Havelock Vetinari

Y'know, that would be a nice reply if it weren't for the fact that guarded statement mentioned involved denying an entire half of humanity a basic right. Kinda ruins it.

Here here!

That about sums up the implications behind that statement. Discrimination based on mere biology is illogical in the extreme. Denying someone the right to take up arms for the cause they believe in simply because of the arrangement of a few chromosomes is hardly the mark of a just society. Perhaps this is not the purpose of this blog article, but as it has evolved into this, I see no reason not to voice my opinion on this vital issue. We might have differing views on certain things Zarayna, but your views seem to involve denying people basic rights. Last I checked BZP had many female members...per chance does this violate the "respect other members" rule? I mean, you can't get more disrespectful then saying that they are not fit to fight because of their gender.

I believe he was talking to me. Your logic, Beggerpie, is flawed. Considering the indefensible bias of many societies ancient and present, women have not taken to the battlefield often enough for their numbers to match the males. It's beyond me why you are even bringing up numbers. More often then not, when the women we know of in history, go to war, they perform competently or above and beyond that. This would suggest that women face no serious problems due to their gender when on the battlefield and that means there is no logical, empirical reason to keep them from fighting.

From the sample group we have, this is the conclusion that can be drawn.

Then why did you bring it up in the first place?

Wow. I don't even...wow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nusaybah_bint_Ka%27ab

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Pingyang

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rani_Lakshmibai

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladiatrix

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kittur_Chennamma

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_Nyak_Dhien

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_Nyak_Meutia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Christina_Tiahahu

I'll let historical examples speak for me here. Considering the competence of the above, there is no logical reason to keep women out of the military.

So women have a different purpose then men? Women shouldn't be fighting?

.....Nope. Nope. That speaks for itself honestly. I could say something, but it'd just detract from that.

*Slow clap*

DeeVee is quite correct.

A simple comparison between Black Widow and half the other "empowered" female characters is quite telling. One only needs to look at what happens to a female character in Skyrim when she wears fur armor to see that. A women can be the most capable fighter in existence within the fictional universe, but sadly, due to the need to appeal to an unfortunately large crowd...well, they are transformed into objects. I would argue that a female being able to fight her way out of any situation is, at least, a step in an empowering direction, though a bit blunt. Considering how many times the same formula has been applied to males, I think this is less of a problem with action girls and more of a problem with protagonists in general. Black Widow at least, has a sensible (more sensible) outfit and despite how some may feel about the revealing portion of it, it's hardly out of the norm. I can walk down the street and see things worse then that. Might even be used for a distraction-she is an assassin after all and every advantage counts in battle.

I'll also quibble a bit with your statement on relationships-you don't have to need or look for a good relationship? Considering the amount of loveless marriages out there and the number of happy celibates, I don't think this is accurate. People seek out mates because they feel the need to, the amount of people who fall in love with one another on sight is quite low. Relationships take work and dedication, and if you weren't looking for one in the first place...well, you won't put much effort into it.

How you choose to perceive my comments is, of course, completely up to you.

True virtues of femininity?

Can I just say I don't understand who some people insist on separating the sexes at all. Beyond the terms of simple biology and some minor chemical changes, we are the same species. Any huge variation that has a dramatic effect on someone's abilities is.....far fetched. The virtues of being feminine or masculine, are basically the same thing.

Huh. Just found out the CEO gave himself a 300% raise AFTER the Unions agreed to a first set of strikes.

Clearly it is all the fault of the Unions. Of course.

Roll for 1d8 SAN loss.

Nevermind. Not worth it.

Well, you have to stand up for what you believe in. I respect them for refusing to knuckle under.

I'd be all for this. Prevent job loss and hey, I bet we could sell them overseas. Tell them it's american luxury food. Worked with those noodles in Japan. Government sells them junk food, makes money, uses money to help pay off debt. Then uses the money to...uh, we'll say build a giant elevator to the moon.

Because why not?

Phase two is complete.

Soon the world will be mine.

I for one am proud of our occasional riots and civil wars. It's an important part of our cultural heritage it is.

That explains the smell of gasoline and burned flesh lingering around me blog.

 

Anyone have a few spare air fresheners?

No. That's the remains of the riot.

I would tend to view it as a natural event, likely linked to fight or flight. The human body simply isn't set up to acknowledge our technology on an instinctual level. Our body evolves slowly, but technology changes quickly. A hundred years is the blink of an eye to evolution, but look at what our technology has done in one hundred years.

So when someone...triggers a certain something, people who read it undergo a fight or flight response on an int-and I'm taking this way to seriously.

Considering most of the time the event you are alluding to needs a trigger, I would say it's more akin to an engine misfiring.

Standard feline panic I think. Happens all the time when I have to take them to vet.

Whoever recorded that is lucky the cat in question isn't trying to gnaw their face off.

Well, I'm a Space Lich from Mars who feeds off human misery. So there's that. Secretwise at least.

As for not being able to force someone to be open-minded...well, I recall a few programs in our history that shut up/changed the minds of a good amount of close-minded people. Involved lots of marches and speeches. Now I'm not comparing Zar's viewpoint to theirs mind. But it does contradict your statement about force.

I can't respect something that doesn't deserve it. Being close-minded is one of those things.

Open contempt for competing ideas is quite harmful actually. One only has to look at history to see that. Beyond that, it's just not what one would expect of a serious philosopher. Or student.

Here's the connection.

Zar here has made no secret of his rather strong opinions on a certain subject banned here. Dawkins has the opposite viewpoint and Zar refusing to read through it objectively, or rather, saying the very idea of doing so makes him want to throw up, reveals a mind unable to cope with contesting viewpoints. A narrow mind. Judging solely from this blog post at least.

The logic does seem to flow doesn't it?

Because. Just because someone doesn't want to do something doesn't mean they shouldn't. That's growing up.

I don't want to type out roughly two essays a week. I do it. I don't want to put up with certain people, but I do. I'd like to read more by Mr. Dawkins daily. But I don't have the time.

Complaining about it helps no one and in this case, reveals something of a narrow mind.