Did women cause the recession?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby compared2what? » Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:51 am

May I have the attention of the board, please?

Thanks, whoever said: "Uh....Okay." Take a moment to read this. I'll be right back.

Stephen Morgan wrote:Women are the house niggers, the lap dogs, the tools.

I have always been a socialist, partly due to my life-long experience of being treated in a manner I deem to be unbeffitng for an Englishman. My raison d'etre, or as the French would say, my reason for being, is to take bloody vengeance upon the ruling class of my country and the world, preferably through a policy of redistributive taxation and workplace democracy. But I can't do that alone and there is no longer a mass movement aimed at these goals, nor has their been since the guardian-ite liberals left their coalition with the socialist left in favour of feminist identity politics, with the occasional nod to black people, muslims, greens and so on, rather than the bread and butter issues of the standards of living of the poor.

My own life, which I like to use as an exemplum for the plight of society at large has seen me constantly under the authority of such female jobsworths, first in school where I was eventually driven out by my constant buttings of head with the female teachers (one thing which make it rather difficult to find work is the fact that I am, officially speaking, illiterate due to my lack of an english qualification, although my inherently scruffy appearance and surly nature may well not help (imagine a man with a bristly red beard, arse-length blonde hair, and a natural inclination to answer questions with words of one syllable or less, then imagine an accent both guttural and coarse incorporating words you haven't heard before of a vaguely insulting and possibly sinister tone (slang words seem to be rarely used by women, examples of those I may say would be, say, bewer, which is not one I've heard from outside the local area, along with the more common terms such as owt/nowt for anything/nothing, summat for something, sen for self, and things along the lines of chinger, chavvy, chore and so forth, from what I gather it's a bad idea to refer to an interviewer as either "chavvy" or "mush") and further imagine that you are interviewing this personage, the you will see, although of course I could simper and scrape for some band of prattling simpletons, that would be acting, which is undignified and hence unworthy)), and more recently through the constant ministrations of the Jobcentre. The staff are almost entirely female and one of them recently reported me to the benefit fraud office for working while signing on, as if I'd still be signing on if I had some other source of income. Of course the jackal who forced his way into my home to investigate me for this non-existent offence wasn't female, they wouldn't be getting their hands dirty (besides, the most compelling, atavistically satisfying course of action would be to beat the buggers to death when then come to do their little investigation, so I suppose a small middle aged man with glasses is a more logical choice than a woman). Indeed I once waited for half an hour to sign on, well past my alloted time while the bitches stood around talking, I kid you not, about what hat they were going to wear to Ascot. Clearly the difference between them and me is that they are much more efficient scroungers.

Of course they don't constitute the ruling class of society, they are merely evil, verminous, scum. The hangman, the occupation soldier shooting an orphan, the policeman beating a peaceful protestor, the electricity worker cutting off a pensioner in the middle of winter, the jobcentre worker making false accusations against claimants, the woman making a false rape allegation, the HR staff member making others redundant while keep their own, more literally redundant, job, obviously all bailiffs everywhere, the concentration camp guard, the women's studies grad, these I should hope we can all agree are scum, although their power is not their own but that of their masters. So it goes. Also amongst these, I would number women using unjust laws to deprive children of their fathers, women claiming alimony other than by the destitute against the extremely wealthy (a rare situation), teachers indoctrinating students with feminist or capitalist lies, women receiving affirmative action, or shelter from a shelter publicly funded for victims of violence when they are not themselves victims of violence, givernment buraeucrats who keep their jobs while productive jobs disappear, and indeed the entire feminist movement and anyone who would put its ephemeral aims on a par with the noble causes of socialism and worker control.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby compared2what? » Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:52 am

Back.

Okay. Now try reading these words. And having just read them in context, please judge for yourselves whether any of the stuff I've cut justifies them, or whether the edit distorts their meaning, or whatever:

Stephen Morgan wrote:Of course they don't constitute the ruling class of society, they are merely evil, verminous, scum....although their power is not their own but that of their masters.


Because I'd say they're strong enough that their meaning is equally plain, either way.

Does anyone doubt that if "they" = Jews, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, blacks, illegal immigrants, alien abductees, RA survivors, members of the GLBT community, Alex Jones fans, or -- in short -- pretty much any class of people on earth besides women (with the possible exception of Democrats), I'd be looking at 14 pages of flame instead of at a half-dozen dispassionate, okay-bored-now posts?

Why is that, RigInters? Whence the uncharacteristic tolerance?

You don't have to reply. In fact, I kind of hope you don't. But please ask yourselves.

Also, for the record, I am not merely evil, verminous scum.

Thanks. Peace out.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:28 am

Stephen, you can’t let the fact that this world is run wrong stop you from getting what is rightfully yours.

If modern relations with women are wrong, duly note it, but focus on cultivating proper relations with women. It’s all you can do, really.

If modern economic/industrial/social arrangements and enterprises are wrong-headed, note it, oppose it where you can, but don’t let it stop you from finding rewarding work. You’ll have to make compromises, but you alone will be the biggest loser if you don’t make some unsavoury compromises here and there.

Me for example, all along in my life I’ve chosen to avoid (to use a very crude phrase) sucking dickas a means to improving my position in the world. As a consequence, and in combination with the fact that I’m quite the social retard to begin with, it is a menial job I find myself doing today, but the actual job I do is rather rewarding.

I work in a sector of an industry which I am in fact ideologically opposed to (the sector that is, not the industry), but if I chose instead to be unemployed, it’s me who would suffer most for it. And if I chose to find similar work in this industry in a sector which I do find ideologically sound and acceptable, I’d be exposing myself to all sorts of problems which the wrongness of the industry (and the wrongness of the world) itself creates, and that I (I calculate) more than most people don’t particularly deserve to be exposed to.

So on the face of it, I could easily be condemned for “selling out” on rigid ideological grounds of my very own choosing, but I don’t feel like a sellout, I actually feel kind of blessed to find myself where I am after a rather convoluted process of both avoiding compromise and avoiding the excesses of ideological unwillingness to compromise.

Go figure, huh?

So consider compromising a little here and there, if you haven’t already.
Last edited by erosoplier on Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:28 am

compared2what? wrote:Stephen Morgan:


Apologies, Stephen.


compared2what? wrote:Working in a white-collar low- or middle-management job of the kind we're using as examples is really not so very cushy. At least eight times out of ten it means working under the thumb of some tyrannical control-freak who's never satisfied. Ask any man or woman who's had experience in the area. I'm confident that he or she will back me up.

Nor do the people who do those jobs get pampered, petted and spoiled. Typically, they spend their days getting glared at suspiciously when they're on the phone if they're not exhibiting enough signs of stress and misery to make it clear at a glance that they're not spending two minutes on -- gasp -- a personal call.


Did you seriously not for a moment consider comparing “white-collar low- or middle-management” jobs with UNEMPLOYMENT before you concluded that they’re “really not so very cushy”?
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:30 am

You don't have to reply. In fact, I kind of hope you don't. But please ask yourselves.


now i suppose i sort of have to then.


Does anyone doubt that if "they" = Jews, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, blacks, illegal immigrants, alien abductees, RA survivors, members of the GLBT community, Alex Jones fans, or -- in short -- pretty much any class of people on earth besides women (with the possible exception of Democrats), I'd be looking at 14 pages of flame instead of at a half-dozen dispassionate, okay-bored-now posts?


Well, no, not really.

(with thee possible exception of Alex Jones Fans. and only sometimes.)

i think that SM's monologue is almost always at least approaching hate speech. y'know, at best. also near-constant misrepresentation of data to fluff out his hyperbole.

Why is that, RigInters? Whence the uncharacteristic tolerance?



i could psychoanalyze the group, but it would be impossible to generalize to everyone, so i can only speak for myself:

He is incapable at present of recognizing any of this. All attempts to reason past it are met with more hyperbole and fluff and complete disregard of any contrary data.
...

plus i just don't like him, and his content coupled with his carbonated classicist prose makes my eyes bleed if i stare at his nonsense for too long.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby justdrew » Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:33 am

I was trying to not feed a troll, and hoping he meant "a narrow subset of" and not "generally all" but looking at it again, that seems like a slim-to-no hope
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Postby OP ED » Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:38 am

justdrew wrote:I was trying to not feed a troll, and hoping he meant "a narrow subset of" and not "generally all" but looking at it again, that seems like a slim-to-no hope



given that he has a long history of saying things that are so vaguely directed that they must be heavily interpretted to not be obvious hate speech...

[thread after thread]



Women are the house niggers, the lap dogs, the tools.


really sort of says it all. and by "all", i mean "hey i'm in need of therapy and reeducation".

i just find it distasteful in total.

(my doubt is running out of benefits)

edit:

btw: i meant that it is hate speech even if he is talking about a particular vaguely defined subset. isn't that what hatespeech is?
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby justdrew » Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:15 am

OP ED wrote:
justdrew wrote:I was trying to not feed a troll, and hoping he meant "a narrow subset of" and not "generally all" but looking at it again, that seems like a slim-to-no hope



given that he has a long history of saying things that are so vaguely directed that they must be heavily interpretted to not be obvious hate speech...

[thread after thread]

i just find it distasteful in total.

(my doubt is running out of benefits)

edit:

btw: i meant it is hate speech even if he is talking about a particular vaguely defined subset. isn't that what hatespeech is?


I must have skimmed passed most of the track record I'm not particularly familiar with it for some reason. Most of it seems more like excessive hyperbole to get a reaction than hate speech per se, but then it does seem to harbor some hatred too; born from some real hardship, but that's no excuse.

Of course at one time or another I've said terrible things about yuppies, republicans, juggalos and crossover-country acts in general. but I'm trying to be less judgmental too. Hopefully SM can too. It almost reads like a rejected Sir Digby Chicken Caesar voice-over monologue.
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Postby compared2what? » Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:34 am

erosoplier wrote:
compared2what? wrote:Stephen Morgan:


Apologies, Stephen.


compared2what? wrote:Working in a white-collar low- or middle-management job of the kind we're using as examples is really not so very cushy. At least eight times out of ten it means working under the thumb of some tyrannical control-freak who's never satisfied. Ask any man or woman who's had experience in the area. I'm confident that he or she will back me up.

Nor do the people who do those jobs get pampered, petted and spoiled. Typically, they spend their days getting glared at suspiciously when they're on the phone if they're not exhibiting enough signs of stress and misery to make it clear at a glance that they're not spending two minutes on -- gasp -- a personal call.


Did you seriously not for a moment consider comparing “white-collar low- or middle-management” jobs with UNEMPLOYMENT before you concluded that they’re “really not so very cushy”?


Simple answers to simple questions:

No. I did not seriously not for a moment consider comparing "white-collar low- or middle-management" jobs with UNEMPLOYMENT before I concluded that they're really not so very cushy.

Poverty is akin to torture, or the systematic oppression on the basis of political affiliation, class, race, ethnicity or gender, or child abuse, or capital punishment. It's antipathetic to a free and just society in an absolute sense, and therefore a zero-tolerance issue. Also, it kills people. And, you know, UNEMPLOYMENT leads ineluctably to poverty, either in the short or the long term. I'm not even gonna add "imo." Because it's a reality.

Elsewhere in capitalism,*** white-collar low- or middle-management jobs are not so very cushy. The people who do them are not pampered, spoiled, or favored. Those assertions had been made. They were incorrect. So I was addressing that.

Hey! I posted some images for you down in the topics forums a little while ago. Did you see them?

*** ON EDIT: Changed from "On an unrelated note." Because they're not unrelated. They're just not comparable.
User avatar
compared2what?
 
Posts: 8383
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:31 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby wintler2 » Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:56 am

Does anyone doubt that if "they" = Jews, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, blacks, illegal immigrants, alien abductees, RA survivors, members of the GLBT community, Alex Jones fans, or -- in short -- pretty much any class of people on earth besides women (with the possible exception of Democrats), I'd be looking at 14 pages of flame instead of at a half-dozen dispassionate, okay-bored-now posts?


If someone is comfortably stuck in their hating, there is not a whole lot of point in repeating critiques of their position. Mr Morgan has pretty fixed views and no apparent interest in new info, the internet has taught me it is better to argue with a tree: at least it gets you outdoors.
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Wed Aug 19, 2009 6:36 am

compared2what? wrote:On an unrelated note/Elsewhere in capitalism,*** white-collar low- or middle-management jobs are not so very cushy. The people who do them are not pampered, spoiled, or favored. Those assertions had been made. They were incorrect. So I was addressing that.


Compared to most blue collar jobs, and especially to most unwanted unemployment, white-collar low- or middle-management jobs are totally very cushy. I don't see how this can be a controversial claim to make. Of course it depends on what you're capable of, and what you prefer, and the exact job in question, but I've been unemployed, I've worked in a factory, I've got a kind of white collar job right now, and I am friends with some spoilt whiney public servants: I think most white collar jobs are cushy compared to the alternatives. This isn't an assertion, this is an observation based upon my experience. :shrug:


Hey! I posted some images for you down in the topics forums a little while ago. Did you see them?


Yes I believe I did. I just posted there earlier.
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby JackRiddler » Wed Aug 19, 2009 6:43 am

justdrew wrote:Oh good, I was hoping someone would post this story...

It is dead wrong, sexist garbage. It pushes the utterly false claim that the problems were caused by people taking out mortgages they couldn't afford and generally inuring too much debt. That's not the case. Anyone pushing that view is a disingenuous liar. As if mortgages lenders were just forced to give liar loans out to anyone who asked for money. No the cause of this was MEN making fraudulent loans they knew they could sell to other stupid liar MEN to be made into CDOs.


Yes.

compared2what? wrote:To which I'd like to say, and not for the first time, that women stay in low to middle-management office jobs for longer than men do less because they're taking over the world and more because the employers who are running it are aware that you can pay them less, that they're less likely to ask for promotions or raises than men, that they're less likely to quit if they don't get them, and that they're also less likely to take a job that entails either uprooting or moving away from their spouses and children, if any.

So can we please retire that scenario as one of the proofs that women as excessively predatory and ambitious?

Thanks.


Yes.

So, how many women were there among those derivatives traders who created the trillions-bubble that the taxpayers are now shovelling endless trillions into a bottomless pit to "cover," which is the actual banking crisis? If there's one, I'm surprised, so let's try a question that will produce an answer greater than zero: How many women among the brigades of CNBC-style bubble pumpers? Answer: Several! Like Abby Whatserface, right?

Hey, Morgan: Was Margaret Fucking Thatcher your mom? Cos' I think that might just be bad enough to explain your issues.

(Back to my Burlyman's Beer....)

.

ON EDIT: Just read the Morgan rant about his own predicament, plus concentration camp guards and women's studies grads. Priceless. Stands on its own. What need one respond?
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby erosoplier » Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:06 am

JackRiddler wrote:So, how many women were there among those derivatives traders who created the trillions-bubble that the taxpayers are now shovelling endless trillions into a bottomless pit to "cover," which is the actual banking crisis? If there's one, I'm surprised, so let's try a question that will produce an answer greater than zero: How many women among the brigades of CNBC-style bubble pumpers? Answer: Several! Like Abby Whatserface, right?


The question is, should we be gearing up to fight males, or should we be gearing up to fight patriarchy?

How many women live beside and directly benefit from those "derivatives traders who created the trillions-bubble that the taxpayers are now shovelling endless trillions into a bottomless pit to "cover""?

And the millions of males scratching out an existence for themselves and their families in third world nations - are they somehow in on all this Wall Street chicanery?
Last edited by erosoplier on Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
erosoplier
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:38 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby wintler2 » Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:15 am

erosoplier wrote:..Compared to most blue collar jobs, and especially to most unwanted unemployment, white-collar low- or middle-management jobs are totally very cushy..

Broadly agree but its complex. Sales is sometimes whitecollar and is physically cushy, but it corrupts the soul. Some superficially whitecollar jobs require you to be societies sacrifical bumper (eg. social worker, state school teacher) and you have to pick up the pieces and sell the benefits of living in society to individuals who already know that society sucks. I've left (low level) jobs in public service, business & academia because they involved too much sales and am loving semiskilled labouring - sure i sweat and occasionally bleed, but i don't have to kiss anyones arse, in person or on paper, or try to remember what my key performance indicators are, or explain how my role will evolve with the organisations vision statement. Its amazing what people will put up with for airconditioning and an adjustable chair.
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby OP ED » Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:36 am

wintler2 wrote:
erosoplier wrote:..Compared to most blue collar jobs, and especially to most unwanted unemployment, white-collar low- or middle-management jobs are totally very cushy..

Broadly agree but its complex. Sales is sometimes whitecollar and is physically cushy, but it corrupts the soul. Some superficially whitecollar jobs require you to be societies sacrifical bumper (eg. social worker, state school teacher) and you have to pick up the pieces and sell the benefits of living in society to individuals who already know that society sucks. I've left (low level) jobs in public service, business & academia because they involved too much sales and am loving semiskilled labouring - sure i sweat and occasionally bleed, but i don't have to kiss anyones arse, in person or on paper, or try to remember what my key performance indicators are, or explain how my role will evolve with the organisations vision statement. Its amazing what people will put up with for airconditioning and an adjustable chair.


oh geezus.

i know this may not be an exceedingly popular question, but um, wrt: comparative suckness of relative positionings: who cares?

if my choices are seemingly a) starve now or b) starve later after helping others starve now; then frankly, i think i want another option.

a lot of things are assumed by this dialogue, and most of them irk me as strikingly lacking in ambtion, for starters...please don't tell me that our goal is to be a mere reinstatement of the same sort of horrid nineties-era-ultra-service-economies that created this crap....

(sure let's just fight like trapped dogs over a crumbling middle management sector instead of planning our combined attack on the perimeter fencing)

...

The question is, should we be gearing up to fight males, or should we be gearing up to fight patriarchy?


neither as i see it.

the responsibility for making these decisions, as politics and scummy business, rests on specific shoulders, and should be handled accordingly. The subsector and/or ideology and/or abstraction of the enemy is irrelevant. Only a distraction.

...

on nother note, for those of you who find the ultra-misogyny tedious, i also have a question for you:

Why am i the only person i know of here who finds all the "class-warfare" nonsense as distasteful as racism or sexism?

why is it okay to eat people because they're rich?
what about their rich kids? can we eat them too?

[i phrase it that way because i've seen that "joke" a half dozen times here this week]

no. seriously.
User avatar
OP ED
 
Posts: 4673
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:04 pm
Location: Detroit
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 185 guests