I wonder how free your thought can be if this is your underlying position
— MmeGazelle

It's not my underlying position, why do you call it "Underlying position"?

That is something that I personally believe. Would you want to discuss it? — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

Are 'underlying position' and 'belief' not synonymous? If you have a negative opinion of women won't you seek evidence to support this belief?

it is even in favour of women (imo, not)
— MmeGazelle

The thing is, I just gave you a whole list of differences that favor women

https://diferenciaslegaleshombremujerenespana.law.blog/
— ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

And, in your opinion, it is still not in favor of women. — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

I am not suggesting that there is equality, or that women are not favoured in any/some specific cases. I am saying that when you compare rights overall, as a whole, then we are closer to equality than at any time in history. And to get to this position has required a shift away from the historically dominant position favouring male rights.

For example in the specific examples you gave, the inequalities are not as extreme as, say, the having the right to vote, or access to abortion, to give two examples off the top of my head. They certainly don't speak to your original invocation of 'survival'.

It seems to me that you are not seeking truth, you are looking to justify the discourse of your ideology. — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

This is not helpful or particularly meaningful statement, I have merely responded to your arguments with observations of my own. Perhaps the same mistake as my 'incel' comment inferring an ideology rather than taking statements at face value.

By the way, I think your analogy of the pendulum is reasonable. But if you are looking for it to stay still (be even, be fair) you should not try to compensate the momentum it had in the opposite direction, because gravity will take it back again, you just have to derogate the position it is in. If feminism means equity, then modern feminism is anti-feminist. — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

Thank you. Can you elaborate on what you mean by "the momentum it had in the opposite direction" and I don't understand the word "derogate" in this context. Perhaps where the analogy fails is that there is no 'natural force' (akin to gravity) that will return the pendulum to the central position, there are always conflicts and power struggles moving it.

In the context of a one's position as an individual within a community, in my experience, power over oneself liberates, power over others tends to corrupt.

your arguments remind me of those of the ‘incel’ movement.
— MmeGazelle

By the way, I participate in free thought, not in movements that bring me nothing.
Something that seems to be missing from you. Not name calling. :)

If we move to the field of personal opinions... women have always seemed to me the most frivolous beings that have been born on earth. — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

I wonder how free your thought can be if this is your underlying position

Edit: I have looked it up. What I understood, is that "Incel" is the derogatory way of calling those who doesn't agree with feminism. — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

'Incel' is not those who don't agree with feminism, it relates to ideas that women are inferior to men and should be subservient to their needs. However I see that bringing to up has been unhelpful to this discussion, would you agree to park it?

Perhaps women enjoy more power and freedoms
— MmeGazelle

We are much closer to equality now
— MmeGazelle

Perhaps women enjoy more power and freedoms, then we are much closer to equality... I get it.

To explain: If you consider a hypothetical pendulum representing the balance of rights, swinging between male advantage and female advantage at its extreme positions. While there may be inequalities on specific rights, the pendulum represents the aggregate of the position across all powers/freedoms. The pendulum has moved away from the male side towards the centre as women have gained more rights, and is therefore now closer to the centre, closer to equality. The position between male dominated and female dominated is closer to the centre than it's ever been and what overall displacement exists, if it is even in favour of women (imo, not), is still significantly less than the swing towards male rights that has existed in the preceding centuries.

There is a web page that mentions many of the legal differences in Spain (that favor women), which is the country where I currently live in.
I don't know if any of you speak Spanish, but I translated some of them using Google Translate and it is understandable.

https://diferenciaslegaleshombremujerenespana.law.blog/

Again, we need to set aside your evolution/survival argument here. Legal rights in society relate to the power structures and freedoms enjoyed by individuals and groups. Perhaps women enjoy more power and freedoms than men in certain areas nowadays, however this imbalance, if it exists, is nowhere near the historical power and freedom deficit of women compared to men over the preceding millennia. We are much closer to equality now, a woman’s ‘advantage’ (again, insofar as it exists) in terms of rights over a man today is not as pronounced as mens’ over women 100 or even 50,10, … years ago.

And I have no idea why you think there hasn’t been ‘real opposition’ to women gaining equal, or ‘more’ rights.
— MmeGazelle

I think there has not been real opposition because it has not been obliterated yet.

Is the only evidence of ‘real’ opposition the obliteration of its target?
Not name calling but your arguments remind me of those of the ‘incel’ movement.

Anyone, including women ‘deserve’ the same right to survival as anyone else in society.
— MmeGazelle

Can you elaborate it a little more?

Your conflation of’ survival’ and ‘rights’ is a little problematic. There is no real (external, other than self inflicted) survival pressure on humans as a species as a whole, and certainly not one that discriminates between male and female humans at a group level. In terms of rights, In the eyes of Western democracy every life, at the population level (I.e. not individual level) has equal value and every individual is entitled to the same rights as a citizen, in principle at least; we are still a long way from the realisation of these ideals.

Anyone, including women ‘deserve’ the same right to survival as anyone else in society.

Can you elaborate on in what way women have more rights (legally) in Spain?

Whilst in western society you could argue that women have increased their rights, in many parts of the world, and throughout history, men can, have and still do ‘overpower’ women, from outright enslavement, in domestic and professional environments, and reproductive control (cf. current news in US).

And I have no idea why you think there hasn’t been ‘real opposition’ to women gaining equal, or ‘more’ rights.

Sounds like a terrible dystopia

No car, no traffic, no pollution, universal public transport, cycle everywhere. No rent, free food, free, clean energy. No commute, meaningful, creative work. Green spaces, well designed products, full recycling. Free time, good sleep, good health, …

One the face of it sounds utopian, to me. Perhaps unrealistic, but interested why you consider it dystopian?

1. The consumption of meat will never be perfectly ethical, but the consumption of well cared, pasture-fed animals, is much more ethical than factory-farmed animals and is beneficial to human health.
2. A vegan diet is directly morally ethical, as it does not involve direct animal suffering, however, it may have indirect ethical issues given the environmental and health impacts.
[For the sake of the argument, please assume the scientific side of premises 1 & 2 is true]
3. It is more ethical to consume humanely raised animal products for the sake of human health and the prevention of climate change.

The vast majority of meat eaten by the vast majority of people is not produced in a way that is consistent with 1 & 3. So the ethical thing to do is to reduce, or ideally altogether avoid, consumption of meat produced in environmentally harmful and unhealthy ways. Whether that be by veganism or exclusively eating ‘well-cared, pasture fed’ meat, the aim should be eliminating ‘factory’ farming practices, something which both vegans and ‘ethical’ meat eaters agree would benefit the environment and health.