showa58taro wrote:I guess I better stop buying Anja and Elena boys PJs... Wouldn't want them to develop a personality or anything...
What kind of personality would that be? Gender specific? Sexuality specific?
Foo seems to want automaton babies who get to be either a boy or a girl.
In other words, normal and healthy babies that are not exposed to liberal insanity during their formative years?
So I should stop them from having choice. Got it. Gonna go with no thanks, that is some pretty dumb logic.
Yes. This is where society has gone off the rails. It is not a choice, you are born a male or female. Parents job is to keep them on the path.
If a child wanted to stop attending school at age 10, would you give them that choice as well? Our job is to use our life knowledge to prevent them from life altering mistakes and keep them on a path to be productive and successful adults.
showa58taro wrote:I guess I better stop buying Anja and Elena boys PJs... Wouldn't want them to develop a personality or anything...
What kind of personality would that be? Gender specific? Sexuality specific?
Foo seems to want automaton babies who get to be either a boy or a girl.
In other words, normal and healthy babies that are not exposed to liberal insanity during their formative years?
So I should stop them from having choice. Got it. Gonna go with no thanks, that is some pretty dumb logic.
Yes. This is where society has gone off the rails. It is not a choice, you are born a male or female. Parents job is to keep them on the path.
If a child wanted to stop attending school at age 10, would you give them that choice as well? Our job is to use our life knowledge to prevent them from life altering mistakes and keep them on a path to be productive and successful adults.
did society go off the rails when men started growing their hair longer? despite them being seen as pussies or queers initially, it didn't really break down the culture. fashions change as you said before.
if we were looking at another culture that fought a change in fashion customs, i can't help feeling like we would be all about freedom. how they were being oppressive. etc. maybe, some, to the point of forcing change upon them, even.
showa58taro wrote:I guess I better stop buying Anja and Elena boys PJs... Wouldn't want them to develop a personality or anything...
What kind of personality would that be? Gender specific? Sexuality specific?
Foo seems to want automaton babies who get to be either a boy or a girl.
In other words, normal and healthy babies that are not exposed to liberal insanity during their formative years?
So I should stop them from having choice. Got it. Gonna go with no thanks, that is some pretty dumb logic.
Yes. This is where society has gone off the rails. It is not a choice, you are born a male or female. Parents job is to keep them on the path.
If a child wanted to stop attending school at age 10, would you give them that choice as well? Our job is to use our life knowledge to prevent them from life altering mistakes and keep them on a path to be productive and successful adults.
did society go off the rails when men started growing their hair longer? despite them being seen as pussies or queers initially, it didn't really break down the culture. fashions change as you said before.
if we were looking at another culture that fought a change in fashion customs, i can't help feeling like we would be all about freedom. how they were being oppressive. etc. maybe, some, to the point of forcing change upon them, even.
Long hair as fashion has cycles throughout history. Some of histories biggest bad asses have had long hair. Pretending our little boys are little girls in the mainstream is new.
How many gender queers does it take to stop three savages with knives?
Foo wrote:
Long hair as fashion has cycles throughout history. Some of histories biggest bad asses have had long hair. Pretending our little boys are little girls in the mainstream is new.
How many gender queers does it take to stop three savages with knives?
wearing fashions that would be considered to be a skirt or dress-type of attire also goes in cycles. if you don't want to pretend boys are girls, i'm all for that.
i don't even know how this relates to the thread at all?
Foo wrote:
Long hair as fashion has cycles throughout history. Some of histories biggest bad asses have had long hair. Pretending our little boys are little girls in the mainstream is new.
How many gender queers does it take to stop three savages with knives?
wearing fashions that would be considered to be a skirt or dress-type of attire also goes in cycles. if you don't want to pretend boys are girls, i'm all for that.
i don't even know how this relates to the thread at all?
Do you have examples of when the men dressed in women's clothing of that era?
Foo wrote:
Long hair as fashion has cycles throughout history. Some of histories biggest bad asses have had long hair. Pretending our little boys are little girls in the mainstream is new.
How many gender queers does it take to stop three savages with knives?
wearing fashions that would be considered to be a skirt or dress-type of attire also goes in cycles. if you don't want to pretend boys are girls, i'm all for that.
i don't even know how this relates to the thread at all?
Do you have examples of when the men dressed in women's clothing of that era?
no, it's seen as non-masculine or feminine by the standards of our era, or even of just our culture. and i made that point in the last post.
though i can point to women dressing in men's clothing within an era, if you like?
Foo wrote:
Long hair as fashion has cycles throughout history. Some of histories biggest bad asses have had long hair. Pretending our little boys are little girls in the mainstream is new.
How many gender queers does it take to stop three savages with knives?
wearing fashions that would be considered to be a skirt or dress-type of attire also goes in cycles. if you don't want to pretend boys are girls, i'm all for that.
i don't even know how this relates to the thread at all?
Do you have examples of when the men dressed in women's clothing of that era?
no, it's seen as non-masculine or feminine by the standards of our era, or even of just our culture. and i made that point in the last post.
though i can point to women dressing in men's clothing within an era, if you like?
Men's clothing have long been crafted around utility and thus can be unisex. That is why I pointed to men wearing female clothing. That is why a woman wearing jeans is different than a man wearing a sun dress.
Foo wrote:
Men's clothing have long been crafted around utility and thus can be unisex. That is why I pointed to men wearing female clothing. That is why a woman wearing jeans is different than a man wearing a sun dress.
if an american wore a kilt to a job, or even just around town, would you feel comfortable hanging out?
Foo wrote:
Men's clothing have long been crafted around utility and thus can be unisex. That is why I pointed to men wearing female clothing. That is why a woman wearing jeans is different than a man wearing a sun dress.
if an american wore a kilt to a job, or even just around town, would you feel comfortable hanging out?
Absolutely. If it was a man wearing a dress, I would pass on that freak show, however.
Foo wrote:
Men's clothing have long been crafted around utility and thus can be unisex. That is why I pointed to men wearing female clothing. That is why a woman wearing jeans is different than a man wearing a sun dress.
if an american wore a kilt to a job, or even just around town, would you feel comfortable hanging out?
Absolutely. If it was a man wearing a dress, I would pass on that freak show, however.
fair enough. i don't see how a kilt is utilitarian and a dress or skirt can't be. and men can and do wear fashion that isn't always utilitarian. (especially through history) but this is all just going in circles.
Foo wrote:
Men's clothing have long been crafted around utility and thus can be unisex. That is why I pointed to men wearing female clothing. That is why a woman wearing jeans is different than a man wearing a sun dress.
if an american wore a kilt to a job, or even just around town, would you feel comfortable hanging out?
Absolutely. If it was a man wearing a dress, I would pass on that freak show, however.
fair enough. i don't see how a kilt is utilitarian and a dress or skirt can't be. and men can and do wear fashion that isn't always utilitarian. (especially through history) but this is all just going in circles.
Why do you think you think cultures all over the world, various races, religions, and beliefs adopted gender roles for as long as we have human history? Do you believe anything is just a natural fact?
Foo wrote:
Men's clothing have long been crafted around utility and thus can be unisex. That is why I pointed to men wearing female clothing. That is why a woman wearing jeans is different than a man wearing a sun dress.
if an american wore a kilt to a job, or even just around town, would you feel comfortable hanging out?
Absolutely. If it was a man wearing a dress, I would pass on that freak show, however.
fair enough. i don't see how a kilt is utilitarian and a dress or skirt can't be. and men can and do wear fashion that isn't always utilitarian. (especially through history) but this is all just going in circles.
Why do you think you think cultures all over the world, various races, religions, and beliefs adopted gender roles for as long as we have human history? Do you believe anything is just a natural fact?
i'm not looking for men to not be men, or women to not be women. (except if they are transgender, which is a whole different topic) but i' don't see why something marketed toward one sex or gender can not be used or enjoyed by another. (within reason, so i cover my bases. )
slavery doesn't really have much to do with this discussion, other than the historical standards element. but then you tried to take us down a weird path too, with your three savages with knives thing.
zombie wrote:slavery doesn't really have much to do with this discussion, other than the historical standards element. but then you tried to take us down a weird path too, with your three savages with knives thing.
Just me pointing out that at other times in history, the tiny Muslims jumping out of a van would not have terrorized downtown londoners, because they would have come out of the bars and busted their asses.
zombie wrote:slavery doesn't really have much to do with this discussion, other than the historical standards element. but then you tried to take us down a weird path too, with your three savages with knives thing.
Just me pointing out that at other times in history, the tiny Muslims jumping out of a van would not have terrorized downtown londoners, because they would have come out of the bars and busted their asses.
