Anonymous #1 1w

What’s this mean? I’m so sorry I don’t get it

0

Anonymous OP 1w

Societal standards: Men judge women and women judge men for what they want to date. Therefore if (generalized) women care about something (I.e wanting a man to make more money) that becomes a standard. Same with body count Most men ik don’t care much about body count if it’s someone they really click with, as long as it’s not like 30+, to where they may feel like that can represent different values in life

6

Anonymous #1 1w

Thank you

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Only men I’ve seen care are religious ppl and chronically online people

2

Anonymous #3 1w

Also, since women are the baby-havers, a woman who sleeps around and gets pregnant means the baby’s father is a mystery. Whereas if a man does the same thing, and gets two different women pregnant, if he was the only one seeing those women, then the children’s parentage is still clear. Again, not saying that it’s right in the modern day where we have widely available contraceptives and shit, but I think these are the roots of these norms around sex.

10

Anonymous #3 1w

I think modernity has rendered these norms outdated, and that’s a different debate. But, given the fact that such norms exist across the entire world in all sorts of different societies, there’s clearly anthropological reasons for why they came to be the accepted norms. Like nowadays we have paternity tests, which eliminates the Unclear Lineage issue, but before we had those tests, you can see why those people would value female chastity, so they know who’s kids are who’s.

12

Anonymous #4 1w

Women ARE the gatekeepers for sex and procreation. In a stable civilization, they choose true champions and you get offspring that are champions. A different way of looking at it is a friends quote, “When women are hoes, evil men get to have sex. It takes all altruism out of getting sex as a man if you can be evil and women will still sleep with you.”

2

Anonymous #5 1w

So I pretend I’m a virgin or??

0

Anonymous OP 1w

No don’t do that. Don’t have a relationship built on lies

6

Anonymous #1 1w

Fuck

0

Anonymous #1 1w

I have too many bodies

1

Anonymous OP 1w

No you don’t lol. Truly

3

Anonymous #1 1w

You don’t know how many I haveee

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I mean if we clicked in every other way and u were ok with me being a virgin it could work.

4

Anonymous #1 1w

It’s really just my insecurity but we would have to work through it and I would want to make sure our intimacy means something to both of us yk

6

Anonymous #1 1w

You’re a virgin? You don’t care about me having bodied

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Yes it’s not something within the top 30+ things I look for in a future gf

8

Anonymous #1 1w

Aw

5

Anonymous #3 1w

because patriarchy has ruled most of the world forever and still today. men had this idea that they were stronger and tougher, therefore should be the ones in charge and it’s hurt, held back, and killed women ever since. double standards are part of that.

-1

Anonymous #2 1w

biology often has nothing to do with a society’s double standards. things like gender norms, morality, and standards are uniquely human inventions

0

Anonymous #7 1w

Men are, on average, (of course there are statistical outliers) stronger and tougher than women.

-4

Anonymous #7 1w

So is “civilization”. The code in which humans live by, their “morality” and standards allow for creations and stability animals cannot achieve.

0

Anonymous #4 1w

yes but that does not mean they should make all the decisions. women are great leaders and i personally believe better leaders than men, there are studies on this and countries lead by women even tend to have way more legal equality and ethical initiatives. the world needed and still needs women in power

6

Anonymous #4 1w

it still doesn’t negate the fact that it’s not about biology.. if we invented it, we can fix it and make it better. we should constantly be striving to hear new ideas and perspectives

0

Anonymous #7 1w

Women still prefer to be led by men. There were several studies which I’m not going to take the time to cite because this is a chat app not an academic journal, where women who have worked several jobs stated they preferred to have a male “boss” rather than a female boss. The researchers attributed the data/results to the “queen bee” Delemma.

-2

Anonymous #7 1w

New does not always equal better, it just creates a different pattern. We know which patterns lead to what, and all the “new” patterns humans attempted to “normalize” through their hubris, lead to the abomination that is the civilization to which we currently reside.

-2

Anonymous #7 1w

Patriarchy also has its roots in material conditions historically and anthropologically but is one of those things that’s outdated because we don’t live in ancient times anymore

1

Anonymous #4 1w

don’t get all puritanical on me now😭 it also sounds like you’re trying to say something else here..

1

Anonymous #3 1w

We currently live in material conditions. As long as we exist in civilizations where “things” are built, there will be material conditions.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Like, patriarchy didn’t develop because a bunch of men were like “fuck them women lol” it developed because once humans started farming men became responsible for a vast majority of the food production and power goes where the food comes from. Nowadays we don’t need that shit but in ancient times it made sense

1

Anonymous #7 1w

Come to your own conclusions but don’t project concepts I didn’t write directly.

1

Anonymous #4 1w

i was referring to nations, not businesses. and no, i would MUCH rather have a woman in office, and i don’t know a single woman in my life who would say otherwise🤷🏼‍♀️

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Well back in the day you kinda had to be a man to do the extremely intense labor of harvesting and tilling, but nowadays anyone can drive a combine.

1

Anonymous #4 1w

yes, because you said it indirectly. i’m curious as to what you think is abominable tho

1

Anonymous #3 1w

Men were also the leaders of hunter gatherer societies and nomadic civilizations. (Mongolia) Not due to “food”. It has to do with “risk” and men are more sacrificial until they gain the experience to be leaders. We protect women because they have inherent worth to the future without taking extra risk of venturing into the unknown and combating chaos. Christian’s would argue we protect and value women even if they don’t have children because they too are made in the image of God.

1

Anonymous #4 1w

In ancient times where everything was more labor intensive, yeah you needed basically all dudes on a construction crew, farm, etc. because you needed their upper body strength to do those things. Nowadays we have machines that take away a lot of that need, and make women equal in a lot of areas of labor. Not to mention how much of our economy is mental labor, which both sexes are obviously capable of.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

The lying, the gossip, the systemic corruption, the fact that we let rapists and murderers procreate and didn’t issue the death penalty when we changed the laws and no longer issued the death penalty for such things. The “progress” we made, appears to have been progress towards a civilization that incentivized people to not be “civil”.

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Mongolia isn’t the model of all hunter-gatherer societies, and we have a lot of evidence that in many of them they had a matriarchal structure because the women who gathered plants produced more food for the tribe than the men who got maybe one animal per week

1

Anonymous #3 1w

I’ve worked construction recently. The machines help, but there need for skilled labor is not dwindling. If anything, there are too few strong men to accomplish jobs on time. Why do you think it appears constructions is ongoing and everlasting in Auburn? What do your own eyes show you?

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Construction*

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Well construction often takes a longer time than it needs to because contractors, especially those hired by the government for things like roads and shit, are attempting to squeeze as much money as possible for the job, nothing to do with a lack of strong dudes to do the job.

1

Anonymous #3 1w

If anything is being replaced by machines/AI, it’s “mental labor” And don’t kid yourself, the details that go into physical labor are not without mental labor. It’s not mindlessly swinging a pick ax.

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Also, most of the skilled trades aren’t the ones that require brute strength. Any strong dudes can be a laborer, it takes precision and intelligence to do things like electrical, welding, plumbing, etc. work a lot more than it does brute physical strength

1

Anonymous #3 1w

That’s not what I’ve found on site. It’s true some jobs the contractors in the office try to slow things down, but the inhibitor is always who can get what crew where who has the skills to accomplish the task in the order needed. More crews, quicker we work. More guys capable of doing multiple skill sets, the quicker we move. Those times you see people standing around we are often waiting for one guy, with a specific skill set to either find a utility line, dig around a fiber optic cable, etc

1

Anonymous #3 1w

How many women do you see using their free will to take up trades like electrical welding plumbing? Women tend to desire “inside” “people based” professions. Men tend to desire outside, things based professions.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

This has been a stimulating conversation so allow me to find common ground and cede part of a point on the “woman leader” concept. No matter the task and/or rank, regardless of gender, the person who has faced + “survived” (it’s not always life or death) the most chaos in that sector becomes the leader. More often than not, it’s a man, especially over time, but it can be said, sometimes it’s a woman. Men tend to be much more willing to face chaos/risk more often, to die for the women/kids.

0

Anonymous #4 1w

I mean a large part of why women don’t go into blue collar fields is also that the men on site don’t exactly treat them well when they do, last story I heard about a woman welder was because one of her coworkers murdered her with a sledgehammer because he was mad at her presence. And obviously it’s not all blue collar dudes, but I’m sure there was plenty of signs with that dude and the way he talked about her that none of the other dudes on site called him on.

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Contractors also don’t hire enough crews because under capitalism labor is a cost, because the goal isn’t doing the tightest and best work, it’s profit, and the more hands you hire, the less profits you make.

1

Anonymous #3 1w

I didn’t recommend an ex do electric line work because it could turn violent, but the guys on the team were honest in saying she was attractive enough it would distract the team from their work. She didn’t particularly like the trade but the union was paying $150k + benefits. We live in a strange time when women have traded working for their families for working for companies. Longer hours, less compassion for when they are sick, less care for their well being. I don’t recommend it in general

1

Anonymous #3 1w

This is why I hate that our government contracts out public works projects to private companies instead of having a government-funded crew that does those things. It introduces a profit motive where one is not needed.

1

Anonymous #3 1w

I mean that’s rarely a solid solution too, it’s true what they say about if you want a project to last forever, tell the government to fix it. Nearly everything the government/s has tried to “fix” is 10x more expensive than private. What do you think about altering the terms of contracts public to private to be half the money up front, half when it’s finished. This “cost plus” nonsense, I’ve found, is the target for most corrupt schemes contractors focus on.

1

Anonymous #4 1w

What war did o start on here good lord

-3

Anonymous OP 1w

As the song goes, slightly altered for this pacific situation. You didn’t start the fire OP “it’s been always burning since the worlds been turning”

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Specific*

1

Anonymous #4 1w

You sure?

1

Anonymous OP 1w

Pretty sure 🤔. Origin story has something to do about a false god named Prometheus or a fiery sword given to a couple fleeing a garden.

1

Anonymous #4 1w

Well we also have a government where one of the parties is so fundamentally against the idea of government services that what they do is fund those services as little as possible so they no longer function properly, and then use that dysfunction to justify further cuts and eventually, pushing it into private hands by saying “look, it doesn’t work anyways”

1

Anonymous #4 1w

It’s the #1 strategy of the pro-privatization right wing, starve a government service until it no longer works properly, and then once it no longer works bring in the private sector as “innovative solutions.” This was Ronald Reagan’s entire playbook, and the playbook of every Republican president since.

1

Anonymous #3 1w

What do you suggest? It would appear the Ancient Greek philosopher’s were correct in the concept “Virtue rarely exists in the extremes.”

1

Anonymous #4 1w

I’ve always liked the idea of public sector for necessities, and private sector for consumer goods. So like, for a television, I wanna get it from the private sector, the roads? Public good. Firefighters? Police? Healthcare? K-12 Schools? Public goods, should be state run and funded by the state without profit motives. Because the profit motive for luxuries leads to innovation, profit motives for necessities lead to abuse.

1

Anonymous #3 1w

Fair assessment. Outliers like lasik eye surgery tends to throw me through a loop. The whole concept of insurance reeks of corruption especially in the health care industry. Fortunately we have the technology to map the corruption through the government surveillance state and AI data sifting, when the feds actually intend to start putting people in handcuffs before we get more Luigi style vigilante’s… perhaps only God knows. I do pray the people with badges and credentials pretending to be 1/2

1

Anonymous #4 1w

2/2 good guys, actually start acting like it. They have the tools to enforce government oversight and accountability on the corrupt private sector.

1