Is the word "human" sexist?

[Sandman]

Why do the femi-friendly Scandanavians outbreed the (relatively) sexist Italians, Japanese and Russians then?

[Son of David]

Originally posted by Sandman
Why do the femi-friendly Scandanavians outbreed the (relatively) sexist Italians, Japanese and Russians then?

Northern European countries have slightly higher fertility rates because they have several times more Muslim families in them than do countries like Italy and especially Japan, which is racially 98% Japanese.

Thus, those Muslims, breeding like rabbits, distort the fact that Northern European women are practically having so few children that the entire white population of those countries will be reduced to less than a quarter of its present size within 2 or 3 generations.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Sexism aside, this is the real problem with PC word-swapping. The new term for people very quickly takes up the negative connotations of the old. The negative connotations are attatched to the subject, not the noun.

For once, the commie hits the nail square on the head.

Originally posted by Elok
"Sexism" is so thoroughly ingrained in the English language that we'd have to alter some of the most basic stuff to make it gender-neutral. For example, possessives may be sexist; they appear to have started as an idiom along the lines of "Fred, his hat," which was later contracted to "Fred's hat." Strictly speaking, when we use that possessive form to denote a woman's property, we should use apostrophe plus r, as in "Sarah'r hat." Otherwise we're just perpetuating the old sexist system which assumes everyone who owns stuff is male.

That's a myth. The English possessive descends from an ancient Indo-European ending, and is cognate with the genitives in -s found in many European languages.



Oh, and since nobody seems to've pointed this out yet; the word "human" doesn't contain an element man. It's the adjective-former "-an" attached to a form of the IE root *dhghem "earth".

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Son of David




Northern European countries have slightly higher fertility rates because they have several times more Muslim families in them than do countries like Italy and especially Japan, which is racially 98% Japanese.

Thus, those Muslims, breeding like rabbits, distort the fact that Northern European women are practically having so few children that the entire white population of those countries will be reduced to less than a quarter of its present size within 2 or 3 generations.

That's what's popularly known as a lie.

[Son of David]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
That's what's popularly known as a lie.

You should stick to studying words, because it is common statistical knowledge that white Europeans have below-replacement birth rates, and these birth rates in turn are obfuscated by the fact that certain parts of the population (immigrant groups and certain small indigenous religious groups) are more prolific in their breeding than the main population.

Wow, what do we see when we look at young people in Europe today? Almost half of all young people today in some Nordic countries are Muslims. That equates to almost half of the working age population of those countries being Muslim in the very near future.

And the few remaining whites, will be old people pissing their pants in the nursing homes. The Europe folk have sinned against their God, and He is punishing them with a Muslim PLAGUE.

[Sandman]

Almost half of all young people today in some Nordic countries are Muslims.

You were doing well until until you said this. Better brush up on your lying skills, sod.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
That's a myth. The English possessive descends from an ancient Indo-European ending, and is cognate with the genitives in -s found in many European languages.

Well, it was actually speculation on my part, which was why I said "appears to." Having read a fair amount of Shakespeare recently, I've had ample time to notice the odd constructions like "Mars his gauntlet," used of Coriolanus. But maybe it is just an odd coincidence. A very odd one, I must say.

And, uh, SoD...assuming that all the things you're saying are true (big assumption), that doesn't mean giving women the ability to compete with men will entail the extinction of their societies. Bearing children will physically put your average working woman out of commission for roughly six months, right? Around six months into it they get too big to perform most duties, plus they'll want a good amount of time to recuperate.

That's the end of the biological restriction, and that has to be done all of two or three times per lifetime to keep the population at a steady level. Everything else can be done, or at least helped, by husbands/boyfriends/grandparents/whoever. The lack of a good social mechanism to fill that role will prevent childrearing and cause problems, but societies can adapt. Are you sure the problem is with the year and a half or so childbearing directly cuts out of a woman's career, and not a problem with social structures, or a stigma on parenting, etc.?

[Son of David]

Originally posted by Elok


that doesn't mean giving women the ability to compete with men will entail the extinction of their societies.

Ha!

Well how come I don't see women 'competing' with men in construction work? Or plumbing? Or car fixing?

Okay, so women only want to compete in certain jobs, (i.e. cushy office jobs,) let's give them the benefit of the doubt.

So - if men and women are really identical, the only differences between them being the result of evil patriarchy, why is it that European countries are passing new laws every year to try and enforce an artificial equality between men and women in every aspect of society and the economy?

Seems to me that this all has a political agenda rather than a social one.

To wit, European elites believe that it is better to have as many people slaving away to increase the GDP as possible, than to maintain a healthy society with properly delineated gender roles and expectations.

So be it. But be warned! The vast majority of the world's population realizes what a load of bull that is - and I rather suspect that as European society gets sicker, stupider, and even more demented, allowing its children to have under-age sex and take all manner of drugs, it will come to rely almost totally on other cultures.

European society will be like the sick relative in the human family, who, through sheer profligacy, will be falling apart bodily and spiritually.

And the youthful members of the human family, the healthier cultures and ethnicities, they will take over! Who cares if they don't pander to women and animals like sick demented effetes! What matters is that society be a functional organism and NOT one made up of competitors. And Muslims recognize this.

Muslims are going to inherit all of Europe from the demented Europeans - and then the disappearance of 'feminism' will be the last thing to worry about!

[Elok]

Well, that lucid doomsday prophecy convinced me. I'll just tell my strong, independent ladyfriend that from now on I'll expect her to stay barefoot and pregnant in a kitchen...and just for you, I'll insist that she keep that kitchen kosher to boot. I expect that's important too if we're to keep society from disintegrating into fifteen-year-old crackwhores who inject themselves with saline thrice a day.

[Son of David]

Originally posted by Elok
Well, that lucid doomsday prophecy convinced me. I'll just tell my strong, independent ladyfriend that from now on I'll expect her to stay barefoot and pregnant in a kitchen

On the contrary, I'm not asking you to become a Muslim.

The best approach is always for men to respect women, and women to respect men, and to love one's partner as one loves oneself, of course - but in today's extreme feminism, which exists by virtue of Europe's spiritual sickness, I see something approaching the way middle class Europeans approach their pets: it's a very sickly process of elevating things to a higher position out of sheer sentimentality.

And of course, this sentimentality is sexual in origin. But I won't go into that -

The point is, that men and women should not be competing for CEO positions. They should not be competing to see who can be most obnoxious and promiscuous after drinking 7 pints of beer. Men and women are very different and also very perfect when they walk in the ways God created for them.

Women should be respected, protected, adored, and in no way maltreated - but in a society that is forcing them to behave like men to succeed, now then, I call that the true abuse of woman and the great squandering of the female potential!

[Elok]

....okay, I'll bite. If, in this hypothetical world of yours, women are not "behaving like men"--ie working, along with some stuff about drugs and pop music that I don't get the connection to--and they're not in the traditional "woman's sphere" at home minding the kids and the stove, then what exactly are they doing with their time? Playing shuffleboard?

[Son of David]

The primary purpose of the woman is to raise children and to inculcate cultural/societal attitudes in them.

This is the woman's 'job'. Household tasks are everyone's job.

Now, why are you asking me such elementary questions? Am I supposed to teach you Common Sense 101?

[Dis]

Originally posted by Son of David
Western Women have a very grave right of veto, which I believe is able to make men accept just about anything - they can refuse to have children!

Western culture is seriously sick in the head when it comes to the feminist problem.

that's why you don't marry a woman who doesn't want children.

It's best to discuss these things before getting married.

[Dis]

uhh I have an idea.

How about we let women decide for themselves what they want. No one is forcing "white women" (this is bordering on racist) to work and not have children. White women can have 20 kids if they are able. And some in the U.S. actually do have that many.

It seems to me you are bothered that Europe is becoming less white.

[Son of David]

Originally posted by Dis
How about we let women decide for themselves what they want.

Because most people are demented, and if a policy of 'individual knows best' is continued, the indigenous populations of Europe will be completely replaced by cultural groups who know that religion, God, the attitudes of their forefathers, and group unity are more important than the whims of demented individuals.


Plus, there need to be financial incentives for people who marry and have families, because at the moment the only way any individual can get anywhere is to slave away at work, and even then they pay far too much tax.

The whole purpose of the state should be to facilitate the creation of healthy families.