/lit/ - Literature

anything for a buck

>>13324691
Yeah but in today's political climate anyone can "identify" as a woman if they want to

>>13324691
How is this legal?

>>13324718

https://twitter.com/MAntheaume/status/1140944359619252224

Someone asked the same question before you.

"Hi Magali, Thank you for your message. Positive discrimination like this is not against the law in the Netherlands. In fact, it is motivated by the Dutch government."

>>13324724

Well, as long as it's legal!

>>13324724
FUCK WOMEN, FUCK THE DUTCH AND FUCK JANNIES.

>>13324724
How does that law even work? Isn't all discrimination "positive"? I don't discriminate against blacks, I just discriminate positively for whites...

>>13324724

How is this any different from a numerus clausus law?

>>13324691
>>13324718
>waaaaaaaaaahhhh men literally kept all minorities and women out of the workforce and corporate positions for CENTURIES
>now they're implementing a few temporary regulations to try and even out an inequality that has been ingrained for CENTURIES
>oh the horror, but now who will publish my "narrative-of-pale-middleclass-white-dude-with-severe-social-anxiety-wandering-around-city" manuscript?? :(
you people need perspective.

>>13324767

Wouldn't women feel ashamed for literally having to be forced into positions by law because they can't get into them through merit?

>>13324691
>>13324724
The beautiful thing here is these policies destroy themselves, by definition they are narrowing their recruitment pool while widening their quotas, the result is a giant and systematized brain drain. I say god bless, it may take some time but eventually the market will correct their corrections and it will be glorious.

>>13324691
Posting twitter shit should be a bannable offense.

>>13324767
>waaaaaaaaaahhhh
Stopped reading right there.

>>13324774
Women don’t feel shame.

>>13324767
>narrative-of-pale-middleclass-white-dude-with-severe-social-anxiety-wandering-around-city
what the fuck dude how did you know about the manuscript

>>13324724
>the D*tch

There's a reason we Catholics hate these assholes.

>>13324743
'Positive discrimination' is what the dutch call affirmative action

>>13324793

Is that so? I can't imagine any person not feeling at least a bit ashamed about getting a position only through the helping hand of quotas and/or affirmative action... if I could only get a position like that, I would take it as a proof of my inferiority.

>>13324767
am I part of these evil men you talk about? I did nothing wrong to women, I'm actually a kissless virgin. can I please ask you to mention that I'm not one of evil men next time you mention them? like can you say "evil men did something something, except for *my post num*"?

>>13324718
It's not even legal in the eternal boogeyman-state of the american mind; Sweden.

>>13324805
They are under the delusion that they *deserve that position but of course would never get it in the patriarchy that holds them down (that somehow also positively discriminates them)

Whatever leap of logic it takes to justify their feelings.

>>13324805
You’ll waste your whole life if you wait for women to connect those dots, mate.

>>13324810
>Idid nothing wrong to women, I'm actually a kissless virgin
something tells me you've done plenty wrong to women if you're still a virgin at an age where it is significant enough to mention the fact.

>>13324835
Back to >>>/r/eddit.

>>13324810

If you're a man, women can only value you as a source of 1. high-quality sperm 2. resources 3. attention 4. security. Nothing else. If you're not providing at least one of those, women would rather see you dead than alive.

Dutch law works like this: if discrimination reduces discrimination then it's O.K. Seems nice an utilitarian to me. Do incels really have a problem with this?

>>13324877

There's nothing wrong with this, I agree.

Fucking incels should just go back to /pol/. This is our board now.

>>13324877

if A then not A

ahehehe I guess I'm an incel!!!

no wonder the netherlands produces jack shit

>>13324888
Idiot American can't even logic.
It's: If action A possesses undesirable quality Z, but results in a reduction of action B which also possesses undesirable quality Z, and as a result total Z is actually reduced, then action A is good. Jesus low IQ Americans.

>>13324897

good job outing yourself as a fool

also I'm antipodean

>>13324903
Are you stink Australian perhaps? Doesn't matter, you don't understand basic logic either way. No wonder common-sense laws upset you.

>>13324903
>>13324916
Both of you stop fucking typing

>>13324691
Women have never produced anything of value prove me wrong

>>13324923
I can’t.

>>13324923
They produced men

>>13324923
you were produced by a woman so yeah they only produce pointless, worthless garbage

>>13324928
Name five things that women are better than men at, as a whole. It can be anything: cooking, sports, directing movies, anything. It just can't involve sexual attraction, childbirthing, child-rearing, "being cute," or other biological aspects of womanhood.

Men are literally better than women at every single thing on earth, on average.

>>13324941
right so all the things essential to being a woman? I can't.

>>13324941
theyre not even better at childrearing lmao look at single moms vs single dads

>>13324945
>b-but if you rob me of my passive functions that my body performs simply because I was born with a vagina and higher natural estrogen, I can't DO anything!!

Thanks for proving my point, walking set of holes.

>>13324949
It's true. Simone de Beauvoir says this outright somewhere.

>>13324949
This.

>>13324955
Imagine thinking that a woman who lacks womanhood could still do things.

That's like saying a hammer that isn't a hammer can hammer.

>>13324960
Men have a gender.

A woman's gender has her.

>>13324964
>I do not mean to imply that this difference has always existed
Stopped reading here. I need to know the essence of woman, the womanness itself. Now come, tell me what is when added to human makes them a woman?

>>13325003
>Now come, tell me what is when added to human makes them a woman?
Nay, rather it is whereof is taken away from man that makes a woman. Lesser beings born of Adam’s rib, yea. Aye. Forsooth.

>>13324691
Back in the 1980s, reverse discrimination was a thing.
Discrimination is like a 2 edged sword.
Once you start, you can't do anything right.

>>13324774
They don't think they're being subsidized. They think they're being accurately judged as worthy, and the subsidy only offsets patriarchal discrimination.

>>13324767
>respond to a question with childish mocking
thats why you will never win people to your side

>>13324949
This is probably genetically confounded. If a father is raising kids alone it's most likely because the mother died. The children won't differ from the average 2 parent household. Single mothers are created mostly by irresponsible women fucking irresponsible men, creating irresponsible children.

>>13324691
did they ever stop to question why there was a gender imbalance? it's never been easier for a woman to get the same work as a male, it's just a matter of who wants it most, gets it etc. im pretty sure the same employers who came up with this werent actively discriminating against women shortly before they made this decision. do they just not ask any questions about anything they do and just operate based on what would sell most with the sjw loud minority?

>>13325227
That and the fact that her side champions unjust hypocritical policies.

>>13325254
All gaps are the result of discrimination, unless those gaps are to the detriment of white men, in which case it's because white men are dumb dumbs.

>>13325276
is it bad i couldnt tell you were being sarcastic at first?

Shit I had no idea the dutch were so based, white males are basically cancelled lol.

>>13324767
beautiful post and also revealer that there are several femanons in disguise here

>>13324691
this thread doesn't belong on /lit/

>>13325227
Yeah people hate the policies so much that they actually get politicians elected to get those policies implemented

But I'm sure everyone actually secretly hates them and are just forced to support them by the jew cultural marxist sjw world government, right?

>>13324718
in the netherlands you're allowed to positively discriminate any group of people underrepresented in your workplace

>>13324767
b-buttewfwy-chan!?! :3

>>13325276
can confirm the one about future work
t. scandinavian

>>13324767
you're not oppressed, roastie, just the opposite, men built everything for women.
why don't you cunts every address the historical gender imbalance in coal mines, or military combat? why don't you insist on making oil rigs half wahmens? it's always the high pay comfy office jobs where you work maybe one hour per day.

>>13324767
Women have never been oppressed in human history, and have it far easier than men in every way imaginable now. The imbalance at this point is due to their own failures. In any case, I look forward to Eindhoven and other universities and feminist organizations mandating for gender balance in university admissions which are currently overwhelmingly female.

>>13324767
>men literally kept all minorities and women out of the workforce and corporate positions for CENTURIES
What's wrong with this? Objectively speaking.

>Liberalism has so co-opted the idea of social revolution that now you're a brave hero for turning your back on motherhood and becoming an office drone
Ahaha I've had enough

>>13324810
>I'm actually a kissless virgin
That's actually doing something wrong

>>13324805
Most women are barely more ethically advanced than children. Had an argument about abortion with a friend last week, she couldn't understand abortion violates the bodily rights of the infant, no matter how much I rephrased the explanation she just did not understand. It wasn't even that she disagreed, she just did not understand that other people have rights even when it gets in the way of her fulfilling her own desires. They say that men think with their balls, but the amount of times I've seen pure sociopathic behavior from women when something gets in the way of their sexuality is quite chilling, it's like a reflex takes over their body and you better not get in the way of their cunt getting wet. They aren't even amoral, just premoral

>>13324724
Based Magali.

>>13324767

>>13324691
how many 5 year old kids do they have on their staff?
NONE? OMG, THAT'S AGEISM! STOP DISCRIMINATING AGAINST CHILDREN!

>>13325638
men are like this too though

>>13324767

They have also kept them out of building railways and serving in frontlines and hunting mammals in the savannah and most other tasks that would risk their lives in any way.

Kinda funny how that works right? That a species with gender dimorphism like us had men and women suffer different selective pressures, making men generally taller and more muscular and women more adapted for childbearing? So crazy to think this could influence societal structures or something, and that in 2019 you'd still expect men to willingly sacrifice themselves so that you can be happy.

Also if your only answer to this is "have sex", I politely decline the offer.

>>13324945
fuck off, terf

>>13325638

Lmao at the professor spreading that message in a class that's full of mostly white women at the peak of their fertility. I wonder who would benefit from those women not giving birth, or having as few children as possible?

>>13325638

I suppose that's just a side effect of a mother's need to be able to ignore ethics and morality if the continuation of her genetic line, her children, would be in danger if she didn't do so ( eg.: not stealing food from others when her children are starving ).

>>13325701
Dilate, freak. Back to the discord.

>>13325706
Who indeed

The absolute state of d*tch """""""men""""""

>>13325696
True. It's significant in that whole we have pretty much gotten his to channel men's destructive impulses into contstructive ones down to a few, pretty much every governor on women's impulses has been removed.

>>13325597
this is the best post in the entire thread

>>13325701
You will never be a woman

>>13324724
>Positive discrimination
The superstate of Eurasia applauds this decree

>>13325724
based

>>13324724
>Positive discrimination
what??

>>13324964
This is much better than I expected from heating about this book

>>13325638
>she couldn't understand abortion violates the bodily rights of the infant
But for most abortions it isn't an infant yet, and on top of that, it doesn't have what would constitute in legal terms a body that would justify the possession of bodily rights independent from its mother. I'm not going to get into a debate about the point at which a foetus becomes a human being because that argument is faulty to begin with; what I will say however is that you haven't given a legit explanation as to why an unborn infant's bodily rights take precedence over the reproductive rights of the mother. You make the point to say that an infants rights gets in the way of a mother "fulfilling her own desires" which is nonsense, because its never a question of desires or wants, only legal rights. You've just chosen to frame it in that way to make women appear self-centred. But demonising the women having abortions doesn't mean the infant takes legal precedence over the mother, you need a stronger point that doesn't rely on the gross stereotype of the modern woman as a coldly-detached baby slaughterhouse.