Just saying but you know that rape has risen in Sweden by this factor largely because they legally broadened the the statistical definition of 'rape' in like 2005 yeh lol?Also, Angela Merkel can fuck off now. It's ludicrous what she's doing to Germany, she's destroying it. She's so blinded by her own political correctness that everyone else is suffering. She actually took the German flag off someone and discarded it. Good work. Nice statement you're making. Now watch your people get raped.
Please watch this video.
When rape has risen 1400% in Sweden but German officials claim 'don't blame the migrants' and then release a code of conduct against their own people. If you get raped it's because of what you were wearing!
If a group of people become terrorists so easily then thats proof they don't belong in the country in the first placeProbably the most idiotic thing you could say if you are against immigrants who are/ become terrorists. This sort of thing is exactly what causes it. Stripping them of their rights and removing support for them will only aggravate & disillusion them and turn them towards extremism. If they are granted residency, this is the LAST thing we should do.
So you're saying by allowing women to access the same opportunities men do and thus seeking equality, is somehow a "seek for female supremacy"? That doesn't make sense at all. It's a seek for equality, not supremacy.I'm not a feminist. Feminism has degenerated into a seek for female supremacy (omg no it hasn't!!!!!!).
Don't know what's funnier, the fact that a forum of this nature exists, or, the fact that you knew about itMods can u move this thread to https://www.stormfront.org/forum/
No, it isn't as if in custodianship based cases women aren't favoured, not at all. Also, we've achieved gender equality. Females have every right that males do. I'm contextualising my argument to the West in specific. How are women disadvantaged today in the Western world?So you're saying by allowing women to access the same opportunities men do and thus seeking equality, is somehow a "seek for female supremacy"? That doesn't make sense at all. It's a seek for equality, not supremacy.
Feminism exists to achieve equality because let's be real here, have females EVER been superior to men in any sort of relevant category here (e.g. education, rights, job opportunities, pay)? No it's always been the other way around in history, hence why feminism is a thing.
Unless you think otherwise? Then tell me a country where females are superior to men in gender - gender statistics.
I can show you many countries where men are superior to women in gender - gender statistics:
http://247wallst.com/special-report/2013/10/30/the-most-unfair-countries-for-women/3/
This is why feminism exists, it's was a massive issue in many first world countries years ago and an issue now for many countries.
Why would you limit your ideas to the western world? Are you saying feminism is needed outside the western world or not? Because I've clearly said why it is needed. To think otherwise would be ignorant and pretty selfish. You can't turn a blind eye to it when trying to argue feminism isn't needed / is stupid or whatever the hell your trying to say.No, it isn't as if in custodianship based cases women aren't favoured, not at all. Also, we've achieved gender equality. Females have every right that males do. I'm contextualising my argument to the West in specific. How are women disadvantaged today in the Western world?
As I said due to the fear instilled by feminists on corporations, people are actually looking to higher more females. Also, many economists have substantial evidence to believe that the gender paygap isn't real.
Go outside and tell me if you meet someone who is actually like what you're describing. I'd be very very surprised if you do meet one, let alone enough to make them a real issue. Normal people are not like that.Thing is you shouldn't be hiring based on gender but on skill. These rampant ravenous radical feminists are ensuring that every aspect of anything involves females. Also, I'm only confining it to the western world because this is where the problem is. Feminists are too busy worrying about whether females should be called actors too instead of actresses (seriously????) instead of combatting the inequality elsewhere. Feminists are so whiny now it's annoying. Their immature behaviour to the slightest of activity is sickening and it's tarnishing the ease at which men and women can communicate.
I would agree with orwell (for the first time) women in the west as has more or less achieved gender equality, though there will always be some cases of inequality, that can not be helped.No, it isn't as if in custodianship based cases women aren't favoured, not at all. Also, we've achieved gender equality. Females have every right that males do. I'm contextualising my argument to the West in specific. How are women disadvantaged today in the Western world?
As I said due to the fear instilled by feminists on corporations, people are actually looking to higher more females. Also, many economists have substantial evidence to believe that the gender paygap isn't real.
I think Orwell is mainly alluding to the western world because we're talking about refugees European countries, but yes, feminism is still definitely needed.Why would you limit your ideas to the western world? Are you saying feminism is needed outside the western world or not? Because I've clearly said why it is needed. To think otherwise would be ignorant and pretty selfish. You can't turn a blind eye to it when trying to argue feminism isn't needed / is stupid or whatever the hell your trying to say.
Because here in aus and the western world of course the gap between men and women rights are very close to equal and not THAT much of a worry. Why are you trying to make it out like I think otherwise?
They probably want to hire more females because they have a low percentage of females in their company and want to equalize that percentage with the amount of male employees. What's wrong with that?
^this.Alright this is getting a little too far, I am open to the idea of getting educated and skilled immigrants or refugees of what ever race or religion.
Believe it or not but there are many females out there who actually do have skills.I would agree with orwell (for the first time) women in the west as has more or less achieved gender equality, though there will always be some cases of inequality, that can not be helped.
I think Orwell is mainly alluding to the western world because we're talking about refugees European countries, but yes, feminism is still definitely needed.
The problem with hiring females to balance the percentage is that they are being hired because of gender not skills or their employment is prioritized over men because of their gender. Anyhow that is already inequality in itself.
^this.
However, i do not support immigrants or refugees that come on the basis of reaping the benefits of a country's welfare, not because they are truly avoiding warring conflicts
Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk