Message from @PerformedShelf
Discord ID: 505059080377860127
As a concept, and an idea it certainly does
Personally, I don't know why you'd advocate for equality for a group that is objectively inferior.
As long as we are humans, we will be sexually dimorphic.
What's next, infant suffrage?
They are inferior only physically not in other aspects
Do this test:
If we really believed in equality, we would not separate sports by gender.
If you really believed in meritocracy, and can tell me with a straight face that you are committed to it, then everything would be meritocratic.
Why segregate boxing if it was all about merit and genders are equal?
Let the men box against women. Even in the same weight class it would be a disaster.
Would it?
We would end with a crying heap of women folks and broken jaws.
Let's find out!
Didn't a women's skull break when fighting a trans gender in mma
I was going to say, you wouldnt use a knife to chop down a tree
If people are really not just paying lip service to equality, halleluja!
Let's find out! No more Selective Service Act. No more gendered draft. No more segregeation in sports. BRING IT!
I am 100% going to back you up. Let's fucking do it.
Female guards in male prisons.
But let us also dispense with this double speak and the all the pretense.
And we can start with shared parenting, which so-called "feminist" organizations out for equality have been opposing for decades.
You are? Awesome!
>no more segregation in sports
>equality means we ignore dimorphism
Wew
We will go down in a blazing ball of fire, but the way it's going we will either way. Might as well make it fun.
Thats why earlier I was talking about women conscription
@Beemann This is exactly the kind of double speak I am talking about.
Either men and women are equal or they are not.
Conscription is fine, because you don't have to be GI
If they are dimorphic, then we cannot assume equality of outcome.
You can be equal under the law
If we cannot assume equality of outcome, then exact gender parity is nonsense.
You cannot have it both ways.
If you're talking about biological denialism they're actually not that inconsistent
You can have equal sentencing laws, contracts and so forth, but if you acknowledge dimorphism, then you also have to do away with gendered quotas, whose premise it is to achieve equal outcome.
You cannot have it both ways.
If you just want equal outcomes then whatever gets those outcomes is good
Gendered and racial quotas dont even work toward their intentions
So if you have unisex sports teams and men are winning too much something has to change
So you acknowledge dimorphism AND you want equal outcome?
Do you not see the problem with that?