Supreme Court Case Admits Justice Policy Creates Gender Conflict
In the Koira vs Metro Car Wash Supreme Court case the court actually admits that justice system policy keeps men and women at each other's throats: :
"Men and women alike suffer from the stereotypes perpetrated by sex-based differential treatment. (See Kanowitz, "Benign" Sex Discrimination: Its Troubles and Their Cure (1980) 31 Hastings L.J. 1379, 1394; Comment, Equal Rights Provisions: The Experience Under State Constitutions (1977) 65 Cal.L.Rev. 1086, 1106-1107.) When the law "emphasizes irrelevant differences between men and women[,] [it] cannot help influencing the content and the tone of the social, as well as the legal, relations between the sexes. ...
As long as organized legal systems, at once the most respected [40 Cal.3d 35] and most feared of social institutions, continue to differentiate sharply, in treatment or in words, between men and women on the basis of irrelevant and artificially created distinctions, the likelihood of men and women coming to regard one another primarily as fellow human beings and only secondarily as representatives of another sex will continue to be remote.
When men and women are prevented from recognizing one another's essential humanity by sexual prejudices, nourished by legal as well as social institutions, society as a whole remains less than it could otherwise become." (Kanowitz, Women and the Law (1969) p. 4.)
Whether or not these defendants consciously based their discounts on sex stereotypes, the practice has traditionally been of that character. For example, in Com., Pa. Liquor Control Bd. v. Dobrinoff (1984) 80 Pa.Cmwlth. 453 [471 A.2d 941], the trial court relied on just such a stereotype in upholding a tavern's cover charge distinction based on sex.
The court suggested that the purpose of the discount was "'chivalry and courtesy to the fair sex.'" (Id., at p. 943.) The appellate court held, however, that a variance in admission charge based "solely upon a difference in gender, having no legitimate relevance in the circumstances" violated the Pennsylvania Human Relation Act's prohibition against sex discrimination. (Ibid.)
Similarly, in striking down the New York Yankees "Ladies' Day" promotion, the New York State Human Rights Appeal Board observed that "the stereotyped characterizations of a woman's role in society that prevailed at the inception of 'Ladies' Day' in 1876" were outdated and no longer valid "in a modern technological society where women and men are to be on equal footing as a matter of public policy." (Abosh v. New York Yankees, Inc. (1972) No. CPS-25284, Appeal No. 1194, reprinted in Babcock et al., Sex Discrimination and the Law, supra, at pp. 1069, 1070.)
With all due respect, the Washington Supreme Court also succumbed to sexual stereotyping in upholding the Seattle Supersonics' "Ladies' Night." (MacLean v. First North. Industries of America, supra, 635 P.2d at p. 684.) The court found that the discount was reasonable because, inter alia, "women do not manifest the same interest in basketball that men do." (Ibid.) fn. 16
This sort of class-based generalization as a justification for differential treatment is precisely the type of practice prohibited by the Unruh Act. (See [40 Cal.3d 36] O'Connor v. Village Green Owners Assn., supra, 33 Cal.3d at p. 794; Marina Point, supra, 30 Cal.3d at pp. 739-740.) "[T]he Unruh Civil Rights Act prohibits all forms of stereotypical discrimination." (San Jose Country Club Apartments v. County of Santa Clara (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 948, 952 [187 Cal.Rptr. 493].) These sex-based discounts impermissibly perpetuate sexual stereotypes"
Prison, racism, violence, murder, homelessness, homophobia, mental illness, suicide, reproductive rights, workplace injuries and death, military deaths, parental bias, failing our veterans failing education, lack of empathy and compassion, lack of choices, degradation, dehumanization, etc., are all overwhelmingly male experiences of gender injustice. Even sexual assault and domestic violence equally affect men. These are all examples of historical disadvantages that men have endured due to male gender role expectations There's a huge male underclass in this society, as compared to those in power, influence and authority. Chivalrous men who more often than not attain their influence, power and authority at the expense of other mens value, rights, justice, dignity, humanity and compassion. Female victimization and oppression pales by comparison. Patriarchy is actually a construct of the male female dynamic. It is a collective male gender role response to female demands for deference, protection and resource provision. Since the dawn of humanity men have slaughter each other by the billions to fulfill gender role expectations and seek approval from potential mates. Yet feminism still reinforces male gender roles with the help of white knights in power, influence and authority. Women through feminism have thrown off gender roles that they deem oppresses or victimizes them. Now it's men's turn.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete"Female victimization and oppression pales by comparison. Patriarchy is actually a construct of the male female dynamic. It is a collective male gender role response to female demands for deference, protection and resource provision. Since the dawn of humanity men have slaughter each other by the billions to fulfill gender role expectations and seek approval from potential mates. Yet feminism still reinforces male gender roles with the help of white knights in power, influence and authority. Women through feminism have thrown off gender roles that they deem oppresses or victimizes them. Now it's men's turn."
DeleteYou're definitely onto something considering that the societies where women seem to do fairly well in fields like STEM are the so-called oppressive patriarchal ones like in the Middle East, and compose a greater number of government officials compared to the Weast; all the while in places like Scandinavia, where women apparently enjoy the most egalitarian societies, women are by a great degree still choosing typical female oriented jobs or flat out choosing to be stay-at-home mothers.
That's to show you that no one has addressed the elephant in the room called biological predispositions that we need to be aware of so we can take more control of ourselves and not let just biology dictate the outcomes in gender/mating relationships.
The problem of why men face harsh backlash for not wanting to be tied to our traditional gender roles is exactly as you put it: a collusion of white knights and feminists trying to shame you into disposability by being walking human wallets for women and protecting them when they snap their fingers while bashing your supposed violent toxic masculinity.
I see how we, who are aware and took the red pill. are surrounded by 1/10000 ratio of white knights and manginas ready to stomp you for these feminist overlords and ignore you if you are feeling suicidal due to systemic misandry.
It will definitely take some effort either being orchestrated coalitions to dissent from society, or each individual man will have to do it or his own.
We're definitely going back into small "tribal" brotherhoods where we can form trustworthy forms of voluntary governments in order to protest the ones we are currently under which is basically sacrificing each male born into this world on the altar of the Goddess of Feminism.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete