If you ask black people quite a few will say there's a war going on them. Same goes for feminists, anti feminists, religious people etc.. It's not a view totally without justification. Not to say it is correct in the literal sense, but the fact that many perceive something like that is evidence of great friction.
Some black people owned their own slaves and property. How do you think that happened?
This is getting boring. Pull your weight or I'm done.
Err.. no
I actually found his style very similar to those who were arguing that british rule had been good for the occupied people.
It's only as stupid as people who argue that the caste based system is the best for all of India.
I missed that? When did that happen here?
That's what came to mind for me too.
I didn't. In fact I explicitly said emancipation was one of the great achievements of that movement, but feel free to believe what you want.
Didn't even notice that. "One of the major cons of being a slave is... being a slave." @Lothar read what you are writing please!
I'd say "major cons" is understating things just a tiny bit.
Yes, they are almost as bad as those who think the alternative to British rule at the time was a modern democratic justice based system which they stupidly judge the past by so they can maintain a grudge . They are both laughable aren't they?
You should've seen it before the slaves got freed.
More or less?
Obviously there are some roles and jobs which are inherently suited to a specific gender, for a variety of reasons.
Like...?
Like specific acting roles, modelling (as in, clothes etc). Manual labour is in general less suited to women as on average a woman is less physically strong (this doesn't mean they can't do it, simply that proportionally you won't see as many women on building sites as men, and it isn't due to any sort of favouritism.)
Alright, I'll give you "heavy lifting" but I'm pretty sure women are allowed to be actors and models these days.
You are making a mountain out of a molehill. Of course women are allowed to be actors or models - my original post was simply that there will be times that a role or job requires a man (or a woman) due to its nature, not due to any sexist agenda. On a catwalk you are rarely going to see men modelling women's clothes.
Well, that makes no sense. How can you want women to have the same rights as men and simultaneously not want men to have those rights?
Well the original post/speech by Emma Watson seems to agree that there are issues facing men as well.
Right, and if you re-read the Emma Watson statement then it explains better than I can, why making a movement - in your words - FOR WOMEN, is immediately alienating men from the discussion, and putting the focus exclusively on women, rather than having the focus on equality for everyone.
