Roche bought Genentech. Europe sucks?

@JK

that's not just an anecdote, that's an anecdote from 8 years ago.

@DO

The opinions of the people of Saudi Arabia don't concern me. What matters tome is equality of opportunity. If a girl wishes to be a mechanic or a model or (God help them) a politician they should have just as much chance to get there as a boy. What I disagree with is the idea that equality of numbers should be enforced. If fewer girls want to be engineers, don't force them. If fewer girls want to a military career, that's fine.

What I find revolting is the attacks women repeatedly get by chauvinists, the worst of whom repeatedly attack them for daring to live as they wish and follow the paths they want, and the worst of feminists who repeatedly attack them for pursuing lives feminists consider unworthy, and put them down for daring to have opinions that conflict with those favoured by feminism. To hell with the lot of them.

Im muting this thread.

here's some more solid data. we still have the most drugs produced and most innovative core discoveries. the only lapse has been a short period after the financial crisis, which Europe's public healthcare system was able to ride out, thus allowing for continuous funding on. pharmaceuticals.

still, the long run trend of American dominance is pretty clear

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0077247

I don't know if you've talked to a real feminist before, doesn't sound like you have. I personally don't know feminists who put women down for making whatever choice they want with what to do in life.

I'm going to bother engaging with you on why freedom of choice is actually an illusion, but you can tell that equality hasn't been met just by the amount of women that face sexual harassment and abuse on a regular basis. I also don't know if I know a woman who hasn't faced this at some point in her life, often multiple times or on a regular basis.

Just to clarify. "Feminists" that shame women for deciding to be house wives, etc are not feminists.

With respect, that sounds like the very definition of the no true Scotsman argument.

I know quite a few feminists, and most of them are fine people. But I assure you that there are a good number of nasty pieces of work who identify as feminists and do little but bully women who disagree with them. There are self declared feminists on this very forum who will attack with venom any woman who is pro-choice as being some lesser being. They're often in the same crowd as the rabid anti Nazi brigade.

Like I say, there are plenty of chauvinists out there who need to be taken down. I dare say that a painfully large number of women have experienced prejudice. But the cure for unacceptable male behaviour is not to blind yourself to unacceptable female behaviour.

Feminists are feminists. There are goods and bads just like in every bunch

Same goes with any group, really

>be borderline fascist
>handle is named after a fascist villain
>somehow be seen as less Nazish than normal conservatives

Profit...?

"There are self declared feminists on this very forum who will attack with venom any woman who is pro-choice"

There is a huge, huge difference between criticising someone for choosing to be a housewife, and criticising someone for being pro-choice.

In the first case you would be criticising them for deciding how to live their own life.

In the second case you would be criticising them for trying to control the rights of *other* women over their lives.

The pro-choice movement seeks to restrict women's choices and impose limitations on their rights over their own bodies.

I am aware of no comparable movement which wishes to make it illegal for women to be housewives.

I was called a sexist on this forum for suggesting that women like to be mothers.

Just a reminder. Not sure why this thread reminded me of that.

^ fake reminders.

That is not why you were called a sexist.

^ fake clarification.

That is exactly why.

Jamiet you are still a 'subject' begging for a position in her majesties government.

1) the Scotsperson thing is a false analogy. It's more like saying someone who thinks capitalism is great is not a true Marxist. Don't conflate that kind of identity with ideology.

2) there are good and bad feminists, I agree. And there's all kinds of good ones, and all kinds of bads ones. But putting women down for their job choices is neither. It's not feminism. Period.

3) Croak, that is not what you said fuck off

I was shamed for suggesting that when given the option, more women would choose to be mothers and be more fulfilled and happy for it.

But I wouldn't expect you rabid neoliberals to admit that that's exactly what happened when it doesn't support the CURRENT argument that you're having that you attacked someone for defending motherhood.

Surely it’s ok for housewives to put down feminists.

And for menimists to put down feminists who put down menimists for putting down feminists.

I am begging for nothing, Brad, and I'm not sure what you're talking about, frankly. You keep talking about the Queen in relation to me, and it's weird.

And I am also muting this thread, because reading the lies and bullshit that comes out of Croak makes me physically sick.

Eh, I might not always be particularly pleasant but I at least make an effort not to lie.

@DemonOverlord,
Except that that is silly because in the United States women are guaranteed equal protection of the laws and ensured all of the privileges or immunities of any other citizen. Hence, no overtly discriminatory policy can stand, regardless of what level of government enacts it.

To discredit the opinion of another woman because it doesn't comport with your opinions, by simply dismissing it as "Stockholm syndrome," or something along those lines, is profoundly anti-intellectual and frankly, pathetic.

@"Ben Franklin said after the Constitutional Convention, that we have a Republic.. if we can keep it. Right now, we are trying to keep it. The election of Trump against the rampant corruption of President O and Clinton was the first step to keeping the Republic safe. "

I've never heard such utter bull. Bush, Clinton, Bush 2, and Obama were all part of an establishment which screwed the American people, who took money for massive influential corporations, and spent billions on weapons of war. They all waged war.

Hillary would have followed suit. Trump is only different in that he is a billionaire with his own agenda.