) if that would go over as well.


----------



## Faithful Wife

RebuildingMe said:


> Marduk, I couldn’t disagree with you more on every one of your positions. To me, it seems that your are relentless, post 100 times a day and your views are *at odds with just about every male on this site*. What are you getting out of all of this? That the more you spew the more you are right? In the end, you don’t have to convince anyone but yourself.


Actually there are quite a few men who agree with @Marduk on many points.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Maybe, I certainly haven't been here long enough. I should not have called out anyone individually and should only speak for myself. *For that, I do apologize.
*
"I" have not seen a post that "I" have yet to agree with.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> Says the zen guy... that's being suspiciously judgemental and projecting a lot about fear. In fact, how about you do me a favour and stop telling me what I'm feeling like you're some kind of messiah that can see into my soul?
> 
> If you don't want to talk about it, feel free.
> 
> All I'm saying is that if you're pro-life, then call it for what it is: denial of a woman's right to choose what she does with herself. And if you're going to actually be "pro-life" about children, then there are a helluva lot of ways to help actual children instead of telling women what to do about theoretical ones.


Fair enough. Point taken on the first paragraph. My apologies and you are right. Forgive me. I'm a little high rn.:wink2:

Last paragraph. I dont think it's fair to assume that intent. Just as it isn't fair to assume yours. However, you are right. We can do way more for our children who are suffering right here right now.


----------



## uhtred

I don't think its that simple.

Is it OK to abort a fetus that could at that time be delivered safely?

Or on the other end, why isn't birth control killing potential children.


People have argued about this issue for a century because it is such a difficult problem. When does the fetus stop being part of a womans body and under her control and become a "person" with full rights? Birth is a very arbitrary line because children can be delivered by Cesarean. 


FWIW, I am 100% in favor of allowing abortion in the 1st trimester. In favor of allowing it, but not comfortable in the 2nd. 3rd I have difficulties if it is not driven by medical issues - but 3rd trimester abortions for non-medical reasons are extremely rare. 

I understand the other side. Its just that for me, when I compare a world where abortion is legal with the one where it is not, I think the one with legal abortion is on the whole better. 





Marduk said:


> There is one side.
> 
> Either women get to choose for themselves, or they don't. The term "Pro Life" is itself a lie, because it's not about life at all. It's about autonomy. It's systematized misogyny.
> 
> I like that you use the term "unborn" when you're referring to a fertilized cell that neither has consciousness, intelligence, or anything but a theoretical personhood.
> 
> I wonder if you're as fussed by actual children in actual poverty or actual cages as you are these hypothetical children? That "victim" can't be me, because it wasn't me. And if it was me, I wouldn't be here to talk about it. Are you my hero now? You should really look into the anthropic principle before you attempt to be my saviour.
> 
> Are you also as fussed by the multitude of fertilized cells that are currently frozen in institutions around the world? Are those "unborns" also worthy of your unending desire to see them fully expressed?
> 
> Are you also as fussed with the worldwide conflicts that your armies take part in? Worldwide poverty and starvation? What about climate change and all the potential to impact other hypothetical and real children?
> 
> Either you support women's autonomy over their own bodies, or you don't. This isn't about whether you support abortion or not. It's about it not being your choice at all what someone else does.
> 
> And I suspect that's the problem - a projection of an ideal where you don't think women get to choose what they do with their own reproductive system. You're just trying to hide behind "but what about the children" in an attempt to make it not what it is. Systemic denial of a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body.


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> Or on the other end, why isn't birth control killing potential children.


Some religions believe it is.


----------



## Marduk

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Fair enough. Point taken on the first paragraph. My apologies and you are right. Forgive me. I'm a little high rn.:wink2:
> 
> Last paragraph. I dont think it's fair to assume that intent. Just as it isn't fair to assume yours. However, you are right. We can do way more for our children who are suffering right here right now.


OK fair too, my bad. Maybe I should indulge myself.

I really, really can't stand when people - especially men - try to take away women's right to choose anything for themselves any more. I just can't ****ing stand it any more. I feel like I'm through the looking glass on this and I just can't see things the same way any more.


----------



## Marduk

uhtred said:


> I don't think its that simple.
> 
> Is it OK to abort a fetus that could at that time be delivered safely?
> 
> Or on the other end, why isn't birth control killing potential children.
> 
> 
> People have argued about this issue for a century because it is such a difficult problem. When does the fetus stop being part of a womans body and under her control and become a "person" with full rights? Birth is a very arbitrary line because children can be delivered by Cesarean.
> 
> 
> FWIW, I am 100% in favor of allowing abortion in the 1st trimester. In favor of allowing it, but not comfortable in the 2nd. 3rd I have difficulties if it is not driven by medical issues - but 3rd trimester abortions for non-medical reasons are extremely rare.
> 
> I understand the other side. Its just that for me, when I compare a world where abortion is legal with the one where it is not, I think the one with legal abortion is on the whole better.


I can get behind that. My point is that the person with the body in question is the person that gets to choose.

We men can hypothesize about whatever we want until the cows come home. It's the person that's in the situation that needs to choose.


----------



## Marduk

RebuildingMe said:


> Maybe, I certainly haven't been here long enough. I should not have called out anyone individually and should only speak for myself. *For that, I do apologize.
> *
> "I" have not seen a post that "I" have yet to agree with.


Let me say right now if that was directed at you calling me out, you don't have to apologize. I have no issue with being called out, just like I have no issue at all if I stand alone and take a side strongly on an issue.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Actually there are quite a few men who agree with @Marduk on many points.


I personally don't know a single man that is pro-life - as in thinks that a pregnant woman shouldn't get the choice. And I know a lot of me. I normally don't mind if people I know take opposite stances on me on most things; but when it comes to women's rights I now have a red line about it.

I literally would not tolerate someone in my life that thought it was OK for anyone to take away a woman's right to choose. Just like I wouldn't tolerate someone in my life that advocated for the existing "due process" for sexual assault complaints, softening of sexual harassment laws and policies, or any kind of backpedaling on "no means no" - and even further "if it's not a yes, it's a no."

There are certain things that just aren't a debate for me any more - academic, theoretical, or otherwise. 

With that, I'll get the hell off my soapbox and return this thread to you.


----------



## Faithful Wife

@Marduk

When I have been rid of my ignorance about human rights violations and then can’t ever think of a topic the same way, I - like many other people lately - have referred to that feeling as “woke”.

Unfortunately, lots of people hate that word and in some contexts I don’t blame them. But for me the word always meant that a human rights problem came to my attention and I was awakened to a new way of seeing the world because of it.

I am not saying I’m woke in the overall sense, just one topic at a time.

I’m glad you are woke on this one. It really warms my heart. It also helps me be woke about why red pill men are suffering and what they are suffering from. Because you know how easy it used to be for me to trash all of them at once if I was speaking about them here. But I have been awakened to the lack of empathy men receive, and to me this is also paramount. To have happy human beings we must be empathetic to all of them, at least at the human rights level.

Now I shall never use the word woke again here, because it’s not a word people can feel comfortable about. 

But thanks again for being that word which shall not be said by me again.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

MaiChi said:


> Personally I do not see those you list as privileges for women. They are more like control methods.
> In some countries I have worked, women are permanently at risk from men's behaviours.
> 
> Once it gets a little dark, women can be raped by the same man who during light time opened the door.
> Women cannot safely live alone in the house whereas men can
> Women are less likely to get a job than men
> Women a less likely to get Hire purchase agreement than men
> Women are asked to bring a marriage certificate or a husband if they want to be sterilised
> Women are more likely to be car jacked by men than men
> Domestic violence has more female victims than males
> In many countries women are owned by men the same way people own a dog or cat.
> Women have infinitely less privileges than men and what little privileges they may have, such as in western countries as mentioned, are so few compared to those for men, that it is not worth considering them.
> 
> It is always better to be a man, all factors considered.


This may be true based onall of these.

But the rest is a crock, at least in the West.


----------



## uhtred

Monty Python was wonderful at exploring social issues. exp Life of Brian



Faithful Wife said:


> Some religions believe it is.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk


----------



## uhtred

I understand. The issue is that some people believe that the "person" is the fetus. Pretty much everyone agrees that once a baby is born, t has its own rights. Some people believe those rights should start earlier. Some do not. 

I don't think either side is fundamentally evil.










Marduk said:


> I can get behind that. My point is that the person with the body in question is the person that gets to choose.
> 
> We men can hypothesize about whatever we want until the cows come home. It's the person that's in the situation that needs to choose.


----------



## Marduk

@Faithful Wife I think what drives men to the red pill is two-fold: allowing others (women) to define what success is for them, and a profound sense of inadequacy when it comes to other men.

At least that's what it was for me. My wife not wanting me so much any more really bothered me - not just because it meant less sex but because it meant I wasn't measuring up. And it was an attempt to attract her attention, which therefore made me feel successful.

The other side - inadequacy when it comes to other men didn't show up that much for me, except when I'd see my wife turn me down but then drool over some guy on TV. And when she started to pay more attention to me and less to the werewolf guy on true blood, I guess I felt better competition-wise. But I think that's where the whole "20% of the guys get all the girls" stuff comes from. This is why I say the red pill is misandrist - because it somehow thinks that 80% of men don't cut it, and that's just the way it is.

The really hard part though... was the fact that a lot of it worked like a hot damn. It really shouldn't have, but most of the external stuff did. But I guess a lot of that is just be confident, dress well, and be in shape.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Marduk said:


> I can get behind that. My point is that the person with the body in question is the person that gets to choose.
> 
> We men can hypothesize about whatever we want until the cows come home. It's the person that's in the situation that needs to choose.


I'm not taking a position here as, like another has said previously on this thread, I can see both sides. But in seeing both sides I'm compelled to acknowledge that the whole debate hinges on "the body in question" as you put it. When does that thing inside her become a significant body rather than just a tissue mass to be removed like a pesky hangnail or unsightly mole? Some say at conception and I can see why few would agree with that. Some say after a complete, successful birth, and I can see why few would agree with that as well. 


Curious what you think about pro-life _women _who, with all the knowledge and first hand personal experience we men lack, would deny the right to abort.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Marduk said:


> OK fair too, my bad. Maybe I should indulge myself.
> 
> I really, really can't stand when people - especially men - try to take away women's right to choose anything for themselves any more. I just can't ****ing stand it any more. I feel like I'm through the looking glass on this and I just can't see things the same way any more.


I was reading the feminism or whatever thread in the politics section. I read this about an hour and a half or so ago. Everything you said, I agree with. For the most part. You probably are on the other side for your own obvious reasons. I just wonder if you have considered that the pendulum might have swung too far in the other direction? Not that what you feel about the issue is wrong, but maybe your thoughts on what others feel about the issue is a little too extreme. My uncle went flat earth because he saw lies from the government here, and here, and there, and there. Now he thinks everything is a lie. You know what I mean? 

I had a discussion once about abuse in the welfare systems. Same as you, I was looking at it from the inside where my eyes could only see differently. Like you, i urged people to go down into the inner city. Learn the culture. Work with these families. Then come back and tell me it's not a problem. Tell me there's not abuse running rampant. Then I realized we are from two entirely different places on the planet. Completely different cultures. They might do all I said and come back and report differently. That isn't to say your rape culture stuff isn't spot on, it's more to say that I'm very guilty of making assumptions for others as well as accusing friends of being liars because I just didn't want to see or believe them. I was locked in. I'm locked in now, but I'm on a different kick. Haha

In the end, I offered a solution which involves more money spent initially by offering not only checks, but job training. Real life job training paid for by the state. Welding and fork lift certifications and similar type jobs that you can actually make a decent wage doing and require little training before you can step right in. Plumbing and electrician apprenticeships and such. As these families are coming into the work force, the costs of welfare would decrease over time. It's not only that we are helping these families survive, to use the right wing term, we are showing them exactly how to pick yourself up by the boot straps. We even got you some boots! This wont ever pass of course. 


Maybe with an issue like this we can find a similar common ground. It starts by just not being ugly with one another. So, here's a proposed solution and you can shoot it down however you like, I'm interested in what failures you see here. 
We make it the heartbeat. This is based only on the logic that we use heartbeat for death already. No other thought went into this from me other than that simple equation. Second, we provide free pregnancy tests to anyone who wants them. They are literally $1 at any dollar tree. We can cover that cost and make them available everywhere. No vouchers needed, dont care. Walk in, ask for one, get one. That's it. You can test every single day, I dont care. Now most women wont have a need to test every day, so that would rarely ever happen. But if you need to pick up a 5 pack and test every night until you are sure, free of charge. No questions asked. I think they work at about 2 weeks with good accuracy. That leaves roughly 4-6 weeks to make a decision. This is for just general no questions asked abortions or whatever. Medical and other things related to outlying circumstance other than just a simple "oops" will have much longer. Dont care how long actually. 

I think in most cases, people are upset with the "oops" not anything else. From their perspective, that's a baby in there, not whatever clump of cells it is labelled. That "oops" is damn sure not a good enough excuse to take what they see as a life. In their minds, the woman had full control over all her reproductive organs before she made the big "oops." Once a mistake was made, she has to live with the consequences. I've lived with 2 "oops" and have another "oops" on the way. I couldn't imagine life without them. This is another thing people think of. How many of us were actually planned? Haha! So they are also projecting this bit of their lives into things. "What if I decided to abort my baby girl? I would hate myself! They cant make that decision, it's not fair to the child!" That is what I see is the basis of their motivations. I dont ever see them talking about control because I wouldn't listen to that horse **** either. Maybe some of them are disguising nefarious motives. That is a given as we know human nature right? I just think it's a very small number of them. The thing that makes me believe it's so small is there's democrats who are pro-life and Republicans who are pro-choice and women who are pro-life and men who are pro-choice. Most pro-choice are against late term abortions. They recognize there is a clear line where it is no longer just a clump of cells. People see an issue and see what feels like. A lot of pro-life are happy with things like the heartbeat bill and are fine with that being the line in the sand. It's just so hard to find that line so it goes back to all or nothing you know? 

So anyway. I'm trying to find a line that is the least disgusting for everyone involved. But beyond that, we need more education on the subject. We need more resources provided for people who are faced with this decision, which is heartbreakingly sad and difficult to make. That's another one that bugs me from the right is this idea that women get an abortion and it doesn't impact them in any way. That's horse **** too! We need to help these people, not just draw lines in the sand and say "dont cross this!" 

Now, I know this would never get passed for several reasons. First, neither side will like it. Haha. Second, I'm a dumb guy and I'm just spitballing so it probably has lots of holes. I think the discussions we are having aren't working. We continue to draw these lines and it's only our heads going deeper and deeper into the sand. 

Maybe we need to stop asking each other how we feel about an issue, and start asking people what experiences they have with an issue instead. Collect the data, and work from there. Work from a place of understanding of one another so we can empathize and take all common themes into consideration regarding the issue we need to address. We've lost the art of communication is what it feels like. I'm every bit a part of the problem.


----------



## Marduk

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> I'm not taking a position here as, like another has said previously on this thread, I can see both sides. But in seeing both sides I'm compelled to acknowledge that the whole debate hinges on "the body in question" as you put it. When does that thing inside her become a significant body rather than just a tissue mass to be removed like a pesky hangnail or unsightly mole? Some say at conception and I can see why few would agree with that. Some say after a complete, successful birth, and I can see why few would agree with that as well.
> 
> 
> Curious what you think about pro-life _women _who, with all the knowledge and first hand personal experience we men lack, would deny the right to abort.


Exactly the same as pro life men, only 10x more icky. 

To me, denying a woman’s right to decide what she’s going to do with her reproductive organs is as icky as saying a husband has a right to his woman’s body even if she says no. It’s twice as gross somehow to me, because she’s also acting against herself. 

Again, I’m saying that with the meaning that being pro life means taking away a woman’s right to choose. It doesn’t matter to me if you agree with abortion or not - what matters is that someone thinks they get to decide for another woman, or indeed all women. 

Sigh. I said I would get off my soap box.


----------



## Faithful Wife

A random note: I’m astounded that there has not been made a reliable birth control for men. Like easily reversible vas, or something hormonal. These are equivalent to what women use. Why haven’t these items been created safely for men yet? That way a man has more control over his own reproduction and can choose when he is actually ready to make a baby.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> A random note: I’m astounded that there has not been made a reliable birth control for men. Like easily reversible vas, or something hormonal. These are equivalent to what women use. Why haven’t these items been created safely for men yet? That way a man has more control over his own reproduction and can choose when he is actually ready to make a baby.


Most vasectomies are reversible and minimally invasive from what I've read. I wonder if they figure that's already fairly inexpensive and works very well with little health concerns. 

They even shave your balls for you. That's a perk for your ladies right there fellas. Unless your lady likes em hairy I guess. I've always wanted to do a braided style like corn rows myself, but for some reason nobody wants to sit on the front porch and braid my ball hair for me.


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> A random note: I’m astounded that there has not been made a reliable birth control for men. Like easily reversible vas, or something hormonal. These are equivalent to what women use. Why haven’t these items been created safely for men yet? That way a man has more control over his own reproduction and can choose when he is actually ready to make a baby.
> 
> 
> 
> Most vasectomies are reversible and minimally invasive from what I've read. I wonder if they figure that's already fairly inexpensive and works very well with little health concerns.
> 
> They even shave your balls for you. That's a perk for your ladies right there fellas. Unless your lady likes em hairy I guess. I've always wanted to do a braided style like corn rows myself, but for some reason nobody wants to sit on the front porch and braid my ball hair for me.
Click to expand...

Not reversible enough. I’m thinking something like a device like an IUD.

Vas is not that easy to reverse and it would take quite a lot of down time for both surgeries. Not convenient or safe enough.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Marduk said:


> Exactly the same as pro life men, only 10x more icky.


Either way, it removes the idea that it's only men. And as a corollary, It proves that there may be reasons for believing as such that aren't purely the result of ignorance buried somewhere in a Y chromosome. 

As for the "right to choose," there are many things people don't have the right to choose, murder being one, which is why when that fetus becomes more than just a nonviable tissue mass, is so central to this discussion. There's no sidestepping that issue and reducing this purely to an issue of personal choice.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> Not reversible enough. I’m thinking something like a device like an IUD.
> 
> Vas is not that easy to reverse and it would take quite a lot of down time for both surgeries. Not convenient or safe enough.


Yeah, idk why. I imagine it would sell like crazy if it was the cost of BCPs for example. My wife was on a generic without insurance and it only cost us $30/month. If men could get a script for $30/month to shoot blanks, I cant imagine those pills or whatever would be collecting any dust on pharmacy shelves.


----------



## As'laDain

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Perhaps "ruled by fear" is a tad hyperbolic. How about, heavily influenced by fear? You and I are both on an anonymous forum, yet we still keep secrets.
> 
> Nobody gets on with their life when they accept fear. What you are describing is recognizing this fear, and ignoring it in order to overcome it. That's not accepting isht! You are overcoming it. Give yourself credit where its due.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounded like a man opening his heart up to others is what it sounded like to me.


well, i guess there is no point in being afraid anymore... seriously, whats the point?

im afraid, and thats ok. 


anyway...

a couple months ago i found out that i am a complete freak of nature. it seems i am am a chimera. i am two genetic people. 

my father was a twin, and his father was a twin... my mother was a twin as well(paternal). i just recently learned that i was also a twin, a paternal twin. and my twin sister is still with me. 

im so ****ing confused as to what to believe now. after getting an EEG a few weeks ago, i found out that a third of my brain does not function along with the rest of my brain. 

i have basically been told to open myself up to various possibilities because none of my doctors know where to go from here. 

im not ready for all this...


----------



## notmyjamie

Faithful Wife said:


> TheDudeLebowski said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> A random note: I’m astounded that there has not been made a reliable birth control for men. Like easily reversible vas, or something hormonal. These are equivalent to what women use. Why haven’t these items been created safely for men yet? That way a man has more control over his own reproduction and can choose when he is actually ready to make a baby.
> 
> 
> 
> Most vasectomies are reversible and minimally invasive from what I've read. I wonder if they figure that's already fairly inexpensive and works very well with little health concerns.
> 
> They even shave your balls for you. That's a perk for your ladies right there fellas. Unless your lady likes em hairy I guess. I've always wanted to do a braided style like corn rows myself, but for some reason nobody wants to sit on the front porch and braid my ball hair for me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not reversible enough. I’m thinking something like a device like an IUD.
> 
> Vas is not that easy to reverse and it would take quite a lot of down time for both surgeries. Not convenient or safe enough.
Click to expand...

I have an IUD, and I LOVE it. Besides the fact that you don’t have to think about birth control for 5 years, it can also stop your periods which is heavenly. I’ve had one for 17 years and I know if something this were available to men they would love it. To not have to think about it is great. If men having it could stop their partner’s periods they love it even more!! LOL


----------



## As'laDain

notmyjamie said:


> I have an IUD, and I LOVE it. Besides the fact that you don’t have to think about birth control for 5 years, it can also stop your periods which is heavenly. I’ve had one for 17 years and I know if something this were available to men they would love it. To not have to think about it is great. If men having it could stop their partner’s periods they love it even more!! LOL


I really wish that were an option for my wife. Its not working for her though. She is scheduled for a hysterectomy on the 8th of next month. 

If i could take her pain i would.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

As'laDain said:


> well, i guess there is no point in being afraid anymore... seriously, whats the point?
> 
> im afraid, and thats ok.
> 
> 
> anyway...
> 
> a couple months ago i found out that i am a complete freak of nature. it seems i am am a chimera. i am two genetic people.
> 
> my father was a twin, and his father was a twin... my mother was a twin as well(paternal). i just recently learned that i was also a twin, a paternal twin. and my twin sister is still with me.
> 
> im so ****ing confused as to what to believe now. after getting an EEG a few weeks ago, i found out that a third of my brain does not function along with the rest of my brain.
> 
> i have basically been told to open myself up to various possibilities because none of my doctors know where to go from here.
> 
> im not ready for all this...


I've been so stupid. I used to make fun of others who were called brave for opening up. I was driven by my own fears to never open up to others. I was resentful of others who had strength that I never did. Houdini. An escape artist. Your fight response is my flight response. And I had the nerve to look down on others who overcame their fears. Say stuff like "that doesn't make you brave." And other similar diarrhea frothing from my stupid, ugly, disgusting mouth. 

Every single thing about your life is far more bravery than I've ever had to even THINK of experiencing. You continue to prove fear doesn't rule your life. My definition of a hero right there. 

What is it that worries you so much about this diagnosis? What negatives will this have long term?


----------



## Faithful Wife

notmyjamie said:


> I have an IUD, and I LOVE it. Besides the fact that you don’t have to think about birth control for 5 years, it can also stop your periods which is heavenly. I’ve had one for 17 years and I know if something this were available to men they would love it. To not have to think about it is great. If men having it could stop their partner’s periods they love it even more!! LOL


I was imagining a device that cut off his swimmers, that could be removed and inserted relatively easily, like an IUD is for a woman.


----------



## As'laDain

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I've been so stupid. I used to make fun of others who were called brave for opening up. I was driven by my own fears to never open up to others. I was resentful of others who had strength that I never did. Houdini. An escape artist. Your fight response is my flight response. And I had the nerve to look down on others who overcame their fears. Say stuff like "that doesn't make you brave." And other similar diarrhea frothing from my stupid, ugly, disgusting mouth.
> 
> Every single thing about your life is far more bravery than I've ever had to even THINK of experiencing. You continue to prove fear doesn't rule your life. My definition of a hero right there.
> 
> What is it that worries you so much about this diagnosis? What negatives will this have long term?


This probably won't make sense. I would want to hide people who are even remotely like me. 

Its not just a diagnoses... its an explanation. An explanation of what a lot of things actually mean.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

As'laDain said:


> This probably won't make sense. I would want to hide people who are even remotely like me.
> 
> Its not just a diagnoses... its an explanation. An explanation of what a lot of things actually mean.


You are right, that doesn't make sense. :laugh: 
I mean, it does and it doesn't. I can see both sides, but I wonder which one feels right and which one feels better right now? 

Explanations are usually a cause for celebration. Some sense of closure can be reached and if nothing else, some understanding. 

Every puzzle piece of my life fit together all in an instant. Most terrifying, yet exciting, simultaneously worst and best day of my life. I've been freaking out ever sense and my mind wont stop racing. Endlessly racing. Worse than any time and it's always racing anyway. Now I'm in hyperdrive and it's like everything I see is a sign. I feel like I'm losing touch with reality. Like I'm just on some other kind of drug and I've done so many. Maybe I did one too many and I'm actually going insane. Does it feel something like that?


----------



## Marduk

As'laDain said:


> well, i guess there is no point in being afraid anymore... seriously, whats the point?
> 
> im afraid, and thats ok.
> 
> 
> anyway...
> 
> a couple months ago i found out that i am a complete freak of nature. it seems i am am a chimera. i am two genetic people.
> 
> my father was a twin, and his father was a twin... my mother was a twin as well(paternal). i just recently learned that i was also a twin, a paternal twin. and my twin sister is still with me.
> 
> im so ****ing confused as to what to believe now. after getting an EEG a few weeks ago, i found out that a third of my brain does not function along with the rest of my brain.
> 
> i have basically been told to open myself up to various possibilities because none of my doctors know where to go from here.
> 
> im not ready for all this...


Wow. 

Just wow.


----------



## Marduk

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Either way, it removes the idea that it's only men. And as a corollary, It proves that there may be reasons for believing as such that aren't purely the result of ignorance buried somewhere in a Y chromosome.
> 
> As for the "right to choose," there are many things people don't have the right to choose, murder being one, which is why when that fetus becomes more than just a nonviable tissue mass, is so central to this discussion. There's no sidestepping that issue and reducing this purely to an issue of personal choice.


I’m not going to touch this. You know my stance.


----------



## CharlieParker

*Re: Female PrivilegD (non hormones*



notmyjamie said:


> I’ve had one for 17 years


The actual same one? 

I don’t bring it up any more. Her body and all .But we’ve been together close to 30 years. Times she’s seen a lady doc, I can count then on one finger. Her IUD (non hormonal) expired probably before we got together, sigh.


----------



## As'laDain

Marduk said:


> Wow.
> 
> Just wow.


i dont know what to think. i was comfortable with the thought that i was just a bit insane. 

but there is probably more to it than that...


----------



## notmyjamie

CharlieParker said:


> notmyjamie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve had one for 17 years
> 
> 
> 
> The actual same one?
> 
> I don’t bring it up any more. Her body and all .But we’ve been together close to 30 years. Times she’s seen a lady doc, I can count then on one finger. Her IUD (non hormonal) expired probably before we got together, sigh.
Click to expand...


No, I’ve had it replaced twice so far. You are supposed to replace them every 5 years in the US but they will work longer so I was late replacing it last time. I knew it was still working as I still wasn’t getting a period. A non hormonal IUD is very different. Those can stay in for about 10 years I think. They do not stop a women’s periods, in fact they usually make them more difficult. 

What is your wife’s objection to it?


----------



## notmyjamie

Faithful Wife said:


> notmyjamie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have an IUD, and I LOVE it. Besides the fact that you don’t have to think about birth control for 5 years, it can also stop your periods which is heavenly. I’ve had one for 17 years and I know if something this were available to men they would love it. To not have to think about it is great. If men having it could stop their partner’s periods they love it even more!! LOL
> 
> 
> 
> I was imagining a device that cut off his swimmers, that could be removed and inserted relatively easily, like an IUD is for a woman. <a href="http://talkaboutmarriage.com/images/smilies/smile.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Smile" ></a>
Click to expand...

That’s exactly what I envisioned as well. A device that could clamp off the vas deferens and then just unclamp when you want kids. I would think a lot of guys would love this kind of option. Unfortunately, You'd also be clamping off the blood supply and that’s where this plan falls apart.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

notmyjamie said:


> That’s exactly what I envisioned as well. A device that could clamp off the vas deferens and then just unclamp when you want kids. I would think a lot of guys would love this kind of option. Unfortunately, You'd also be clamping off the blood supply and that’s where this plan falls apart.


They already do that. At least one of the options is a small titanium clamp that goes on the vas. Doesn't impact anything. Said to not mess with metal detectors and such. Then when you want a reverse, they just remove the clamps. But they still have to go in there to do it all of it. 

Down time isn't that bad. VAS isnt even that expensive anymore and it works really well. I think more married couples should look into it instead of our women doing whatever. Seems there's still more health risks to female birth control. Doesn't seem fair that women take on the health risks to prevent pregnancy, then turn around and have all the health risks during a pregnancy. This has always bugged me.

Now in our case, Katie has a random cycle. Talking 16 days, then 45 days, then 30, then 22, then 29... Its just random and the gap is that wide. 2 weeks to 6 weeks, roll the dice. Bcp made her cycle regular and she wanted to stay on them for that reason. I didn't like BCPs. Different brands had different negatives. We finally found one that worked with the least side effects but there was still some and it bothered me. We are still trying to figure out if she should get the tubes tied while they are down there or if I should get a VAS. Seems like its still less health risks if I get a VAS not to mention her health is way more important as ive already compromised my own.

They really need to perfect the VAS and make it cheap with all insurance plans or something. I'm talking like $200 or less. Thats a pill most people can swallow. When you go north of that number, its easier on lower income families to go the bcp route.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Makes me think I should just tell my son to have some sperm in the freezer and get a vas. Maybe for a high school graduation present or something? Take him to the sperm bank and then over to the doc to get the snip. Now he's ready for college. :laugh:


----------



## As'laDain

TheDudeLebowski said:


> You are right, that doesn't make sense. :laugh:
> I mean, it does and it doesn't. I can see both sides, but I wonder which one feels right and which one feels better right now?
> 
> Explanations are usually a cause for celebration. Some sense of closure can be reached and if nothing else, some understanding.
> 
> Every puzzle piece of my life fit together all in an instant. Most terrifying, yet exciting, simultaneously worst and best day of my life. I've been freaking out ever sense and my mind wont stop racing. Endlessly racing. Worse than any time and it's always racing anyway. Now I'm in hyperdrive and it's like everything I see is a sign. I feel like I'm losing touch with reality. Like I'm just on some other kind of drug and I've done so many. Maybe I did one too many and I'm actually going insane. Does it feel something like that?


I was chatting with my girlfriend until late last night, hence my short responses. She had her surgery yesterday and is currently recovering. 

Anyway, i have known for a long time that my brain doesn't like to act normally... when i was a kid, surgeon general koop diagnosed me with a benign epilepsy of childhood and loaded me up with enough depakote to turn ne into a zombie for about five years. He ordered an eeg as well. Back then, they had to push electrodes into your scalp and glue them in place. 

I hadnt had an eeg since then, until recently. The issue he saw 28 years ago is still present. It is reminiscent of epilepsy, while i am completely conscious and aware. Technology has come a long way since then, so they now know that it definitely is not epilepsy. 

I have been seeing several specialists to try and figure out why i have such weird sleep patterns. I typically don't go into rem sleep for more than about three minutes, then i wake back up with sleep paralysis, then slip into a lucid dream for about five minutes, then wake up and try to go back to sleep and start the whole process again. Some nights, i just can't seem to get to sleep at all. 

My case is pretty unique, so i was assigned a case manager from walter reed. Ill be moving up there next year anyway, and there really aren't any doctors that specialize in these kinds of things here around fort bragg. 

I just have a **** ton of questions, and am rethinking my medical history. Rethinking just about everything...


----------



## notmyjamie

TheDudeLebowski said:


> They already do that. At least one of the options is a small titanium clamp that goes on the vas. Doesn't impact anything. Said to not mess with metal detectors and such. Then when you want a reverse, they just remove the clamps. But they still have to go in there to do it all of it.
> 
> Down time isn't that bad. VAS isnt even that expensive anymore and it works really well. I think more married couples should look into it instead of our women doing whatever. Seems there's still more health risks to female birth control. Doesn't seem fair that women take on the health risks to prevent pregnancy, then turn around and have all the health risks during a pregnancy. This has always bugged me.
> 
> Now in our case, Katie has a random cycle. Talking 16 days, then 45 days, then 30, then 22, then 29... Its just random and the gap is that wide. 2 weeks to 6 weeks, roll the dice. Bcp made her cycle regular and she wanted to stay on them for that reason. I didn't like BCPs. Different brands had different negatives. We finally found one that worked with the least side effects but there was still some and it bothered me. We are still trying to figure out if she should get the tubes tied while they are down there or if I should get a VAS. Seems like its still less health risks if I get a VAS not to mention her health is way more important as ive already compromised my own.
> 
> They really need to perfect the VAS and make it cheap with all insurance plans or something. I'm talking like $200 or less. Thats a pill most people can swallow. When you go north of that number, its easier on lower income families to go the bcp route.



I had no idea such a thing was possible!! 




TheDudeLebowski said:


> Makes me think I should just tell my son to have some sperm in the freezer and get a vas. Maybe for a high school graduation present or something? Take him to the sperm bank and then over to the doc to get the snip. Now he's ready for college. <a href="http://talkaboutmarriage.com/images/TAMarriage_2015/smilies/tango_face_smile_big.png" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" ></a>



LOL...sounds good on paper but IVF is very hard on a woman...you’d be subjecting his future wife to lots of medical procedures I’m sure she’d rather avoid if possible.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

notmyjamie said:


> LOL...sounds good on paper but IVF is very hard on a woman...you’d be subjecting his future wife to lots of medical procedures I’m sure she’d rather avoid if possible.


Didn't think about that. Well maybe just the vasectomy then. He's the type of kid who needs his career in place before he worries about anything else. Math wiz like him, that gift needs to be protected. He has a lot of potential. 

DD gets good grades but she's not at his level with just natural smarts. Let's just say I'm happy she loves dance so much haha. Otherwise I would be super worried about her. But she wants that career and it hasn't wavered, and continues to show more and more dedication to getting better. 

Katie and I were saying how easy we've had it as parents and are thinking Sophie might bring on the real ... joys of parenting just because karma or something. :laugh:


----------



## CharlieParker

notmyjamie said:


> No, I’ve had it replaced twice so far. You are supposed to replace them every 5 years in the US but they will work longer so I was late replacing it last time. I knew it was still working as I still wasn’t getting a period. A non hormonal IUD is very different. Those can stay in for about 10 years I think. They do not stop a women’s periods, in fact they usually make them more difficult.
> 
> What is your wife’s objection to it?


No idea, it (the IUD and anything remotely gynecological) is literally the only thing we can't talk about, she totally shuts down. I'd imagine the paper gown and spreading one's legs thing is not the most pleasant but having something implanted in your body that no longer serves a function, really? I don't get it.

(Off topic, when I was in college the one week a year I made sure to stay home and not go out was when ACOG was in town, they partied hard, really hard.)


----------



## notmyjamie

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Katie and I were saying how easy we've had it as parents and are thinking Sophie might bring on the real ... joys of parenting just because karma or something. <a href="http://talkaboutmarriage.com/images/TAMarriage_2015/smilies/tango_face_smile_big.png" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" ></a>



Oh yes...the third child gets ya!!! My third is my toughest one to parent by far!!!


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

As'laDain said:


> I was chatting with my girlfriend until late last night, hence my short responses. She had her surgery yesterday and is currently recovering.
> 
> Anyway, i have known for a long time that my brain doesn't like to act normally... when i was a kid, surgeon general koop diagnosed me with a benign epilepsy of childhood and loaded me up with enough depakote to turn ne into a zombie for about five years. He ordered an eeg as well. Back then, they had to push electrodes into your scalp and glue them in place.
> 
> I hadnt had an eeg since then, until recently. The issue he saw 28 years ago is still present. It is reminiscent of epilepsy, while i am completely conscious and aware. Technology has come a long way since then, so they now know that it definitely is not epilepsy.
> 
> I have been seeing several specialists to try and figure out why i have such weird sleep patterns. I typically don't go into rem sleep for more than about three minutes, then i wake back up with sleep paralysis, then slip into a lucid dream for about five minutes, then wake up and try to go back to sleep and start the whole process again. Some nights, i just can't seem to get to sleep at all.
> 
> My case is pretty unique, so i was assigned a case manager from walter reed. Ill be moving up there next year anyway, and there really aren't any doctors that specialize in these kinds of things here around fort bragg.
> 
> I just have a **** ton of questions, and am rethinking my medical history. Rethinking just about everything...


Yeah, I understand with the questions and rethinking everything. When I first found out about the ADHD thing, I got pretty angry. Started questioning everything and making sense of other things. Then I felt mad that nobody noticed. What could have been different if I was helped as a kid? Maybe something would have been different. I could have been somebody! Maybe I graduate and go to college and all that. All the self medicating I've done might not have happened. My self esteem which has been in the dumps my entire life, might be good and normal. I thought of all of that. Felt cheated. Took me time to get over that, but not that long actually. About a week or so of this nonstop what if game I was playing in my head. 

Like you said yesterday, you recognize it, accept it, and move on. Except this is anger I had to just accept. Channel it elsewhere. But me, it always goes to the same place, myself. So I just get mad and then get down on myself and then I'm back into a very dark place. Anger is the great double edge sword. It's a gift, but wielding it unwisely will always cause you to cut others and yourself.


----------



## Faithful Wife

TheDudeLebowski said:


> As'laDain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was chatting with my girlfriend until late last night, hence my short responses. She had her surgery yesterday and is currently recovering.
> 
> Anyway, i have known for a long time that my brain doesn't like to act normally... when i was a kid, surgeon general koop diagnosed me with a benign epilepsy of childhood and loaded me up with enough depakote to turn ne into a zombie for about five years. He ordered an eeg as well. Back then, they had to push electrodes into your scalp and glue them in place.
> 
> I hadnt had an eeg since then, until recently. The issue he saw 28 years ago is still present. It is reminiscent of epilepsy, while i am completely conscious and aware. Technology has come a long way since then, so they now know that it definitely is not epilepsy.
> 
> I have been seeing several specialists to try and figure out why i have such weird sleep patterns. I typically don't go into rem sleep for more than about three minutes, then i wake back up with sleep paralysis, then slip into a lucid dream for about five minutes, then wake up and try to go back to sleep and start the whole process again. Some nights, i just can't seem to get to sleep at all.
> 
> My case is pretty unique, so i was assigned a case manager from walter reed. Ill be moving up there next year anyway, and there really aren't any doctors that specialize in these kinds of things here around fort bragg.
> 
> I just have a **** ton of questions, and am rethinking my medical history. Rethinking just about everything...
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I understand with the questions and rethinking everything. When I first found out about the ADHD thing, I got pretty angry. Started questioning everything and making sense of other things. Then I felt mad that nobody noticed. What could have been different if I was helped as a kid? Maybe something would have been different. I could have been somebody! Maybe I graduate and go to college and all that. All the self medicating I've done might not have happened. My self esteem which has been in the dumps my entire life, might be good and normal. I thought of all of that. Felt cheated. Took me time to get over that, but not that long actually. About a week or so of this nonstop what if game I was playing in my head.
> 
> Like you said yesterday, you recognize it, accept it, and move on. Except this is anger I had to just accept. Channel it elsewhere. But me, it always goes to the same place, myself. So I just get mad and then get down on myself and then I'm back into a very dark place. Anger is the great double edge sword. It's a gift, but wielding it unwisely will always cause you to cut others and yourself.
Click to expand...

Dude, I had asked you about ADD meds awhile back and you were against them.

Has that changed?


----------



## notmyjamie

CharlieParker said:


> No idea, it (the IUD and anything remotely gynecological) is literally the only thing we can't talk about, she totally shuts down. I'd imagine the paper gown and spreading one's legs thing is not the most pleasant but having something implanted in your body that no longer serves a function, really? I don't get it.
> 
> (Off topic, when I was in college the one week a year I made sure to stay home and not go out was when ACOG was in town, they partied hard, really hard.)


Some women absolutely feel that gyn issues are only a women’s domain and so are NOT to be discussed with men, ever. Maybe she’s like that? 

As for leaving the IUD in, in her case it’s not a great idea as it’s made of copper and that will start to leach into your system and can cause copper toxicity. A Mirena IUD is not as big a deal to leave in permanently. Mine will stop working in about 5-7 years...I’ll be 56 by then so won’t really need birth control anymore. My doctor said I can leave it in and forget about it and avoid the hassle of removal or have it taken out. I’ve had one inside me hanging out for so long it wouldn’t bother me to just leave it. I’m so thankful to it for stopping my period for the last 17 years I might just throw it a party LOL

And yes, OB/GYN docs know how to party...their jobs are beyond stressful so when they can let loose, they do!!!


----------



## TheDudeLebowski

Faithful Wife said:


> Dude, I had asked you about ADD meds awhile back and you were against them.
> 
> Has that changed?


A lot has changed. I honestly feel like I'm losing my mind right now. Everything is different. Yes reading 20yr's thread about ADD/ADHD has changed my mind. Not that I can afford to do anything anyway. What if...


----------



## CharlieParker

notmyjamie said:


> copper toxicity


Thanks, something to Google. 

The removal string disintegrated years ago, but I'm not complaining about that.


----------



## AandM

notmyjamie said:


> That’s exactly what I envisioned as well. A device that could clamp off the vas deferens and then just unclamp when you want kids. I would think a lot of guys would love this kind of option. Unfortunately, You'd also be clamping off the blood supply and that’s where this plan falls apart.


This is now in human trials in the US. One pregnancy in 250, and that was attributed to an improper injection. Has never been reversed in humans, but has been reversed in primates.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> A random note: I’m astounded that there has not been made a reliable birth control for men. Like easily reversible vas, or something hormonal. These are equivalent to what women use. Why haven’t these items been created safely for men yet? That way a man has more control over his own reproduction and can choose when he is actually ready to make a baby.


Traditionally, I think it's because men get squicked out by anybody screwing around with their junk (ow, it hurts! what about my masculinity!) and because contraceptives are perceived as a woman's job.

I know in my wife's traditional family such an idea would be 100% verboten. It's all on the women to sort out such stuff for themselves, and in fact, the less a man even knows about it, the better.

Me, I got snipped when I was done having kids. I've been very happy with that decision. I would not want to attempt a reversal though.


----------



## red oak

I haven't read all the posts yet.

One "privilege" I don't think is covered in the OP is voting. 
Men must register with selective service to vote. Women don't. 
May not be as strict as they once were.

Same goes for college aid/loans. In my day if a man wasn't registered for the draft he couldn't get it.
Women could.


----------



## notmyjamie

CharlieParker said:


> The removal string disintegrated years ago, but I'm not complaining about that.


Oh...I’m reminded of a very funny encounter with STBX when he found the string. I knew he had because he started screaming on the top of his lungs!!! Come to think of it, he didn’t find it funny. Now that we’re divorcing the memory is even more funny to me!! LOL




AandM said:


> This is now in human trials in the US. One pregnancy in 250, and that was attributed to an improper injection. Has never been reversed in humans, but has been reversed in primates.


Interesting. The article says they are experiencing a lack of volunteers. Can’t say I blame young men...I’m sure many are afraid their fertility might not return. Many women worry about that with birth control pills.


----------

