|
If you aren't arguing the equivalence of the "transfer" then the concept makes no sense, there is no difference between creating a right and "transferring" it from the magical intangible schroedinger's box in which the state keeps all the rights as yet unconceived.
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 19:56 |
|
|
also, taking from someone else to give to someone who needs it is the right thing to do anyway:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/IISC_EqualityEquity-b19db87d63d1464192a8d5b508fd7237.png)
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:19
|
|
|
I think it's absolutely right we have a mister men. And use an all woman short list to fill the role.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:20
|
|
|
This is legit some divine right to rule level of metaphysical nonsense to explain why power dynamics exist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:20
|
|
|
Like the magic Crown that tubgirls all laws over Charles' head.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:21
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If you aren't arguing the equivalence of the "transfer" then the concept makes no sense, there is no difference between creating a right and "transferring" it from the magical intangible box in which the state keeps all the rights as yet unconceived. I am arguing against OwlFancier posted:Then should we have a minister for white empowerment? After all that does not necessarily suggest that anything is being taken away from anybody else. Your clever quip falls flat because the assertion that it does not suggest anything is being taken is false on premise. So the whole idea of 'Oh you want a men's minister, well lets have a white power minister' gotcha doesn't hold. Every empowerment necessarily suggests something being taken, that something being power.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:21
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:But where did the state get those things in the first place, and from whom? I guess that's where we get into the reams of feminist historical research on the disenfranchisement of women from politics in the British Isles.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:21
|
|
|
Rugz posted:No, it was withholding the right of women to vote because it owned the right for women to vote and could do what it liked. Then when women were empowered the right for women to vote was transferred from the state to the women and the state could no longer withhold the right because it did not own it But if the State had and exercised that right before Women Empowered themselves to it, does that not imply that Women weren't part of the state before Empowerment, but that after, they were part Owners of it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:21
|
|
|
AceClown posted:also, taking from someone else to give to someone who needs it is the right thing to do anyway That is an inaccurate diagram because these people are stealing from the stadium proprietor by trying to watch over a fence without buying a ticket. Equality would be if the stadium empowered them with the right to a ticket therefore those losing said right.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:22
|
|
|
Rugz posted:I am arguing against You're not doing a very good job then, considering almost nobody is understanding your point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
Rugz posted:I am arguing against In loving practice however you have reduced the concept of "transfer" to something which is functionally identical to creating ex-nihilo. So your argument that "something is always transferred" is meaningless because you have argued that it includes cases where literally nothing is lost by any other person, which is the reason why people would object to a white power minister. It advocates the meaningful removal of actual material rights from other people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:But where did the state get those things in the first place, and from whom? I think in our system it's literally "God"
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:You're not doing a very good job then, considering almost nobody is understanding your point. It's just Natural Rights done by someone who is trying to apply them to things they have not previously thought through
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:25
|
|
|
 does this help explain why we don't need a mens minister
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
Rugz posted:Literally nobody is saying this. You have jumped whole hog from 'You are saying this thing exists' to 'You are advocating for this thing' and it is tiresome. The right is being transferred. what? the argument was literally that transferring a resource means no change in the net sum of "rights" enjoyed. that necessarily means the exchange results in someone losing their freedom of movement
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:27
|
|
|
Sir Sidney Poitier posted:That is an inaccurate diagram because these people are stealing from the stadium proprietor by trying to watch over a fence without buying a ticket. Equality would be if the stadium empowered them with the right to a ticket therefore those losing said right.  Mega Comrade posted:I think in our system it's literally "God" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:28
|
|
|
And now for a short interlude while the entire thread laughs and remembers the term 'Sideshow God' https://twitter.com/slondonuk/status/1707716833942351914
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:28
|
|
|
Tijuana Bibliophile posted:what? the argument was literally that transferring a resource means no change in the net sum of "rights" enjoyed. that necessarily means the exchange results in someone losing their freedom of movement it's clearly impinging on someone's right to enjoy their wealth you think wheelchairs are free or something
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:29
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:In loving practice however you have reduced the concept of "transfer" to something which is functionally identical to creating ex-nihilo. So your argument that "something is always transferred" is meaningless because you have argued that it includes cases where literally nothing is lost by any other person, which is the reason why people would object to a white power minister. It advocates the meaningful removal of actual material rights from other people. What meaningful rights would be removed by the creation of a men's minister then? Since the comparison you drew was men's rights and white empowerment I assume you have a laundry list of reappropriated rights that such a ministerial position would bring in, and not just a bunch of ex-nihilo considerations to improve the outcomes for a societal group.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:29
|
|
|
AceClown posted:also, taking from someone else to give to someone who needs it is the right thing to do anyway This jaypeg misses the point. The right which is being transferred is elevation, not ability to see over the fence. The end states are exactly the same.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:30
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:It's just Natural Rights done by someone who is trying to apply them to things they have not previously thought through It's trolling where coming up with an argument is more important than having a consistent position to advance. This derail about natural rights is barely relevant to the original topic of demanding a mens' rights minister, which as a Tory will be used to ban feminism from being taught in school and solve incels by creating workfare for sex work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:30
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:
hmm, it's not sexy enough can you draw her more scantily clad and do that weird comics pose so you can see her t&a in the same panel only then can I learn if misogyny is bad
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:34
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:36
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:
Which minister is currently in charge of helping other men, not in shot and with no bench to sit on, to sit on a bench?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:44
|
|
|
Rugz posted:What meaningful rights would be removed by the creation of a men's minister then? Since the comparison you drew was men's rights and white empowerment I assume you have a laundry list of reappropriated rights that such a ministerial position would bring in, and not just a bunch of ex-nihilo considerations to improve the outcomes for a societal group. As I have repeated numerous times, "men's rights" almost universally means the idea that men are suffering because of women, people who advocate for it want power over women, which in practice ultimately means something like "women should not be working, voting, or doing anything except being a combination of my personal sex slave and/or mother" At best it is an unfocused reaction against improvements to women's conditions in the world, at worst it is theocratic fascism that seeks to legally subjugate women as property, I find nothing worth supporting in any of its forms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:47
|
|
|
There is nothing specific to the needs of men that couldn't be covered by an equalities minister.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:49
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:There is nothing specific to the needs of men that couldn't be covered by an equalities minister. Rugz posted:Split the brief off from mental health and women's health strategy minister and do that good old fashioned ministerial thing that all other ministers do. Alternatively, don't split the brief and tell the current minister to get on with their job. However, since the starting point seems to be 'The job isn't being done' the latter seems a bit redundant. This was covered already.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:57
|
|
|
There are very few problems in my life that would not be solved by more money, less work, and better healthcare for everybody. And a "men's minister" would not help with any of those because none of those have anything to do with masculinity.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:57
|
|
|
Rugz posted:Which minister is currently in charge of helping other men, not in shot and with no bench to sit on, to sit on a bench? Would you prefer a minister for that, or for there to be more benches?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:58
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That picture always misses the third panel off for some reason. But without that fence, there is nothing to stop the Savage baseball mensters from running towards that innocent family and beating them to death with sticks. Liberation = bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 15:58
|
|
|
Give them their own sticks and tell them to get the ball. You may accidentally reinvent hurling in the process, another plus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:01
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:There are very few problems in my life that would not be solved by more money, less work, and better healthcare for everybody. And a "men's minister" would not help with any of those because none of those have anything to do with masculinity. Healthcare and masculinity are linked though? In fact one of the big things is that men don't seek out medical help when they need it because of the concept of masculinity. Walk it off, toughen up, I can handle it, etc. That is not a 'the healthcare system need to be fixed by the healthcare minister' that is a 'the X minister needs to sort out the barriers to healthcare for men'. Tijuana Bibliophile posted:Would you prefer a minister for that, or for there to be more benches? The minister for more benches has clearly already failed in their brief, otherwise there would be enough benches for everyone and the woman would have her own bench in the picture. Therefore it makes sense to split the portfolio down into manageable chunks for different offices.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:02
|
|
|
There is already a thing which tries to stop men from adhering to nonsensical patriarchal standards and it's called "feminism" The people who want a men's minister don't like it very much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:03
|
|
|
Dreading this thread finding out there’s an international Men’s day
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:03
|
|
|
I'd agree with having a minister in charge of combatting the concept of masculinity. Not sure I'd call it a men's minister
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:06
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:There is already a thing which tries to stop men from adhering to nonsensical patriarchal standards and it's called "feminism" And if the message isn't getting through? Just tell people to listen harder or rebrand the message?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
Rugz posted:And if the message isn't getting through? Just tell people to listen harder or rebrand the message? I would probably suggest that sidelining the people who keep 1: telling men that feminism is the problem and why they are miserable and 2: that we apparently need a men's minister to solve the problems that feminism has caused, would be a helpful step. Some people wilfully cling to ideas which don't work, this can be because they are trapped in an environment which works very hard to exclude and discredit the actual solutions. If I had a method to resolve this I would already have fixed every problem in the world, because what this broadly describes is the entire concept of politics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:09
|
|
|
Rugz posted:Healthcare and masculinity are linked though? In fact one of the big things is that men don't seek out medical help when they need it because of the concept of masculinity. Walk it off, toughen up, I can handle it, etc. That is not a 'the healthcare system need to be fixed by the healthcare minister' that is a 'the X minister needs to sort out the barriers to healthcare for men'. You do know that if there were two benches and the woman sat on the empty bench instead of the one which already has a man on it, he'd whine just as much about how slighted he felt. How'd you minister that away
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:10
|
|
|
Tijuana Bibliophile posted:How'd you minister that away Any decent minister would stifle council budgets until the benches fall into disrepair and collapse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 19:56 |
|
|
Blasmeister posted:Dreading this thread finding out there’s an international Men’s day  (Also the men who keep saying "why no men minister" all want the opposite of what IMD was inaugurated to achieve.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2023 16:12
|
|