Teachers and Students > Debates
The battle of the sexes!
nid404:
--- Quote from: $tyli$h Executive on March 09, 2010, 01:58:00 pm ---
Women around India are not allowed to choose their life partners. They HAVE to marry the one their parent chooses. According to me, a woman should be able to like and choose the one she will marry, just like males. It is unfair to restrict them in this way. I also cannot understand why a woman cannot be awarded the right to be a leader if she possesses the necessary skills. Could you please explain how men and women are required to 'bend down for the other' in order to progress? (leaving aside biological issues like pregnancy). I see no reason. Cooperation does not require 'inequal' rights. It calls for 'equality'. Like if women are not allowed to be leaders, how can it be cooperation? It is prejudice.
--- End quote ---
This is lame. Generalizations wtf! Who says we, in India are not allowed to choose our life partners. Ur being too general. Well that not the point. But I do agree with you. Every woman has the rights to freedom, freedom of speech and freedom to practice what they believe(including religion). In terms of rights, we have the same rights but the society discards it most of the times and creates a chasm between the two sexes
Alpha:
Okay, I'll make it clear. I told you: The Dude made a mistake. You were making it seem like a SIN.
--- Quote from: $tyli$h Executive on March 09, 2010, 01:58:00 pm ---Pointing fingers aggressively at another member's personal characteristic is showing disrespect to him or her (keeping aside the accusation of 'SIN').
--- End quote ---
You're saying it yourself.
And for the debate, am tired already. Tired, tired.
Alpha:
Women do have the right to freedom, some families are still pure traditionalists. Well, that's something that's going to change with time.
But the right to freedom does not equate men and women. Like what I said before, of course, women are free > They are free to move inside the cage.
Some people believe that by letting the knot loose, values will fall…
And personally, I don’t find it an irrational belief. Women, having too many rights, make an abuse of it. No sense of morality at all, no manners, no etiquettes… No restrictions, which means they do whatever pleases them. So many women are smokers, drinkers, smugglers, promiscuous, irresponsible, vagabonds. Muslim women (covered with the veil) smoke hookahs on public beaches, and so many others are keen VOLUNTEERS to perform in pornographic films. There is a long list on not-to-do’s that women jump on when there is no supervision on their social behaviour.
Of course, every woman is not immoral. But there are too many exceptions in this rule for it to be ignored.
Margaret Thatcher was a leader, and because she was a woman, she was a failed leader.
Women may be having all the required skills for leadership, but they also have all the required commitments--- the house, children. The employer has to find a suitable replacement in case the woman goes on maternity leave--- which profit-motivated entrepreneur is going to take the risk?
Cooperation, in its simplest form, means working together to attain certain specific goals, of which compliance is an essential feature. Men and women cooperate, why not? It’s possible, just like employers and employees do, like the general and soldiers cooperate in wars, just like the law and the public does, and just like a government and a nation can cooperate. Is it equality?
$tyli$h Executive:
--- Quote from: ~Alpha on March 10, 2010, 03:07:36 pm ---
Margaret Thatcher was a leader, and because she was a woman, she was a failed leader.
Women may be having all the required skills for leadership, but they also have all the required commitments--- the house, children. The employer has to find a suitable replacement in case the woman goes on maternity leave--- which profit-motivated entrepreneur is going to take the risk?
--- End quote ---
I just had a glimpse on the [url]article on Margaret Thatcher[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_thatcher/url] on wikipedia. I must say, there is no conclusive evidence which proves that she was any less successful than Tony Blair, let alone being a 'failed leader'. She was the PM from 1979-1990. If I am correct, the UK economy was at a turmoil in the period between 1973-1980. Inflation peaked at 30% in 1976. Unemployment was high, due to powerful trade unions and therefore, business incentive was low. As far as I can see, during her leadership, inflation rate fell from the peak of 30% to much lower levels. She was an opposer of trade unions (which I personally think is a dirty word too). Industrial unrest became history. Trade deficit lowered. Influence and membership of trade unions fell from its peak in 1965. And many more...
As far as I can see Alpha, during her leadership, the UK economy enjoyed a good upturn as I just illustrated. Yes, maybe it was not (just) because of her. Maybe its because of the good policies of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the bank of England or the Royal Mint. Whatever it may be, this cannot lead us to believe that she was a 'failed leader' after all (if not any more successful than Tony Blair).
--- Quote ---Women may be having all the required skills for leadership, but they also have all the required commitments--- the house, children. The employer has to find a suitable replacement in case the woman goes on maternity leave--- which profit-motivated entrepreneur is going to take the risk?
--- End quote ---
Lemme give you an example. I'm sure you know of PepsiCo. It's a $102 billion company. The CEO is a woman, Indra Nooyi. I am sure PepsiCo. is not a charity organisation. Their main objective is one that is common in all of us - Profit. How come, a woman with so many commitments like her husband, kids, pregnancy and all others, is able to handle PepsiCo. so successfully that the share price has enjoyed such a long uptrend. It wasn't much affected in the bad date of 2008. I am sure this is a great achievement on part of her. It just reflects how successful she is to ensure a good business health of her company.
If you are unsure of how much the stock market was affected in 2008, see the condition of Citigroup Inc. (the largest financial conglomerate in the world) (attached)
Angel Of Love:
hey i am not writing in anyone's favor about this fight going on.
i am just answering the first question in the first post.
I agree that both the genders should be given equal rights.
there are many places in india where a lot of discrimination takes place between gnders, a lot of domestic violence too takes place.
We indians are trying our best to stop it.
We hope we will overcome this one day.
but nowadays there is no difference between any sexes.
WE ALL ARE NOW EQUAL.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version