A Crash Course in Feminism Mk. II (or, why everyone should be a feminist)

[Broodingman87]

[unless you are talking about backwards places wihtout universal suffrage].

Sir, I find that offensive, I live in the American south and that is a backwards place. lol

[Broodingman87]

Actually women have the same sex drive as men, possibly greater, [URL="http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/06/turns-out-women-have-really-really-strong-sex-drives-can-men-handle-it/276598/"]we are just socialised to repress it from a young age[/URL]. It varies from individual to individual but Gotts point about incompatible sex drives in a relationship being a personal issue not a gender one is accurate.

Actually, I was countering gott's statement that men are perverted because society says so.

[eldargal]

According to [URL="http://www.fao.org/gender/landrights/report/en/"]this group[/URL], women make up 19% of land holders in the UK. Can't find anything about 1% global total in the World Bank report yet but I'm still going through it, looks like the WSJ may have jumped the gun on that.

Actually, I was countering gott's statement that men are perverted because society says so.

That wasn't what she said.

[Broodingman87]

that's something feminists are trying to stop by getting rid of the idea that men must be this tough, unfeeling paragon of hyper masculinity who is never bothered by anything and always wants sex

That looks to me like she did.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

So you have never viewed any girl with objection? You've never said anything along the lines of "I'll be in my bunk"?

[eldargal]

So you have never viewed any girl with objection? You've never said anything along the lines of "I'll be in my bunk"?

Finding someone sexually attractive and/or expressing a desire to woo them is not objectifying. There is a difference between expressing admiration of someones appearance or stating that you find them sexually attractive and viewing them only as an object there for your gratification.

[Wolfshade]

According to [URL="http://www.fao.org/gender/landrights/report/en/"]this group[/URL], women make up 19% of land holders in the UK. Can't find anything about 1% global total in the World Bank report yet but I'm still going through it, looks like the WSJ may have jumped the gun on that.

That wasn't what she said.

I think it is also very important this phrase "There are no impediments to women’s ownership or inheritance of land or to their participation in agriculture."

19% of the argicultural landowners
around 30% is not owned by the person who works it , there is no breakdown of the gender divide
so up to around 50% of owners are men, potentially.

I also wonder how much of that 50% have my farmer and spouse on the title deed. How would that be counted?

[eldargal]

There are three categories, male ownerships, female ownership and joint ownership. No legal impediments you mean, that is an important distinction. There are few to no legal impediments to equality left but we still have inequality because of various other cultural factors.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

Finding someone sexually attractive and/or expressing a desire to woo them is not objectifying. There is a difference between expressing admiration of someones appearance or stating that you find them sexually attractive and viewing them only as an object there for your gratification.

I'm not sure that's the implication...

[Gotthammer]

Then rather than just posting vague, possibly rhetorical, questions why not contribute your thoughts on how all people can lessen the problems we're bringing up? If you think there is another implication, why not share it? If you feel that a certain stance is objectifying people, tell us why. You can't complain about a lack of real communication on an issue if you never actually put forward a point of your own (and just saying "I disagree" is not a point to start with).