Search results

right. i'm talking about feminism as a political or governmental program, though, not ivory tower scholarly theory. my point is that most of the third-wave program is beyond the purview of 'governance', which is kind of the point- making it third-wave, and not second-wave. hence the irrelevance...

is the push for more than equal rights not mainstream, or less mainstream? if so, by how much? as for third wave feminism, so what? we're talking about political programs here, and third wave feminism simply isn't one. they have very few cogent aims, and the ones they might have (such as...

no im not, i didn't even identify any positions other than wage disparity. but please, enlighten me on the struggles of the struggles of 'non-rich, non-white' women, and why that means women are deserving of anything more than equal treatment under the law. don't know what a 'basis of equality'...

an excellent riposte

no im sorry but 4chan is not responsible for the use of the phrase in modern parlance, though they may use it a fair bit. and if you think 4chan is full of sex craved misogynistic tosspots you are mistaken not that 4chan isn't the arse end of the internet, mind you anyways i would say modern...

when will the male-female height inequality be addressed? this is a shocking injustice perpetrated by men worldwide

you do realise that giving women "equal voting" means they can vote in women-specific legislation so that's pretty much the only right they actually 'deserve'

women earn more on an hourly basis than men in professional tennis precisely because of equal winnings close the wage gap, end the equality

4chan didn't coin the phrase white knight you goose

higher taxes, harmonious society

greens don't care about the real issues.

pleasure to be of service m'lady no but seriously the greens would run this country into the ground

that whole article makes me want to kill myself. i don't get it. is he implying that price controls, salary caps, and a sales tax on overseas goods are "orthodox economics"? is he implying that mainstream economics is orthodox economics? and almost everything he mentioned was populist bullshit...

ask her if she is a reptillian

because australians are more deserving of high living standards than foreigners

technically this thread was over after the first post answered the original question

any thing can be reduced to fit into it but the validity of the conclusions is inversely proportional to how far reduced the thing really is - what kernels of truth are discarded in the process of reduction. ergo, you can reduce the great intangibles, your love or religion, to economics and...

even that might be taking it too far. i think the weaker claim (how you pursue it is economic) is more agreeable. whats with all the judgements? no one is telling you how to live your life. we have only suggested that there are modes of analysis (such as economics) that are conducive to the...

ok, so you've established that you can quote out of context, and that you get outraged if someone is curious as to why you're commenting on labour economics when you don't know much about it, and that you respond to congenial and cordial discussion with petulence the only amendment to the...

and no one seriously pretends otherwise. so what's your point? i asked why. i haven't once implied that everything fits neatly into economic or scientific frameworks. they're models. they're analytical tools. they help us think. you keep strawmanning me, and economics, and attacking my...