Home Funny Pictures YouTube Funny Videos Funny GIFs Text/Links Channels Search

monswine    

Rank #866 on Comments
monswine Avatar Level 230 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Offline
Send mail to monswine Block monswine Invite monswine to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:8/01/2013
Last Login:4/20/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#14257
Comment Ranking:#866
Highest Content Rank:#11445
Highest Comment Rank:#812
Content Thumbs: 3 total,  12 ,  15
Comment Thumbs: 3595 total,  4002 ,  407
Content Level Progress: 0% (0/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 31% (31/100)
Level 230 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 231 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:0
Content Views:2544
Total Comments Made:1219
FJ Points:3029

Show:
Sort by:
Order:

funny pictures

latest user's comments

#6 - I was ready to cringe, but not bad. It's missing directions to… 19 hours ago on "They are trying to... 0
#21 - did they crash as a result of sexual intercourse distracting t… 19 hours ago on Mayday 0
#530 - Studies show that women are more resistant to pain than men, m…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/19/2014 on "male privilege" 0
#531 - mooproxy (5 hours ago) [-]
Yes she is sufficiently trained, but when it comes to physical testing, women have to complete less to achieve the same rank: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Physical_Fitness_Test
And they may well send minorities as cannon fodder, but if they're being used as cannon fodder then they're hardly going to be the best soldiers the army have, are they?

Women may be more resistant to pain (though seeing those studies might help) but that doesn't make them physically stronger.
#21 - I don't believe there are no differences between sexes and rac… 04/19/2014 on du 'patrerkey 0
#20 - I disagree, I think that there is wide spread bias and that hi… 04/19/2014 on du 'patrerkey 0
#8 - twelve year olds thinking they know everything. Women represen…  [+] (5 new replies) 04/19/2014 on du 'patrerkey -1
#22 - pwnarn (04/19/2014) [-]
Look guys! I found the feminist!
#15 - anonymous (04/19/2014) [-]
Mfw genetics. Mfw sexual dimorphism Mfw marxists like you will perpetuate this sterotype that everyone is equally good at everything and has the same body and genes!YAAY!!!!
User avatar #21 - monswine (04/19/2014) [-]
I don't believe there are no differences between sexes and races, that's what the last few sentences of my comment were about. It's a crying shame when over-zealous crusaders force us to ignore them in the name of pseudo-scientific political correctness but I believe law and policy should have little to do with the nitty gritty of statistical differences between the various subgroups of humanity and treat all of us as equal persons.
#14 - anonymous (04/19/2014) [-]
Flagged Comment Picture
This image was flagged 1397918632
So you are in fact saying that; "Yes, we need more diversity in all the spots, but we don't need to change the standards." The problem is that for a lot of jobs the current standard is easier to achieve for males, therefor to allow more females to do such a thing would require lower standards.
TL;DR Just my 2 cents.
User avatar #20 - monswine (04/19/2014) [-]
I disagree, I think that there is wide spread bias and that hiring practices often have little to do with who is the most qualified. Besides, the armed forces routinely lower their standards to let retards and fatasses join, but not women?
#9 - Feeeed Meee  [+] (4 new replies) 04/19/2014 on Audrey 3 ? +68
#58 - anonymous (21 hours ago) [-]
User avatar #43 - bloodrider (23 hours ago) [-]
"league of legends mid lane in a nutshell"
#49 - Javapenguin (22 hours ago) [-]
User avatar #42 - lietuvisss (23 hours ago) [-]
This always cracks me up.
#361 - #8 was god damned Seinfeld www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmMna1EwZ1E 04/19/2014 on Oblivious Single... 0
#528 - But that disproportionate distribution of risk is wholly the r…  [+] (3 new replies) 04/19/2014 on "male privilege" 0
#529 - mooproxy (04/19/2014) [-]
Well women are (most of the time) physically weaker than men. That's biological fact so don't start calling sexism. Armies want the strongest soldiers they can get (to carry heavy equipment, resist gun recoil, and of course occasionally hand-to-hand combat) so they predominantly select men on the front line.
Now I didn't choose to be generally stronger than women. I could chose to be unhealthy and become weaker, but that leads to health risks etc etc. The point is that we are naturally physically stronger (like I said as a general rule, there are exceptions) so we will be chosen to go on the front lines in war more often and therefore more of us will die.
Even if women ran society, it would be a terrible strategy to send mostly women onto the front lines. The point of the poster was to point out that we have the 'privilege' to be selected for that, and as a consequence die more frequently.
User avatar #530 - monswine (04/19/2014) [-]
Studies show that women are more resistant to pain than men, mothers to an extreme. Minorities have historically been deployed to the front lines as cannon fodder more often than strapping white boys. A woman who joined the armed forces would be rigorously trained and wouldn't be deployed unless she as deemed sufficiently proficient at completing her duties no matter what other factors were in play. It's silly to think otherwise.
#531 - mooproxy (5 hours ago) [-]
Yes she is sufficiently trained, but when it comes to physical testing, women have to complete less to achieve the same rank: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Physical_Fitness_Test
And they may well send minorities as cannon fodder, but if they're being used as cannon fodder then they're hardly going to be the best soldiers the army have, are they?

Women may be more resistant to pain (though seeing those studies might help) but that doesn't make them physically stronger.
#525 - This post is making the claim that men have been disproportion…  [+] (5 new replies) 04/18/2014 on "male privilege" 0
#527 - mooproxy (04/18/2014) [-]
Yes, it doesn't negate the mother's part, but it equally doesn't mean that the mother's role is more important. Every man has been born of a woman (or by caesarian if you count Macduff) but that statement is irrelevant because men have basically equal involvement.
And more men historically have died in war. Women are allowed to go to war, however more men die in war. It may not be discrimination as to who gets shot, but it's still a danger that our sex face more frequently.
User avatar #528 - monswine (04/19/2014) [-]
But that disproportionate distribution of risk is wholly the result of the actions of men, or at the very least a society with men in charge who believe that women are unfit for service. It would be like saying how unfair it is that Kings are more prone to gout and other such diseases.
#529 - mooproxy (04/19/2014) [-]
Well women are (most of the time) physically weaker than men. That's biological fact so don't start calling sexism. Armies want the strongest soldiers they can get (to carry heavy equipment, resist gun recoil, and of course occasionally hand-to-hand combat) so they predominantly select men on the front line.
Now I didn't choose to be generally stronger than women. I could chose to be unhealthy and become weaker, but that leads to health risks etc etc. The point is that we are naturally physically stronger (like I said as a general rule, there are exceptions) so we will be chosen to go on the front lines in war more often and therefore more of us will die.
Even if women ran society, it would be a terrible strategy to send mostly women onto the front lines. The point of the poster was to point out that we have the 'privilege' to be selected for that, and as a consequence die more frequently.
User avatar #530 - monswine (04/19/2014) [-]
Studies show that women are more resistant to pain than men, mothers to an extreme. Minorities have historically been deployed to the front lines as cannon fodder more often than strapping white boys. A woman who joined the armed forces would be rigorously trained and wouldn't be deployed unless she as deemed sufficiently proficient at completing her duties no matter what other factors were in play. It's silly to think otherwise.
#531 - mooproxy (5 hours ago) [-]
Yes she is sufficiently trained, but when it comes to physical testing, women have to complete less to achieve the same rank: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Physical_Fitness_Test
And they may well send minorities as cannon fodder, but if they're being used as cannon fodder then they're hardly going to be the best soldiers the army have, are they?

Women may be more resistant to pain (though seeing those studies might help) but that doesn't make them physically stronger.

Comments(0):

 
Per page:
Order:

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Anonymous commenting is allowed
No comments!
 Friends (0)