The Wrap is a lot like the liberal news- it takes one part of a whole and stomps away.
Nah. It's like a digest of the more interesting bits of things I run into during conversations, largely. Sometimes it's a serious of funny bit I simply read someone else write. And it always contains direct links to the source material, an invitation/encouragement for people to read the larger arguments and look around threads they might have missed.
..taking one part of a whole and stomping away
If by that you mean to diminish a simpler truth by a warped description: when you make untenable claims I set out the why. When you distort a thing or create "facts" not in evidence, I note it.
There are over 500 women specific shelters that never fill to capacity, while other shelters fill with men to a point where they are shacking up in the hallways.
Citation to source. It's an interesting figure if there's any truth to it.
Your statistics can say whatever they want
Facts don't "want" to say a thing, they simply relate a truth. If that truth bothers you then it's time to examine why.
being homeless for a night is not poverty.
Man will that be a terrific counter for anyone who says otherwise...whoever they may be.
Having quotas, guaranteed benefits, and alimony is not oppression-
That's a convoluted mess. What quotas? Which benefits? How does alimony figure in and do you understand the circumstances where alimony typically is awarded? That sort of thing.
there are so many fail safes and safeguards for women that if they aren't utilizing them it's because they would rather be on the street prostituting or creeping their way into men's homes.
Thanks for illustrating my earlier note on the irrational hostility in your approach to women for anyone who might be new to this...
Women in this poor fellow's delusion, are either living in the safety and comfort of nets provided, aka living off others (men) or they're prostitutes, or they're "creeping into men's homes".
lain:
And by that, you manage to call those women victims as well
I call victims "victims" because I'm rational. Most women aren't victims. They disproportionately suffer from poverty and abuse, compared with our gender. That aside, I've combated your hysterical histories of women, their role in society, and the movement to see them standing equally in right and privilege within the compact.
It's madness that if a woman wants her husband out of the house, the police will try to make up something that will suffice for him being thrown out of his own home.
I'd agree that your believing that's the rule is madness.
It's madness that you are concerned with women being payed less for the same work (a lie)
Again, I don't believe we've ever had that discussion. I invited you to quote/nudge me if I'm mistaken on the point. What I've read on the point sustains the idea. By way of example, this recent article in Forbes from March of 2016:
Women Are Still Paid Less Than Men - Even In The Same Job.
and don't care about the fact that women do less time for the same crime (a fact).
It absolutely is a fact. Are you suggesting that men serve too long or women too little? In any event, as with sentencing relative to race, it's a point in need of address. It's also not an either/or. That is, you don't reasonably have to say, "I'd like to see equity in pay, but not so long as men are incarcerated longer for the same crime."
It would be a peculiar segue, to say the least.
Oh, don't sell yourself short, you will. Just not in this particular post.
