[Decky]

I just see women as not meant for politics, in the end most women judging by their mentality should have no participation in political matters.

Now where have I head that before?

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion."

[Saeko]

I just see women as not meant for politics, in the end most women judging by their mentality and temperament should have no participation in political matters.

Why do you believe that women are not meant for politics?

[Albert]

Why do you believe that women are not meant for politics?

Because of their mentality and temperament, women has more difficulty then men in governing properly and justly. More quickly swayed by emotion, notoriously prone to not adjust and not recognize her wrong when needed, easily corrupted by power. To say the few.

Edit: I say this as not a negative, I just say it as that is just the way it is.

[Decky]

So what Christians thought and who are still devout still think the same way. Your point Decky, please arrive to it.

Christianity is a Middle Eastern faith just like its little brother Islam and its father Judaism and those barbaric Middle Eastern views on women have no place in Europe. You are are a supporter of the destruction of European culture.



Bodiccia was a European with European values, you are far closer to the Asiatic people than you are to a European (and not just because you are a Russian).

[Albert]

Every society on earth, though the same way Decks........ since immemorial. Regardless of its origins were from Middle East or not.

[Saeko]

Because of their mentality and temperament, women has more difficulty then men in governing properly and justly. More quickly swayed by emotion, notoriously prone to not adjust and not recognize her wrong when needed, easily corrupted by power. To say the few.

So it would be fair to say you want people to govern properly and justly, not be swayed by emotion, who recognize when they are wrong, and are not easily corrupted by power?

Wouldn't it be much more effective to target corrupt politicians than women?

[MB.]

I've fixed this poll so that it may be worth keeping, for now.

[Albert]

So it would be fair to say you want people to govern properly and justly, not be swayed by emotion, who recognize when they are wrong, and are not easily corrupted by power?

Wouldn't it be much more effective to target corrupt politicians than women?

Well yes corrupt politicians should be prosecuted. Look if we truly had equality between men and women; natural order would come into place, consequently what I speak about will become evident.

Most women simply will not be adequate to be in position of power.

What we have today is such state of affairs where the people in government are attempting to enforce their vision on general population. By their attempts to enforce equality between men and women they actually brought unfairness and inequality.

This has been long way in a making but it blew out post 60s civil rights movement.

Women basically maintain their position in society through state support that unfairly gives them more support; be it material, legal and social. Then otherwise to men. If there were actually equality, this whole progressive modern construction will fall apart. And true nature of things will come about.

Hence I actually support equality between men and women, please by all means bring it about.

Let the strongest flurioush, am I rights Seako?

[Saeko]

Well yes corrupt politicians should be prosecuted.

That wasn't at all the issue. The question is whether it would be more productive to go after women in government or corrupt politicians if you want to eliminate corruption. It's absolutely clear that keeping women out of government would be the far less effective option.

Look if we truly had equality between men and women; natural order would come into place, consequently what I speak about will become evident.

Most women simply will not be adequate to be in position of power.

What we have today is such state of affairs where the people in government are attempting to enforce their vision on general population. By their attempts to enforce equality between men and women they actually brought unfairness and inequality.

Is the "natural order" of things such that women have the right to vote but choose not to, or that they are simply not allowed to vote in the first place?

This has been long way in a making but it blew out post 60s civil rights movement.

Women basically maintain their position in society through state support that unfairly gives them more support;

So women having the same right as men to vote is the same as them having more support from the state than men?

[Albert]

Natural order of things is for women not to be allowed to vote. I understand women are not children, but it's best example for me to illustrated what I mean. A child if given opportunity to drive a car will take it, yet it does not mean it's the right decision to give a child that right. As they are not capable to drive a car responsibly, due to their disposition.

Same thing it is with women and voting rights. It is not about equality here, but just proper function.

But in the end as I have said, I do support full equality (also women being allowed to vote) as that will lead to natural order taking place regardless. The thing is, right now we don't have equality. We have this weird state of affair where we attempt to treat women equally yet we still have special care treatment from the old, that gives them care as the fair sex. At the same time they are proped up by the system.

This is not equality or fair. If we want to establish true equality. Then there should be no more affermitive action, no half/half during divorce. No favour to woman given custody of children.

In fact equality has been established actually long time ago. Women can go to school, marry who they want, divorce, go for any career. What is done now, is in attempt to social engineer this feminist vision it is being forced. In this a bizarre situation has been created of unfairness for men and inequality.

[MB.]

Who is trying to engineer the feminist social vision you describe, Albert?

Also, are you aware that in the natural order there are no political systems, let alone, elections?

[Albert]

Politicians and social progressives are trying to socially engineer.

And naturally there is always a political system that humans govern themselves with. It does not always has to have elections as part of its governing mechanism though.

[MB.]

Do you believe that at no time in history have humans not functioned under a political establishment?

Who are the progressive social politicians you believe are conducting the social engineering?

[Saeko]

Natural order of things is for women not to be allowed to vote.

How is it "natural" if it must be imposed by a government?

I understand women are not children, but it's best example for me to illustrated what I mean. A child if given opportunity to drive a car will take it, yet it does not mean it's the right decision to give a child that right. As they are not capable to drive a car responsibly, due to their disposition.

Same thing it is with women and voting rights. It is not about equality here, but just proper function.

So women have the same amount of agency as children in your view, is that correct?

But in the end as I have said, I do support full equality (also women being allowed to vote) as that will lead to natural order taking place regardless.

The thing is, right now we don't have equality. We have this weird state of affair where we attempt to treat women equally yet we still have special care treatment from the old, that gives them care as the fair sex. At the same time they are proped up by the system.

This is not equality or fair. If we want to establish true equality. Then there should be no more affermitive action, no half/half during divorce. No favour to woman given custody of children.

In fact equality has been established actually long time ago. Women can go to school, marry who they want, divorce, go for any career. What is done now, is in attempt to social engineer this feminist vision it is being forced. In this a bizarre situation has been created of unfairness for men and inequality.

How much support from "the system" should each person get?

[Albert]

@MB.
It is not possible for human society to exist without some sort of order or political system.

We I guess it's not a particular individual, but more so the established political and academic class. Also general movement within society. That has its origins in liberal thinking.

[MB.]

Do you believe that political order therefore predated the emergence of the human species?

Can you elaborate on the nature of the political, academic and social movement you describe as originating in liberalism that is responsible for the social engineering?

[Albert]

How is it "natural" if it must be imposed by a government?

It is natural in the same way as the government imposes marriage and divorce.

So women have the same amount of agency as children in your view, is that correct?

In my view, their agency is between men and children. As I have said, they are not children, but not men either.

How much support from "the system" should each person get?

In traditional society women were treated as the fair sex who need more care and support then men. We still carry this in modernity, culturally and systemically. Yet in context of equality between men and women such traditional support becomes unfair and not equal.

So to simply answer your question. A person, a woman should get the same support from the system as men.

Do you believe that political order therefore predated the emergence of the human species?

No, it came together with humans.

Can you elaborate on the nature of the political, academic and social movement you describe as originating in liberalism that is responsible for the social engineering?

It began with first movement of feminism in 19th century. Where the thought that under liberal system women should have equality as men. At first it got no ground but later on through activism and political activity such policies had become considered. Men in government passed them through. It was a slow gradual process striving to "dismantle" the "old ignorant ways". It apexed in 1960s with things like by dismantling any structure to marriage, basically voiding it as almost null in legal system. With no fault divorce legislation.

So I guess what I mean by progressives and social engineers are those people who believe humanity is moving towards progress. Thus they believe through egalitarianism we can heal injustice throughout this world.

[MB.]

Can you provide a chronological date for the first political order? If politics existed at the start of human existence it would have to between a quarter and half a million years old. I presume you do not believe that politics existed before that period?

Can you expand on the manner by which the feminist divorce legislation gained traction with the male establishment, and how this has led to academic, political, economic and social engineering that you insist is taking place?

[Albert]

Can you provide a chronological date for the first political order? If politics existed at the start of human existence it would have to between a quarter and half a million years old. I presume you do not believe that politics existed before that period? It is logically impossible otherwise, you don't need historical evidence that no one can find anyways.

Can you expand on the manner by which the feminist divorce legislation gained traction with the male establishment?

Tribal society has order, monkeys have their social order, fish in water has order. It is not possible for community of beings to exist without some sort of order.

I don't have all the answers but I will answer as best I can. Ithe was in California that no-fault divorce and many other social depravities had originated in America. I imagine it was a man a governor who passed the legislation. He probably was influenced by feminist thought one way or another.

[MB.]

So what you're saying is that you don't know or understand the difference and relationship between a natural hierarchy, biological taxonomy, and a political order? You do not know when the first political establishments formed?

Also, that you have no idea how or why divorce legislation from the 1960s in California produced liberal social control and engineering by feminists?