deleted_user wrote:If by applying the physiological differences of the genders one obstructs the individual's will (i.e. expectations of how they should behave) -- that is unjust.
[...]
I will restate my position: that the manifest of the personal will should be always the most free, barring immoral complications.
Applying the differences? I do not know what that is supposed to mean. In any case, I completely support freedom of the highest degree with the exception of immoralities. You seem to be mistaking my assessment of the differences between men and women or my personal preference of certain types of people for an intention to forcefully impose restrictions upon people.
deleted_user wrote:This is everything Snuden has expressed and admitted to in so far.
No. Snuden has admitted to no such thing. What he expressed was his preferences (or requirements) which he is entitled to as he is not public property; this is not an infringement on the rights of others.
deleted_user wrote:His defense is that, "but it is just my personal preference." Which is true, it is his personal preference. I am arguing his sense of personal preference stems from a damaging, overarching stereotype which is the same damaging, overarching stereotype which has historically oppressed women, meaning, their lack of basic rights -- that is, the idea that women are womanly beings more so than they are thinking, feeling beings. That they should fit into a predetermined role rather than in whichever role they wish to fil themselves! It's a very dangerous mindset.
You are not really arguing, but groundlessly making statements about his preferences as if they are facts.
"women are womanly beings more so than they are thinking, feeling beings" is just a word salad. If you have no concrete criticism, perhaps you should stop adhering to your preconception that everyone who has a preference that seems extreme to you is a bigot. People with preferences perceived as extreme by you are thinking, feelings beings more so than they are bigoted beings.
deleted_user wrote:Today this prejudice exists in more "nuanced" areas such as workplace opportunities, positions of power, rape and sexual abuse, etc. Note, these issues affect all genders but again, historically, plainly, and clearly, they affect women more. Thus we see the majority of activism on the woman's behalf.
Women are the primary victims of rape and sexual abuse for obvious biological reasons. This is not exclusive to humans, and certainly not due to some systematic societal oppression of women. Elaborate more on workplace opportunities and positions of power, please.
deleted_user wrote:To be frank you have yet to outline a belief
I have expressed my beliefs in this very thread, in fact. I even suggested the creation of a new thread to discuss the matter in depth, but seeing as almost everyone preferred to cry
"Sexism!" instead of engaging in a factual discussion I realised that the effort would be wasted. This just happens to be a one-year-old thread which you may have missed. What exactly do you want me to outline?
Pay more attention to detail.