• PepeLivesMatter
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Perhaps in the past, but nowadays women are totally free to become soldiers, farmers, butchers, construction workers, electricians, bus drivers, or garbage collectors. Yet all of those jobs are still overwhelmingly done by men. And if men didn’t do them, there would be no houses, no roads, no electricity, and no food.

    • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Men sexually harass women who do those things in the workplace, and they still have to cook your food and wipe your bum when they get home

      • PepeLivesMatter
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, they do not. Women do not have to stay in abusive relationships. They can go to court and get a restraining order, a divorce, or sue their employer if they are harassed at the workplace. No one is forcing them to stay in these types of situations. If they chose to do so anyways, they have no one but themselves to blame.

        • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Ah, the good old “systemic oppression doesn’t exist because free will”

          Next you’re gonna say women who are forced by the state to carry pregnancies to term can just choose not to raise their kids

              • PepeLivesMatter
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                So you’re saying it’s immoral to give up a child for adoption when you are unable to raise it, but it’s not immoral to abort it before it even has a chance to take its first breath?

                • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You’re very confused. We’re talking about women who COULD raise a child while working a job, and would rather have a life of their own, but are bound by basic morality. You also seem to think a single celled organism with no nervous system is a child.

                  • PepeLivesMatter
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yes, I am indeed confused. Are you saying that women who COULD raise a child but choose not to are acting immorally when they give their child up for adoption, but they are acting morally if they chose to abort their pregnancy instead?

                    Because it sounds like that’s what you are saying.