The impact of democracy on the nuclear family

[Gary Childress]

"Same economic opportunities," you say, Gary?

Here's your problem.

I'm not having one, thanks.

I'm not saying "same economic opportunities" as in exact same.

Silly me. I imagined "same" meant "same."

So you're advocating privilege. That's not a whole lot better, I have to say.

Go find someone else to harrass with your dishonest shit, IC.

[Immanuel Can]

Here's your problem.

I'm not having one, thanks.

I'm not saying "same economic opportunities" as in exact same.

Silly me. I imagined "same" meant "same."

So you're advocating privilege. That's not a whole lot better, I have to say.

Go find someone else to harrass with your dishonest shit, IC.

Hey, you said it. I didn't.

If women are equal, why do they need special privileges?

[Gary Childress]

I'm not having one, thanks.


Silly me. I imagined "same" meant "same."

So you're advocating privilege. That's not a whole lot better, I have to say.

Go find someone else to harrass with your dishonest shit, IC.

Hey, you said it. I didn't.

If women are equal, why do they need special privileges?

OK. Blocked.

[Immanuel Can]

Go find someone else to harrass with your dishonest shit, IC.

Hey, you said it. I didn't.

If women are equal, why do they need special privileges?

OK. Blocked.

So...no answer. Just a paradox. And no answer.

[Age]

Hey, you said it. I didn't.

If women are equal, why do they need special privileges?

OK. Blocked.

So...no answer. Just a paradox. And no answer.

Why do you believe 'women' need special privileges for, exactly, "immanuel can"?

Not that you will ever answer.

[Immanuel Can]

OK. Blocked.

So...no answer. Just a paradox. And no answer.

Why do you believe 'women' need special privileges for, exactly, "immanuel can"?

Not that you will ever answer.

I'll answer when you learn how to read, so you can ask a question that makes sense.

Clearly, that's not today.

[godelian]

Well, even if we grant you that, I don't think any of that has to do with "democracy." That thesis just won't hold up.

Feminism is just one problem. Claiming assets and/or income from the husband upon leaving the marriage is another one.

But it's not democracy. Democracy has no relevance to that problem.

Laws are the product of their political environment. It is the democratic process that has produced divorce-rape laws. No other political system has ever done that.

Democracy results in the government intervening intrusively in people's private lives. If you don't want that, you need to get rid of democracy. That is why I only live in non-democratic countries.

Take for example China. It is much easier to prevent the Chinese government from sticking its nose in my private affairs than the American government. So, I would always choose to live in China instead of the USA.

But then again, SE Asia is even better in that regard. Places like Dubai, Qatar, and Oman are also better in that respect. What is Dubai more than a city where the government promises to leave you alone?

Beyond a certain low level of involvement, I simply do not benefit from government action. More government merely results in more nonsensical laws, which I do not want, especially not in my private life.

So, I do not vote by means of a ballot. I am not interested in that. Instead, I vote with my feet. I go there where I am treated best, meaning, there where I am left alone. The best choice always turns out to be a non-democracy.

[Immanuel Can]

Feminism is just one problem. Claiming assets and/or income from the husband upon leaving the marriage is another one.

But it's not democracy. Democracy has no relevance to that problem.

It is the democratic process that has produced divorce-rape laws.

No, there's no particular link. You might argue that Feminist activism has done that, but not democracy. There was democracy when there were no such laws, and there are many democracies with different laws. The link you hope to make is not there.

Democracy results in the government intervening intrusively in people's private lives.

It does not do that. In fact, only authoritarian systems do that -- Communism, Fascism, Sharia...

Take for example China.

Just try living in China and doing something the Chinese government doesn't want you to do. Then tell me about their non-interference. If we can find you, after that.

[Age]

So...no answer. Just a paradox. And no answer.

Why do you believe 'women' need special privileges for, exactly, "immanuel can"?

Not that you will ever answer.

I'll answer when you learn how to read, so you can ask a question that makes sense.

Clearly, that's not today.

So...no answer. Just an excuse. And no answer.

And, clearly 'we' have another prime example of 'this one' making another assumption, and then believing its own assumption is absolutely true and right.

Now, why do you believe, absolutely, that I can not read?

Not that you will, again, ever answer.

Have you ever considered that what you believe, absolutely, I have not read is not even what I am referring to, exactly?

Or, is it 'the case' that whatever thought or belief, existing within that head, is what is absolutely true and/or right?

[Age]

So...no answer. Just a paradox. And no answer.

Why do you believe 'women' need special privileges for, exactly, "immanuel can"?

Not that you will ever answer.

I'll answer when you learn how to read, so you can ask a question that makes sense.

Clearly, that's not today.

Once again 'this one' will not answer because if it did, openly and honestly, then it would contradict "itself".

[godelian]

Just try living in China and doing something the Chinese government doesn't want you to do.

The Chinese government is not interested in imposing intrusive laws onto my bedroom shenanigans.

They also have no dealings with my finances or my online business ventures which are not even in China.

The Chinese government is only interested in stamping out political activism, but that kind of activity is exactly what I am not interested in.

I am not interested in changing anything. My strategy consists in choosing from the various alternatives the alternative that I like the best, without trying to change anything.

This strategy would never bring me into trouble with any government. If I don't like what they are doing, then I simply go elsewhere.

I am very, very unlikely to run into trouble with the Chinese government. This is not true about the American government. As soon as a woman starts claiming that she wants half your assets, because she has been a rotation bitch of yours for a while, the American government will start making trouble to you. The Chinese government would never do that.

[Immanuel Can]

Why do you believe 'women' need special privileges for, exactly, "immanuel can"?

Not that you will ever answer.

I'll answer when you learn how to read, so you can ask a question that makes sense.

Clearly, that's not today.

So...no answer.

No: no sensible question. Ask Gary instead. He's the one favouring privilege.

[Immanuel Can]

Just try living in China and doing something the Chinese government doesn't want you to do.

The Chinese government is not interested in imposing intrusive laws onto my bedroom shenanigans.

So you think the government that forced the "one child" policy had no intrusive bedroom rules? Ah, well...at least you gave me a laugh. But you didn't show that any of the state of the family has anything to do with democracy.

[godelian]

So you think the government that forced the "one child" policy had no intrusive bedroom rules?

No, because you could always make the extra children elsewhere.

You see, there is something that you fail to understand.

Some people identify, even strongly, with the territory in which they happen to have been born or in which they grew up. They may even consider that to be a "higher value". They are willing to pay for that. They may even be willing to die for that.

Then, you also have people who consider that to be just a minor variable in an equation. They do not consider themselves to be, for example, "American". They merely use the American government as a passport issuing service. They often use several passport issuing services.

I am of the second type. I am not willing to pay particularly much to a country, and I am certainly not willing to die for one.

If you cannot have more than one child on Chinese territory, who even cares? There are 200+ such sovereign territories! Have some more children on one of those!

I don't care about China. I don't care about any country in particular. Other people do, but I don't.

There are millions of Chinese who think like me and who don't care about what the Chinese government does. They often live elsewhere anyway. They may visit China once in a while. In what way are they or their children outside China even affected by any one-child policy? China is irrelevant to them!

[Immanuel Can]

So you think the government that forced the "one child" policy had no intrusive bedroom rules?

No, because you could always make the extra children elsewhere.

Whaaaat? Not if you're a citizen of the PRC. You don't get to rove around the world, pollenating the planet. And you certainly aren't allowed to establish a family not conforming to the PRC rules.

If you cannot have more than one child on Chinese territory, who even cares?

The Chinese do, of course.

In any case, the PRC has certainly legislated the bedroom practices of its people, and with demographic-disastrous effects, as you know. And guess what? They're not democratic. So again, the OP just doesn't make any sense.

Democracy has nothing to do with it.