Why Is Patriarchy Seen As A Bad Thing?

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I would let them be with their liberalism. It is shocking to see the bearers of Liberalism glorify wanton sex. Then when the facts are produced, that diseases such as Monkey Pox/AIDs/HIV are more prevalent within the homosexuality community, they run like Forest Gump and cry anti LGBTQ.

Monogamy is the tried and tested discipline, everything else results in broken homes, divorces, delinquent children etc.

I see no one addressed this, not sure it's strictly connected to patriarchy though, but it's what I always believed. But times are changing, I guess we will only know as it unfolds whether those changes will prove successful. Is it fair on a child to be brought up by two dads? I think two mums would be more likely to succeed, but that's just me with my sexist baggage.

 

[Technics 1210]

Why is that even relevant?

I am baffled that you think that a woman’s increasing number of sexual partners makes her more and more worthless.

Then again, I don’t see what business of any man it is to concern himself with a woman’s autonomy over her own body.

Why is what relevant? I was highlighting your 'values' - "In nine of the ten most successful countries, women average more than 10 sexual partners before marriage." This claim is relevant, since you brought it up as a defence and criteria of liberal success.

Ask any father of a daughter if they accept your liberal values as a pillar of success for women.

Ask society, including your own liberal society, on how they perceive a woman having multiple sexual partners.

I am not baffled by your values though, its exactly what I would expect from Liberalism, absurdity.

 

[Junaids]

Why is what relevant? I was highlighting your 'values' - "In nine of the ten most successful countries, women average more than 10 sexual partners before marriage." This claim is relevant, since you brought it up as a defence and criteria of liberal success.

Ask any father of a daughter if they accept your liberal values as a pillar of success for women.

Ask society, including your own liberal society, on how they perceive a woman having multiple sexual partners.

I am not baffled by your values though, its exactly what I would expect from Liberalism, absurdity.

I’m the father of a daughter, the husband of a wife and the son of a mother.

Who are men supposed to be sleeping with if “decent” women can’t sleep with as many people as men? How does that work?

I’ll judge a person by their personality, their skills, their conversation and their interests and knowledge. How many people they have slept with is completely trivial, but then I don’t see why chastity or modesty would be viewed as desirable features.

Who is going to have more suitors: Pamela Anderson or Anne Widdecombe?

Everything about this thread seems to be about Incels having female hostages.

 

[Technics 1210]

I’m the father of a daughter, the husband of a wife and the son of a mother.

Who are men supposed to be sleeping with if “decent” women can’t sleep with as many people as men? How does that work?

I’ll judge a person by their personality, their skills, their conversation and their interests and knowledge. How many people they have slept with is completely trivial, but then I don’t see why chastity or modesty would be viewed as desirable features.

Who is going to have more suitors: Pamela Anderson or Anne Widdecombe?

Everything about this thread seems to be about Incels having female hostages.

I feel sorry for you. No wonder liberalism is a failed ideology, it lacks any consistency or merit.

Such a ridiculous notion you have, you think having sex with multiple partners determines one’s skill and personality? Oh boy, such low standards! When are you going to start living in the real world?

So you will judge a person based on their skills and personality, yet judge a nation’s success on its women sleeping with 10 men on average - got it.

Pamela or Anne? Hahahaha. This is what your point boils down to? Are you really suggesting Pamela Anderson will have more suitors because she sleeps around? Unreal.

You are fascinated by sexual constructs; nothing more or less, this is the way you measure society, value women, and your standards by the number of iphones, laptops, ipads, and, sexual partners, one has.

If there ever is an advert/warning for what is wrong with Liberalism, then I’m reading/seeing it now.

 

[Junaids]

I feel sorry for you. No wonder liberalism is a failed ideology, it lacks any consistency or merit.

Such a ridiculous notion you have, you think having sex with multiple partners determines one’s skill and personality?

So you will judge a person based on their skills and personality, yet judge a nation’s success on its women sleeping with 10 men on average - got it.

If there ever is an advert/warning for what is wrong with Liberalism, then I’m reading/seeing it now.

I don’t think you comprehended my post.

I said that I will judge a woman by her skills and personality, not her sexual history. You don’t seem to have understood that concept.

And earlier I pointed out earlier that the countries which have the highest quality of life are the ones in which women are the most liberated.

That doesn’t mean that it is because women have sex with more men that these countries are more successful.

It means that it is the liberation of women to reach their potential which leads to their nations’ success. (And also, separately, which liberates them to enjoy more freedom in their private lives).

I think you are struggling to understand how cause and effect work.

 

[Technics 1210]

I don’t think you comprehended my post.

You’ve changed your tune again.

Fact is, you pin point a nation’s success on the average number of men, women sleep with. Your words not mine, in this thread.

It is you who perceives women as sexual objects, figures, given liberal westerners see no issue in parading their women.

Forget liberalism, you give freedom a bad name.

 

[Junaids]

You’ve changed your tune again.

Fact is, you pin point a nation’s success on the average number of men, women sleep with. Your words not mine, in this thread.

It is you who perceives women as sexual objects, figures, given liberal westerners see no issue in parading their women.

Forget liberalism, you give freedom a bad name.

No, I am saying that 50% of a country's adults are female, and that if you suppress their potential you place a brake on your country's development.

Any country that is run by a Patriarchy automatically limits itself to being half as successful as a non-Patriarchy.

Again, go back to Netherlands v Saudi Arabia and Denmark v Pakistan.

Even with Saudi oil, the Muslim Patriarchies are models of how NOT to run a society and a country.

The Netherlands isn't a success because the average woman sleeps with 20 men in her life.

She has that sex life for the same reason that she is better educated than women in a Patriarchy and has the ability to get a high-flying job.

And that reason is that she is free to make her own choices. And they are better than the choices a paternalistic man would make for her.

 

[Technics 1210]

Hey Mr. DJ, dance while the record spins.

I notice the number of average men has jumped from 10 to 20. +8 pitch control.

)

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Testosterone is superior to estrogen when it comes to leadership. This is biological reality. This is science.

There is no scientific basis for that. Women can be better at leadership than men as well and vice versa.
That is such a male driven world view that we somehow are better at things then others, or our viewpoint is the best.

Case in point, only two Iceland banks survived, in fact thrived the GFC in 2009. Reason, they had Women Leaders at the top who were more pragmatic in risk taking.

Now, here again men can be pragmatic and do the same things as well. Point is, no one is less than other and both sexes are equal in terms of intelligence, world view, managing things, running economy.

That is the whole point of avoid Patriarchy.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/feb/22/iceland-women

 

[sweep_shot]

I think this thread has run its course. I have nothing further to add.

I conclude by saying these:

- I believe benevolent patriarchy is the best way for a society. Anything else can cause chaos in the long run (which we are seeing in west today).

- Radical feminism is a menace to society. It basically tells women that they can do anything they want; including being topless and sleeping around. No gender (whether man or woman) should have unlimited freedom; it is a recipe for disaster.

- Gender studies is a pseudoscience and a threat to societies worldwide; it should be banned and replaced with something based on actual science. Good on Hungary for banning gender studies.

- Last but not least, female empowerment, female education, and female employment should be taken seriously. These can be achieved with an effective and benevolent patriarchic system.

 

[Junaids]

Addressing the OP's closing remarks:

- I believe benevolent patriarchy is the best way for a society. Anything else can cause chaos in the long run (which we are seeing in west today).
Chaos? You mean success? Living longer, healthier, happier, wealthier, freer lives? That's chaos?

- Radical feminism is a menace to society. It basically tells women that they can do anything they want; including being topless and sleeping around. No gender (whether man or woman) should have unlimited freedom; it is a recipe for disaster.

I have nipples, women have nipples. What is the danger from people seeing them? Who does that harm? My dad grew up in what is now Bnagladesh, where women routinely exposed their midriff in rather daring saris.

- Gender studies is a pseudoscience and a threat to societies worldwide; it should be banned and replaced with something based on actual science. Good on Hungary for banning gender studies.

Gender studies? It's a legitimate scholarly field exploring identity and representation. Are you afraid of female representation?

- Last but not least, female empowerment, female education, and female employment should be taken seriously. These can be achieved with an effective and benevolent patriarchic system.

What business of men are the issues of female education, empowerment and employment? It's as ludicrous as saying that only benevolent women can decide whether a man can be educated or employed, and where!

 

[Champ_Pal]

I think this thread has run its course. I have nothing further to add.

I conclude by saying these:

- I believe benevolent patriarchy is the best way for a society. Anything else can cause chaos in the long run (which we are seeing in west today).

- Radical feminism is a menace to society. It basically tells women that they can do anything they want; including being topless and sleeping around. No gender (whether man or woman) should have unlimited freedom; it is a recipe for disaster.

- Gender studies is a pseudoscience and a threat to societies worldwide; it should be banned and replaced with something based on actual science. Good on Hungary for banning gender studies.

- Last but not least, female empowerment, female education, and female employment should be taken seriously. These can be achieved with an effective and benevolent patriarchic system.

Your issue is that Islam is in support of Patriarchy. Hence you are defending Patriarchy.

 

[Robert]

I think this thread has run its course. I have nothing further to add.

I conclude by saying these:

- I believe benevolent patriarchy is the best way for a society. Anything else can cause chaos in the long run (which we are seeing in west today).

- Radical feminism is a menace to society. It basically tells women that they can do anything they want; including being topless and sleeping around. No gender (whether man or woman) should have unlimited freedom; it is a recipe for disaster.

- Gender studies is a pseudoscience and a threat to societies worldwide; it should be banned and replaced with something based on actual science. Good on Hungary for banning gender studies.

- Last but not least, female empowerment, female education, and female employment should be taken seriously. These can be achieved with an effective and benevolent patriarchic system.

In summary - “Clever girls scare me, so have to be put in their place so I feel safe”.

 

[Tubs]

As already said, it gives one half of the population increased privileges. It isn't simply that there are men in suits sitting in meetings deciding how the patriarchy will be upheld, it stems from thousands of years of patriarchal societies forming certain constructions of how society works. Since human society has been patriarchal since the early-human times (and before that, I'm sure), there is a lot of this ingrained across cultures and societies. Of course, in more progressive nations more has been done to combat this. But it is difficult to undo certain implicit aspects of the patriarchy, at least so soon (since gender equality/feminism has only been a well-known idea for around 100 years).

 

[anikrc1]

There's no argument for patriarchy. On the other hand there are many arguments against radical feminism, the greatest one being it's threat to scientific community. I just represent two theories in post modern feminism and ask [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] what he thinks about them .
1. Principia Mathematica is Newton's rape manual. Because he objectified and investigated nature like men have been doing to women.
2. Building a feminist version of Modern science which should have place for personal experience and subjectivity, going so far as allowing naturaopathy, aromatherapy and other such hocus pocuses as legalised medical therapies.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

In summary - “Clever girls scare me, so have to be put in their place so I feel safe”.

A clever girl could be wearing a burka or a bikini though so it goes beyond that.

Terms like patriarchy or matriarchy are modern constructs. That doesn't make them bad per se, but boilogy is pretty black and white.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

In summary - “Clever girls scare me, so have to be put in their place so I feel safe”.

Historically there were set roles; breadwinner and a homemake. That has evolved, whether the amoral evolution of society where children are being bred ad boc, society accepting and actively promoting omnisexuality, couples interchanging roles and both working, the decrease in parenthood.

Basically, society should be a mother and father, homemaker and breadwinner. Now there is no norm and anything goes.

18th century Britain was like Afghanistan today. It's not perfect but it's arguable whether Britain is any better today on a societal level compared the 18th century, mortality, medicine etc aside.

 

[Champ_Pal]

I get the gist that majority of Pakistani posters have no problem with patriarchy and set roles for Men and women.
Men will be bread winners and women will be homemakers cooking nice stuff in kitchen

 

[Buffet]

Benevolent patriarchy is the type of patriarchy where women are allowed to get educations and have successful careers despite being within a patriarchy.

Patriarchy doesn't automatically mean it is bad for woman. That's my argument.

Half of the world population should thank great thinkers who are allowing them to get education.

 

[sweep_shot]

Half of the world population should thank great thinkers who are allowing them to get education.

You are focusing on grammar and words too much. Look at what I was trying to say.

 

[sweep_shot]

In summary - “Clever girls scare me, so have to be put in their place so I feel safe”.

No. Never said clever girls scare me.

I just want people (both men and women) to get things on merit. Isa Guha shouldn't replace Geoff Boycott due to gender quota, for example.

There seems to be a female quota in the commentary box currently. Why is there a quota? Qualified people should get the jobs always.

 

[Junaids]

Historically there were set roles; breadwinner and a homemake. That has evolved…..

Basically, society should be a mother and father, homemaker and breadwinner. Now there is no norm and anything goes.
.

Yes it has evolved.

Countries without clearly defined gender roles and patriarchy are healthier, better educated, wealthier and more successful.

The past was inferior. So why should we copy it?

Lastly, girls and women outperform boys and men educationally.

So if one gender is going to stay at home to clean and cook and reproduce when demanded, it should be the men. While the women use their superior educational attainment to go out to work, socialise and run the place.

It would also remove any need for hijabs or burkas or even tops, as men wouldn’t be allowed to leave the house except when accompanied by their female guardian.

 

[sweep_shot]

Yes it has evolved.

Countries without clearly defined gender roles and patriarchy are healthier, better educated, wealthier and more successful.

The past was inferior. So why should we copy it?

Lastly, girls and women outperform boys and men educationally.

So if one gender is going to stay at home to clean and cook and reproduce when demanded, it should be the men. While the women use their superior educational attainment to go out to work, socialise and run the place.

It would also remove any need for hijabs or burkas or even tops, as men wouldn’t be allowed to leave the house except when accompanied by their female guardian.

It is scary that many men write like this nowadays. I have to say you have succumbed to radical feminist ideology.

If women are in charge, we may see more wars and fights. Women tend to hold grudges longer and they tend to prolong a conflict.

Here's an article:

Studies reveal women hold grudges longer than men. It doesn't mean it's consistent for all women, but overall, there is a pattern.

..........

Men and Women's Brains Work Very Differently

According to research in the book, Results at the Top, Men tend to be more factual in their thought and action, while women tend to be more intuitive. Put, men like logic, facts and numbers, and women like feelings, emotions, and intuition. It's why women want to talk things out, to better understand and relate. Anytime you involve emotion, it creates a more vibrant experience, but it takes more time and can become more complicated.

Source: https://www.idoinspire.com/blog/do-women-hold-a-grudge-longer-than-men

You are clearly overlooking psychological reality of women.

 

[Junaids]

There is a rather racist assumption in this thread - I think caused by para-religious brainwashing - that the children of married Pakistani parents are better looked after than the poor children of unmarried Western parents.

The problem is that it’s not true.

The children of unmarried Western parents live longer, are less likely to die in both infancy and childhood, are better educated and end up acquiring more wealth than the children of married Pakistani parents.

So the whole issue is a concocted one artificially created by people who want to stick to their failing, outdated way of life (and premature death).

We had the same debate in the west when the Pill freed women in the 1960’s. That argument was lost by the patriarchs too.

 

[Junaids]

If women are in charge, we may see more wars and fights. Women tend to hold grudges longer and they tend to prolong a conflict..

And yet every war in history has been started by men.

 

[sweep_shot]

And yet every war in history has been started by men.

Yes. It is because there weren't many women leaders before. Also, women in the past used to be sensible. Modern women tend to be not as sensible.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

No. Never said clever girls scare me.

I just want people (both men and women) to get things on merit. Isa Guha shouldn't replace Geoff Boycott due to gender quota, for example.

There seems to be a female quota in the commentary box currently. Why is there a quota? Qualified people should get the jobs always.

The BBC are so blatant it's embarrassing. Barely intelligible people of colour are a band. That it overly forced. Only one I can think of who's food, Steve Ryder impersonator Manish Bhasin. The rest are quite cringe

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Yes it has evolved.

Countries without clearly defined gender roles and patriarchy are healthier, better educated, wealthier and more successful.

The past was inferior. So why should we copy it?

Lastly, girls and women outperform boys and men educationally.

So if one gender is going to stay at home to clean and cook and reproduce when demanded, it should be the men. While the women use their superior educational attainment to go out to work, socialise and run the place.

It would also remove any need for hijabs or burkas or even tops, as men wouldn’t be allowed to leave the house except when accompanied by their female guardian.

They're also brewing less and when they are, feral children in single mother households, reliant on benefits. Aisha RA is Islam's bastion. Stop conflating culture and religion. Take your apostate spiel elsewhere. You're deliberately antagonistic.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

The BBC are so blatant it's embarrassing. Barely intelligible people of colour are a band. That it overly forced. Only one I can think of who's food, Steve Ryder impersonator Manish Bhasin. The rest are quite cringe

Hmm.. *bane, *good

 

[sweep_shot]

The BBC are so blatant it's embarrassing. Barely intelligible people of colour are a band. That it overly forced. Only one I can think of who's food, Steve Ryder impersonator Manish Bhasin. The rest are quite cringe

Hmm.. *bane, *good

Yes. I feel like commentary quality has gone down worldwide.

Pre-90's and 90's used to have great commentators.

If they focus on quality of commentary instead of woke agendas, things may improve.

 

[Junaids]

They're also brewing less and when they are, feral children in single mother households, reliant on benefits. Aisha RA is Islam's bastion. Stop conflating culture and religion. Take your apostate spiel elsewhere. You're deliberately antagonistic.

The OP stated a thread to debate whether Patriarchy is a good or even viable model for society.

I have proven with facts that Patriarchal societies produce less healthy, poorer, less educated people. That married Pakistanis produce and bring up sicker, poorer, less educated kids than unmarried westerners.

I’m sorry that that offends you.

But we in the west see with our own faiths that directives for primitive humans thousands of years ago aren’t valid or helpful now.

We keep women safe by educating males not to be rapists, by having good Police and by having severe penalties for sexual offenders. We don’t make women cover up or stay at home, because the potential victim should have more rights than the potential offender, not less.

The Anglican Church has effectively split because in more primitive locations like parts of Africa there is no acceptance of societal development, and no acceptance that gays can marry or that women can be priests.

But, as always, the people who use ancient religion as a pretext for a conservative society are the ones who under-perform people leading progressive lives on every objective measure.

 

[Robert]

Historically there were set roles; breadwinner and a homemake. That has evolved, whether the amoral evolution of society where children are being bred ad boc, society accepting and actively promoting omnisexuality, couples interchanging roles and both working, the decrease in parenthood.

Basically, society should be a mother and father, homemaker and breadwinner. Now there is no norm and anything goes.

18th century Britain was like Afghanistan today. It's not perfect but it's arguable whether Britain is any better today on a societal level compared the 18th century, mortality, medicine etc aside.

That was not always the norm. That only began with capitalism. Prior to that we were hunter gatherers where the men hunted the food animals while the women kept camp and raised the children.

Since women have been liberated from the kitchens with the vote, they are able to achieve their earning potential. If a family has a high-powered salarywoman and a house husband that’s just a different norm.

Of course 21C Britain is better than 18C Britain because all the population has freedom and agency now instead of just half of it. Women can control reproduction - they don’t have to get married off to the lodger if they are made pregnant through rape.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I get the gist that majority of Pakistani posters have no problem with patriarchy and set roles for Men and women.
Men will be bread winners and women will be homemakers cooking nice stuff in kitchen

Even bread winners is an outdated term, anyone can cook bread these days. Men can't feed babies breast milk though. Maybe in the ideal future Indian guys will perform that role.

 

[Technics 1210]

Anyone who considers Pamela Anderson as the perfect role model of a Matriarchal system is proof why a Patriarchal society is a must, and proof why liberalism is the most dangerous ideology known in humanity and is absolutely bonkers.

 

[Junaids]

Anyone who considers Pamela Anderson as the perfect role model of a Matriarchal system is proof why a Patriarchal society is a must, and proof why liberalism is the most dangerous ideology known in humanity and is absolutely bonkers.

Pamela Anderson has done vast amounts of charity work, apart from bringing up two well-adjusted adult sons.

But her activism across multiple domains means that she is a far better human than any of us are.

But again, because of how she looks and the fact that she’s had several husbands and lovers, you write her off as a human being in spite of her accomplishments.

You seem to be really challenged by women who control their own sex lives.

 

[Robert]

The BBC are so blatant it's embarrassing. Barely intelligible people of colour are a band. That it overly forced. Only one I can think of who's food, Steve Ryder impersonator Manish Bhasin. The rest are quite cringe

I can understand Isa Guha very well.

 

[Robert]

The OP stated a thread to debate whether Patriarchy is a good or even viable model for society.

I have proven with facts that Patriarchal societies produce less healthy, poorer, less educated people. That married Pakistanis produce and bring up sicker, poorer, less educated kids than unmarried westerners.

I’m sorry that that offends you.

But we in the west see with our own faiths that directives for primitive humans thousands of years ago aren’t valid or helpful now.

We keep women safe by educating males not to be rapists, by having good Police and by having severe penalties for sexual offenders. We don’t make women cover up or stay at home, because the potential victim should have more rights than the potential offender, not less.

The Anglican Church has effectively split because in more primitive locations like parts of Africa there is no acceptance of societal development, and no acceptance that gays can marry or that women can be priests.

But, as always, the people who use ancient religion as a pretext for a conservative society are the ones who under-perform people leading progressive lives on every objective measure.

You actually see African missionaries in GB now. Trying to revert us to a backwards form of Christianity.

 

[Technics 1210]

But again, because of how she looks and the fact that she’s had several husbands and lovers, you write her off as a human being in spite of her accomplishments..

Why do you lie so much? Where did I write off Pamela as a human being? You are the one who put Pamela on the pedestal of Matriarchy, and I think its bonkers and shows everything that is wrong with liberalism and you laughable standards.

She hasn't accomplished anything of note other than the infamous tape.

Liberalism will die an ignominious death, as it has in the past, and you are living in lala land thinking liberalism will change a naturally ordained system that has existed since the dawn of humanity.

 

[Robert]

Yes. I feel like commentary quality has gone down worldwide.

Pre-90's and 90's used to have great commentators.

If they focus on quality of commentary instead of woke agendas, things may improve.

“Woke” means aware of the racism in society.

 

[Technics 1210]

And yet every war in history has been started by men.

More lies.

Queens have waged wars too!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4454964/Female-rulers-27-likely-wage-WAR-males.html

I picked Dailymail because it is your favourite source of knowledge. Feel free to search Britannica/Historian sites too.

Honestly, how can you post nonsense while keeping a straight face is beyond me. Liberal propaganda at its finest.

 

[Technics 1210]

Liberals will tell you what Woke means, but they struggle to tell you what man and a woman mean.

)

 

[SpiritOf1903]

The OP stated a thread to debate whether Patriarchy is a good or even viable model for society.

I have proven with facts that Patriarchal societies produce less healthy, poorer, less educated people. That married Pakistanis produce and bring up sicker, poorer, less educated kids than unmarried westerners.

I’m sorry that that offends you.

But we in the west see with our own faiths that directives for primitive humans thousands of years ago aren’t valid or helpful now.

We keep women safe by educating males not to be rapists, by having good Police and by having severe penalties for sexual offenders. We don’t make women cover up or stay at home, because the potential victim should have more rights than the potential offender, not less.

The Anglican Church has effectively split because in more primitive locations like parts of Africa there is no acceptance of societal development, and no acceptance that gays can marry or that women can be priests.

But, as always, the people who use ancient religion as a pretext for a conservative society are the ones who under-perform people leading progressive lives on every objective measure.

No, you person of an inflated ego, your conflating first world, third world and then extrapolating whatever you feel from that.

You're not upsetting me, you're a blatantly racist troll

“Woke” means aware of the racism in society.

Which has resulted in positive discrimination, unwarranted.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/raf-took-steps-artificially-inflate-180100182.html

 

[sweep_shot]

Liberals will tell you what Woke means, but they struggle to tell you what man and a woman mean.

)

Correct.

Check out this masterpiece.

Mindboggling.

 

[sweep_shot]

“Woke” means aware of the racism in society.

Fighting racism doesn't mean there should be a quota system. Quota is discriminatory.

 

[Junaids]

No, you person of an inflated ego, your conflating first world, third world and then extrapolating whatever you feel from that.

You're not upsetting me, you're a blatantly racist troll



Which has resulted in positive discrimination, unwarranted.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/raf-took-steps-artificially-inflate-180100182.html

Actually no.

The Republic of Ireland and Northern England within the last 85 years both had similar bad indicators of health, wealth and education to modern Pakistan.

Saudi Arabia has similar GDP per capita to Spain, the Czech Republic and Greece.

But countries remain underdeveloped while they remain patriarchal. Ireland and Northern England are now modern, wealthy societies BECAUSE the potential of girls and women has been unleashed.

Saudia Arabia is proof that even with vast amounts of oil money, a country will continue to underperform if it is run by men for men.

 

[sweep_shot]

Actually no.

The Republic of Ireland and Northern England within the last 85 years both had similar bad indicators of health, wealth and education to modern Pakistan.

Saudi Arabia has similar GDP per capita to Spain, the Czech Republic and Greece.

But countries remain underdeveloped while they remain patriarchal. Ireland and Northern England are now modern, wealthy societies BECAUSE the potential of girls and women has been unleashed.

Saudia Arabia is proof that even with vast amounts of oil money, a country will continue to underperform if it is run by men for men.

Did you really just put Saudi Arabia is same category as Greece? LOL. Saudi Arabia can probably buy out entire Greece.

Also, how is Saudi Arabia underperforming? They make west look like third world.

In Saudi Arabia, there are low crimes and citizens don't have to pay taxes. West tend to be weak on crimes.

 

[Robert]

Which has resulted in positive discrimination, unwarranted.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/raf-took-steps-artificially-inflate-180100182.html

Sometimes you have to positively discriminate to overcome the institutional racism / sexism / classism in an organisation.

As a white male I have been the overwhelming beneficiary of institutional sexism and racism my whole life. That’s wrong. Sadly you are siding with white racists here.

 

[Robert]

Did you really just put Saudi Arabia is same category as Greece? LOL. Saudi Arabia can probably buy out entire Greece.

Also, how is Saudi Arabia underperforming? They make west look like third world.

In Saudi Arabia, there are low crimes and citizens don't have to pay taxes. West tend to be weak on crimes.

Dear Lord. Because of the extreme polarisation of wealth and power in that country, of course. Very few citizens benefit, and women are oppressed.

 

[Robert]

Fighting racism doesn't mean there should be a quota system. Quota is discriminatory.

If you do it right it is the only fair system.

Two people turn up for a job. There are equally qualified and both interview strongly. Under an institutionally racist system, the white guy gets the job. But IF the organisation has fewer brown guys than the local community then the brown guy gets the job. This eradicates the racism inherent in the institution.

 

[sweep_shot]

Dear Lord. Because of the extreme polarisation of wealth and power in that country, of course. Very few citizens benefit, and women are oppressed.

In west, there are also many homeless and struggling blue collar people. It is exactly not a utopia. There are high taxes too.

In Saudi Arabia, there are low crimes and citizens don't have to pay taxes.

Regarding women being oppressed, I think that's subjective. Preventing woman from being topless is not oppression, for example.

 

[Robert]

Actually no.

The Republic of Ireland and Northern England within the last 85 years both had similar bad indicators of health, wealth and education to modern Pakistan.

Saudi Arabia has similar GDP per capita to Spain, the Czech Republic and Greece.

But countries remain underdeveloped while they remain patriarchal. Ireland and Northern England are now modern, wealthy societies BECAUSE the potential of girls and women has been unleashed.

Saudia Arabia is proof that even with vast amounts of oil money, a country will continue to underperform if it is run by men for men.

Ireland was backward because of the strong role of the Catholic Church.

Now Celtic Tiger has been unleashed due to the huge influx of EU cash, travel and study opportunities across the EU for the young and vast improvements in education at home.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Sometimes you have to positively discriminate to overcome the institutional racism / sexism / classism in an organisation.

As a white male I have been the overwhelming beneficiary of institutional sexism and racism my whole life. That’s wrong. Sadly you are siding with white racists here.

Read the link!

I don't want to be taking somebody's job, who's better equipped, than me, just because I'm brown.

 

[Robert]

In west, there are also many homeless and struggling blue collar people. It is exactly not a utopia. There are high taxes too.

In Saudi Arabia, there are low crimes and citizens don't have to pay taxes.

Regarding women being oppressed, I think that's subjective. Preventing woman from being topless is not oppression, for example.

You seem to have a curious obsession with topless women. Actually it is an indicator of oppression because you imply that men cannot control themselves round partially undressed women. I have walked on topless beaches in Spain and France. It’s no big deal.

Western Europe is a utopia for blue collar people because they have access to much better public services, work freedoms and justice provision,

There were no homeless people in UK decades ago but neoliberal policies have concentrated more and more money in fewer and fewer hands and damaged the social security net.

There might be low crime for the very few hyper rich Saudis who own the place but I very much doubt this is true for the common folk off the posh streets.

 

[Robert]

Read the link!

I don't want to be taking somebody's job, who's better equipped, than me, just because I'm brown.

You wouldn’t. It would stop them employing the white bloke instead of you for racist reasons, if his qualities were not better than yours.

 

[sweep_shot]

There might be low crime for the very few hyper rich Saudis who own the place but I very much doubt this is true for the common folk off the posh streets.

Crimes are low across KSA nationwide. Not just KSA but also other gulf states.

Check these stats: https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Saudi-Arabia/United-States/Crime.

It is because of a few factors. They deport very quickly; criminals are unlikely to find safe havens in KSA.

Also, they have effective punishments which probably deter criminals.

 

[ElRaja]

what happened to live and let live?

to guys who believe in the patriarchy and the man being the head of the household
go and earn enough that a woman can have multiple kids, without worrying about any of her financial needs not being met. if u earn £50k and want a woman who will stay at home to look after you, you need a reality check. whilst not every woman will care how much you make, there is a significant proportion who will be willing to fulfil that role if you can look after them properly.

to guys who do not believe in the patriarchy or traditional familial structures,
humanity has evolved for millennia with a familial pattern which repeats regardless of cultural interaction. it makes no sense to assert that generations of behavioural reinforcement will not predispose certain sexes to want to be in certain roles in a relationship.

fundamentally there 8 billion people in the world, if u are not hypocritical in your demands u will pbly find someone who can fulfill what ur looking for, and as for the other 7.9999 billion, don't worry about them too much, live and let live.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

You wouldn’t. It would stop them employing the white bloke instead of you for racist reasons, if his qualities were not better than yours.

Which is being applied illegally. If there are two equal candidates, then fine. Not shoehorning people in when of lesser quality

 

[Robert]

Crimes are low across KSA nationwide. Not just KSA but also other gulf states.

Check these stats: https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Saudi-Arabia/United-States/Crime.

It is because of a few factors. They deport very quickly; criminals are unlikely to find safe havens in KSA.

Also, they have effective punishments which probably deter criminals.

I know quite a bit about the psychology of punishment. It is not a deterrent for criminals because they do not tend to look forwards beyond the crime. Deterrence works on people who think forward, so they comply with the law. People who don’t think forward will not comply because the possibility of punishment does not occur to them.

I would suggest that a major factor in that discrepancy is underreporting of crime. I bet no woman ever reports rape for instance - in KSA what would be the point?

Though crime in is out of control, basically a lost cause. Europe and have lower figures.

 

[Technics 1210]

Why are Liberals obsessed with sex? In this thread we have liberal spearheads quantifying Matriarchy based on sexual constructs, and liberalism in society are happy to parade their women, including their mothers, as sexual objects.

Religion guides women to dress and act respectfully with dignity, but liberals want the complete opposite.

Such low standards of life and respect.

 

[Technics 1210]

And can we please keep Ireland out of this. Ireland's GDP per capita is not down to products produced but services, such as tax levies on IT companies, this is what promotes flow of money in Ireland.

UK should do the same, lower taxes, but remoaners then complain.

Don't argue with liberals, they have very little understanding outside of MSM.

 

[Technics 1210]

Correct.

Check out this masterpiece.

Mindboggling.

This thread has exposed the hypocrisy of liberalism once again. Liberals weeping over men's perspective of women, yet the same liberals have no problems with their daughters, mothers, wives, and general females, sleeping around and showing skin for sexual desires.

Oh and Pamela is the akin to Mother Theresa.

 

[sweep_shot]

This thread has exposed the hypocrisy of liberalism once again. Liberals weeping over men's perspective of women, yet the same liberals have no problems with their daughters, mothers, wives, and general females, sleeping around and showing skin for sexual desires.

Oh and Pamela is the akin to Mother Theresa.

Found another gem:

Seems like a product of gender studies.

This is something you are unlikely to see in a patriarchic society.

 

[Robert]

Found another gem:

Seems like a product of gender studies.

This is something you are unlikely to see in a patriarchic society.

Someone who thinks they are a wolf is connected to gender studies,

Ok.

 

[sweep_shot]

Someone who thinks they are a wolf is connected to gender studies,

Ok.

This guy identifies as a female wolf. This is apparently a gender identity called "otherkin".

Isn't gender identity a component of gender studies?

 

[SalimBhai]

Why do you lie so much? Where did I write off Pamela as a human being? You are the one who put Pamela on the pedestal of Matriarchy, and I think its bonkers and shows everything that is wrong with liberalism and you laughable standards.

She hasn't accomplished anything of note other than the infamous tape.

Liberalism will die an ignominious death, as it has in the past, and you are living in lala land thinking liberalism will change a naturally ordained system that has existed since the dawn of humanity.

If one thing that is constant is that Rules of what is proper and what is not have always changed over time. Cultures/religions/moral codes have come and gone.

 

[SalimBhai]

Did you really just put Saudi Arabia is same category as Greece? LOL. Saudi Arabia can probably buy out entire Greece.

Also, how is Saudi Arabia underperforming? They make west look like third world.

In Saudi Arabia, there are low crimes and citizens don't have to pay taxes. West tend to be weak on crimes.

Yes Saudi can buy Greece. But what does Saudi produce other than oil. What is the standard of women in Saudi Arabia. How many Nobel price winners, Whats the human rights ranking?

 

[SalimBhai]

In west, there are also many homeless and struggling blue collar people. It is exactly not a utopia. There are high taxes too.

In Saudi Arabia, there are low crimes and citizens don't have to pay taxes.

Regarding women being oppressed, I think that's subjective. Preventing woman from being topless is not oppression, for example.

I don't think anyone is saying women need to be topless is Saudi Arabia. Come on man. Have a honest discussion. There are no taxes because that's a way to keep the population from uprising . I am sure when the oil runs out, there will be taxes.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

This guy identifies as a female wolf. This is apparently a gender identity called "otherkin".

Isn't gender identity a component of gender studies?

Poor thing. Must've been so difficult as a young otherkin being kept in their cage

 

[sweep_shot]

I don't think anyone is saying women need to be topless is Saudi Arabia. Come on man. Have a honest discussion. There are no taxes because that's a way to keep the population from uprising . I am sure when the oil runs out, there will be taxes.

I believe women in KSA have sufficient rights now. They can study, work, and drive. There's no voting in KSA as it has a monarchy. What else is missing (other than liberal stuffs)?

 

[sweep_shot]

Poor thing. Must've been so difficult as a young otherkin being kept in their cage

Indeed.

It is mindboggling that a grown-up adult can think about identifying as a wolf.

He apparently got the idea at the age of 12 while watching an anime.

Scary thing is modern day west is starting to legitimize this instead of curing it.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Indeed.

It is mindboggling that a grown-up adult can think about identifying as a wolf.

He apparently got the idea at the age of 12 while watching an anime.

Scary thing is modern day west is starting to legitimize this instead of curing it.

Thought it was Japanese parody!. Supposedly real...

 

[SalimBhai]

I believe women in KSA have sufficient rights now. They can study, work, and drive. There's no voting in KSA as it has a monarchy. What else is missing (other than liberal stuffs)?

Yes its envy of the world. I am pretty sure other nations will soon start copying Saudi Arabia.

 

[Junaids]

Did you really just put Saudi Arabia is same category as Greece? LOL. Saudi Arabia can probably buy out entire Greece.

Also, how is Saudi Arabia underperforming? They make west look like third world.

In Saudi Arabia, there are low crimes and citizens don't have to pay taxes. West tend to be weak on crimes.

Saudi Arabia is a textbook case of How Not To Run a Country.

Saudi Arabia and Norway are both oil-rich.

Most of Saudi Arabia's oil wealth ends up in the pockets of the ruling Royal Family (estimated at 75%) compared with less than 0.1% of Norwegian oil wealth ending up with their Royal Family. And interestingly, prior to oil, Norway was a poor and underdeveloped nation.

Consequently........

Life expectancy:
Norway 83.2 (4th in the world)
Saudi Arabia 75.8 (80th)

Infant and early childhood mortality per 1000
Norway 2.4
Saudi Arabia 6.6

Percentage of population completing tertiary education
Norway 42%
Saudi Arabia 22%

Median lifetime number of female sexual partners
Norway 13.6
Saudi Arabia 1.0

Risk of female death from sexually transmitted diseases (notably cervicval cancer)
Norway 0.1%
Saudi Arabia 2.4%

The irony is that Saudi Arabia massively underperforms as a nation because it fails to look after and develop the female half of the population.

And Saudi women are 24 times more likely to die of sexually transmitted infections, even though they only average 1 sexual partner in their life.

Whereas Norwegian women actually get to experience a diverse sex life, yet are far far safer than Saudi women are.

By the way, Saudi Arabia must have a TERRIBLE problem with violent crime.

Because they have executed over 1,000 people in the last decade. And at least a dozen of them were children, so goodness only knows what a catastrophic problem them must have with child murderers.

Then again, they sentenced a woman to 34 years in jail for using Twitter last week......

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Saudi Arabia is a textbook case of How Not To Run a Country.

Saudi Arabia and Norway are both oil-rich.

Most of Saudi Arabia's oil wealth ends up in the pockets of the ruling Royal Family (estimated at 75%) compared with less than 0.1% of Norwegian oil wealth ending up with their Royal Family. And interestingly, prior to oil, Norway was a poor and underdeveloped nation.

Consequently........

Life expectancy:
Norway 83.2 (4th in the world)
Saudi Arabia 75.8 (80th)

Infant and early childhood mortality per 1000
Norway 2.4
Saudi Arabia 6.6

Percentage of population completing tertiary education
Norway 42%
Saudi Arabia 22%

Median lifetime number of female sexual partners
Norway 13.6
Saudi Arabia 1.0

Risk of female death from sexually transmitted diseases (notably cervicval cancer)
Norway 0.1%
Saudi Arabia 2.4%

The irony is that Saudi Arabia massively underperforms as a nation because it fails to look after and develop the female half of the population.

And Saudi women are 24 times more likely to die of sexually transmitted infections, even though they only average 1 sexual partner in their life.

Whereas Norwegian women actually get to experience a diverse sex life, yet are far far safer than Saudi women are.

By the way, Saudi Arabia must have a TERRIBLE problem with violent crime.

Because they have executed over 1,000 people in the last decade. And at least a dozen of them were children, so goodness only knows what a catastrophic problem them must have with child murderers.

Then again, they sentenced a woman to 34 years in jail for using Twitter last week......

I'm sure your family are proud of you

 

[sweep_shot]

Yes its envy of the world. I am pretty sure other nations will soon start copying Saudi Arabia.

Saudi women can drive.
Saudi women can work.
Saudi women can receive education.
Saudi women can go outside.

You are yet to answer my question. What women's rights are missing in KSA? Do you want women to ditch hijab? Which right is missing?

 

[sweep_shot]

By the way, Saudi Arabia must have a TERRIBLE problem with violent crime.

Because they have executed over 1,000 people in the last decade. And at least a dozen of them were children, so goodness only knows what a catastrophic problem them must have with child murderers.

Then again, they sentenced a woman to 34 years in jail for using Twitter last week......

Execution is a good thing provided it is justified. I am a big supporter of death penalty for violent criminals and those who deserve it.

Western countries pamper their criminals and those criminals create all sorts of problems (gangs, violence, drug dealing etc.). Many criminals don't learn and they are simply repeat offenders. You are unlikely to see these in KSA.

 

[Junaids]

Saudi women can drive.
Saudi women can work.
Saudi women can receive education.
Saudi women can go outside.

You are yet to answer my question. What women's rights are missing in KSA? Do you want women to ditch hijab? Which right is missing?

1. A woman can’t get a job without the written approval of her male owner in Saudi Arabia.

2. A woman can’t get married without the approval of her male owner.

3. A woman can’t leave the country without the written approval of her male owner.

How could it be any worse?

 

[MenInG]

1. A woman can’t get a job without the written approval of her male owner in Saudi Arabia.

2. A woman can’t get married without the approval of her male owner.

3. A woman can’t leave the country without the written approval of her male owner.

How could it be any worse?

Junaids

I Can assure you that 3 has been removed as has 1 - take it from me.

As far as 2 is concerned, the Nikah in Islam has that restriction but there are various reasons for that.

 

[Junaids]

Junaids

I Can assure you that 3 has been removed as has 1 - take it from me.

As far as 2 is concerned, the Nikah in Islam has that restriction but there are various reasons for that.

Thank you.

At this stage I feel that I need to put in a good word for the Islamic faith.

The Christian and Jewish religious scriptures contain the same misogynistic and downright wrong directives and texts as the Muslim faith.

The vast majority of people in the west - probably a bit less so in the USA due to the amount of uneducated rednecks whose religious education exceeds their formal education - long ago concluded that religious teaching needs to be contextualised.

Contextualised within the societies that those prophets lived in.

Contextualised in a world which pre-dated reliable birth control, and which therefore imposed strict sexual rules because a woman could not control her fertility.

The problem that I have is not just with Islamic fundamentalists but also with Born Again Christians and Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who cannot or will not recognise that teachings intended for illiterate peasants 1500 or 2000 years ago cannot be taken literally in a more evolved world.

And that is why for people like [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] and myself, we see threads like this and find ourselves in a situation in which we and the religiously adherent posters each think that the other's views and actions are completely immoral.

 

[Robert]

Indeed.

It is mindboggling that a grown-up adult can think about identifying as a wolf.

He apparently got the idea at the age of 12 while watching an anime.

Scary thing is modern day west is starting to legitimize this instead of curing it.

If you are going to choose the most extreme and nonsensical example as a failure of Western culture, forgetting the freedoms conveyed by trial by jury, habeus corpus, harm principle, utilitarianism, votes for women, reproductive rights for women, anti-racism legislation, disability rights and LGBTQ rights then it shows the exhaustion of you argument.

Why not just fess up and admit that you are uncomfortable with the idea of women and gays having equal power and opportunity to straight men? If you deny these rights, it is a very short step to non-whites losing the vote.