Should White Males be Banned From Voting?

[GordonH]

In "other countries" women prime ministers have been elected. That still doesn't mean North America has elected one.
Kim Campbell did pretty well "for a woman", a comment that speaks for itself. We don't expect women to do much better than be a provincial leader. That's progress, that's not equality.
As for your prediction that a woman would be assured to be elected president in the U.S. (aside from the obvious fact that it has NEVER been done), I don't even think it is likely. The proof is in the pudding. And right now the pudding says Women in North America haven't been elected to lead in their country. Just the fact that a woman got more votes in a U.S. presidential election than a man and still didn't win is pretty ironic don't you think?
If the U.s. or Canada elected even one female federal leader, it still wouldn't prove women were equal. Just as electing one black leader, did not mean African Americans have equal rights in the U.S. It only means, finally, some progress has been made.
Campbell was not elected, and never sat in parliament. Perfect example of tokenism. And of the tunnel vision of men who think that somehow means things are equal (or almost equal) for women in this country.
Just because women are doing so much better than a hundred years ago, doesn't mean they are equal in our society.
If we elect a woman for every federal election in the next fifty years (just to even the stats out a little) then we could say women have acheived somewhere near the same power that men have.
I don't think we should take the vote away from white men, because I think it will be a very good indicator, when Canada can regularly elect a woman as Prime Minister, doesn't even have to be every election. Because then we will know that women have acheived equality in this country.

Highlighted
If you checked 1 Canadian Federal Party has elected 2 as their leader.

[JennParker]

I love this story... it helps (at least in my own mind) to prove a point I made to a co-worker of mine a few months ago (oh and my comments will $%#* off a lot of people, which I also welcome. At least it means you read my post)...

As a middle aged white male who owns a medium sized business, it is my opinion that I am a part of a group of the population that is the most underprivileged demographic in Canadian society. I clarified this by stating and challenging that my demographic :

- Has the least amount of advantages of any other class/race/age group/colour/etc/etc than any other group in our society. I challenged her to find one area of advantage given to my population group that is only given to my population group. I challenge you, the reader, to define one advantage given to my demographic.

- Have encountered specific opportunities available to other groups (see above comment for clarification of these groups) that I, as a free citizen, am NOT allowed to take advantage of. In our current society that promotes and apparently loves equality and equal access, I do NOT have access to numerous programs and facilities. There are many examples, so here are but a few.. womens only clubs, tax benefits limited to specific races, funding programs and grants only available to people of specific colour, race and ger (of which I do not qualify).
I challenge you, the reader to find a program available to me, a middle aged white male that is only available to me. Please, find one, I would LOVE, LOVE, LOVE to sign up!

- Will always be seen as the MOST privileged. I seriously do not understand this stereotype. I have worked very hard for everything I have. I have never been handed anything by family, society or government. I am not "lucky" to have what I have, I earned it through sweat, risk and perseverance. I pay 100% of the taxes I owe. I do not lie, cheat or steal. I run an ethical business. So what makes me, or anyone in my demographic privileged? Please enlighten me.

I am so anxiously awaiting your responses, oh faithful readers...

I challenge you to post this to another forum where the reader base is mostly people who you claim get all these privileges... based on age, sex, race, religion and whatever else you threw out there. The beautiful thing about having privileges is you don't recognize them until they are stripped from you. Ask the black man walking down the street in Edmonton about his privileges. I bet when that charming white, male, who was middle aged, started throwing out the racial slurs... he felt really privileged. As a middle aged white male you get to walk around with a certain immunity that you will never realize you have until it is taken from you.

[fvkasm2x]

Kim Campbell did pretty well "for a woman", a comment that speaks for itself. We don't expect women to do much better than be a provincial leader. That's progress, that's not equality.

No, it speaks towards your inability to understand the English language.

It's the same as saying:

Jay Z did pretty well in life, for a kid from the projects.
Oprah Winfrey did pretty well, for a small town farm girl.
Steve Jobs wasn't too shabby, for a college drop out.

See how that works? It means people can be successful, contrary to ridiculous opinions.

It means "in spite of" something silly some people consider a negative, they were widely successful. But go ahead and twist to however you think it means.

If you checked 1 Canadian Federal Party has elected 2 as their leader.

That would require logic and effort. Who needs that on the internet?

[Jflem1983]

Some of the biggest blows to the progressive cause in the past year have often been due to the votes of white men. If white men were not allowed to vote, it is unlikely that the United Kingdom would be leaving the European Union, it is unlikely that Donald Trump would now be the President of the United States, and it is unlikely that the Democratic Alliance would now be governing four of South Africa's biggest cities.

If white men no longer had the vote, the progressive cause would be strengthened. It would not be necessary to deny white men indefinitely – the denial of the vote to white men for 20 years (just less than a generation) would go some way to seeing a decline in the influence of reactionary and neo-liberal ideology in the world.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/shelley ... _22036640/

Lol ya white guys are sick of progressive bs . Bring it on ban us from voting . Watch what happens. Locked and loaded . Looking for libs . That's what would happen . Huff po is toilet paper anyhow who cares what they say

[Silverstarqueen]

.

Highlighted
If you checked 1 Canadian Federal Party has elected 2 as their leader.

I meant elected as leader of "Canada" i.e. prime minister.(or president in the U.s.) not just a party leader. Which I'm pretty sure you would have gathered if you read my post.

[Gixxer]

Yes so 3rd wave feminists, women, and minorities cant whine/complain anymore like they're in the US with President Trumps win.

[JLives]

I meant elected as leader of "Canada" i.e. prime minister.(or president in the U.s.) not just a party leader. Which I'm pretty sure you would have gathered if you read my post.

That's at party level not National. Few countries would have an issue voting for a suitable female candidate. But we do have to work harder to get to that position. My money is on Elisabeth Warren to replace Trump. Look at Malala who just visited us, she wants to lead Pakistan one day and I don't doubt that will happen. People will elect a woman but she has to be qualified. I don't see any female Trump's assuming office although who knows these days.

[Atomoa]

You're well read? So what? What does that even mean? I read a lot too. I'm a woman and I think it's crap. Lots of other women do too.

It means this is about the 100th time I've read prominent and mainstream feminists take such a ugly position. This is pretty tame actually considering some of the language that exists in modern feminism.

[JLives]

So you are looking for vitriol and finding it. Then expecting an entire gender to take ownership of it? No thanks.

[Atomoa]

So you are looking for vitriol and finding it. Then expecting an entire gender to take ownership of it? No thanks.

Where did I say that feminism represents a whole gender? Or is that part of modern feminism?

You should be more aware of what modern feminism is about before defending it. It's not hard to find 'vitriol" when it's essential part of feminism, which is why I reject it and why mensrights is becoming more and more of a marquee issue. After all the mythical wage gap issue is still showcased as a actual issue, when it pure feminist propaganda. Only a lie that big could last for so long in a place where data is not allowed - modern feminism. It's a quasi religion.

How else could Obama say to a crowd of people "There is nothing a man can do that a woman can't do better!" to thunderous applause and cheers? The same reason feminists can muse about killing white men, castration and taking away the vote from them.

[JLives]

That's just your narrow minded view of it. Feminists, like women, do not share a singular opinion. Do you share the same view as other MRA?

[Atomoa]

Feminists, like women, do not share a singular opinion.

That doesn't change what modern feminism has morphed into. It seems you can't separate feminism from being female. That's also part of modern feminism. An attack on it is perceived as "against women".

Do you share the same view as other MRA?

I have yet to see any sort of mainstream language in the MRA movement suggesting violence against women, celebrating their tears in coffee cups, championing huge lies and pushing them on the media and the blanket minimization of problems that women face.

I can show you lots of videos and examples of feminists attacking men solely on their MRA opinions, blockading speeches, banning gatherings and groups from forming, pulling fire alarms, doxxing and falsely reporting people as pedophiles for pushing up against modern feminism. I dont know a single example of a MRA pulling a fire alarm at a feminism speech, let alone doxxing or reporting child abuse on a feminist by a MRA. I know a prominent feminist that managed to have a man charged with criminal harassment based on tweets he sent to her, disagreeing with a feminist for doxxing someone.

I'd suggest that half the energy of the MRA movement is directly countering the ugliness of modern feminism because our society has been shaped by modern feminism to the point where men are taught to fear and hate themselves and our children are being summarily excluded from being around men in the education field. The demonization and generalization of men (have you told your son not a rape a woman today - he needs the reminder!) and modern child custody and divorce laws. Male suicide rates continue to be the biggest killer of men in our society. Ghomeshi trial is a wonderful example of modern feminism and what it has turned our society into - guilty before proven otherwise.

I'll say this - I would never associate myself with a group who's mainstream leaders/sentiments are of those that modern feminism broadcasts. Any group has "extremists" - modern feminism has come to embrace those extremists.

Still havent watched The Red Pill?

[GordonH]

Highlighted
If you checked 1 Canadian Federal Party has elected 2 as their leader.

I meant elected as leader of "Canada" i.e. prime minister.(or president in the U.s.) not just a party leader. Which I'm pretty sure you would have gathered if you read my post.

Since the 2 front running Federal parties in Canada have not even elected a women leader (yes the Conservatives have 1 now, she is and interim and not interested in running for the leadership) meanwhile the other 2 have. Neither of those parties has any chance to ever forming the Federal government.

At least they did win the Leadership of their respected political parties.

Added later: closes was PC leadership of 1976 by Flora MacDonald

[fvkasm2x]

With all due respect, can you guys (Jlives/Atoma) take this to the Feminst thread?

This thread should be about voting and political aspects and not whatever it is you guys are arguing about

[Atomoa]

With all due respect, can you guys take this to the Feminst thread?

This thread should be about voting and political aspects and not whatever it is you guys are arguing about

The author of the article is a (modern) feminist.

We are discussing whether or not this is a extreme or mainstream example of feminism. Fair enough if you want to actually discuss whether or not white males should be banned from voting, just be aware of the source for such lovely topics. I've said my bit.