Why do women want gender equality in the workplace, but not in dating?

A foetus isn’t a child. Since abortions happen at 24 weeks at the latest (mostly they happen at 12-13 weeks) this isn’t a fully developed baby. At that time, it’s cells that have the potential to become a baby just like sperm.

A pregnant woman who isn’t ready to raise a child, doesn’t want to raise a child, can’t afford to raise a child, doesn’t want a child from her rapist, isn’t murdering anything by getting an abortion. Since the mother is already fully formed and alive, her life is more important since she actually has one.
Women aren’t baby factories, if she doesn’t want to have one she shouldn’t be forced to because people think the life of a potential human is more important than an actual human.

It's not about it being easy for women. It's what saying that means. The undertone is that, men will shag anything. He doesn't realise that saying it's easy for women to get laid [by men] that he's actually insulting men, not women as he intends to, which I also don't agree with because I know he's just bitter. Div.

This is what I don't understand about the modern day gender equality/feminism movement. They want equality in some areas, but other areas they are happy for things to stay the same as long as they receive the benefit.

Women want equal treatment in the workplace with their male colleagues. They want equal pay (FWIW the gender pay gap is a myth - same job for same hours get paid the same, otherwise it's illegal), they don't want to experience sexual harassment in the workplace (what about all the false accusations which ruin men's careers?), they want the same opportunities men have, they want equal opportunities for promotion (despite many of them taking time off for maternity leave).

This is all fair enough. Except they don't want equality in dating. Men are still expected to:

- ask the woman out and face possible rejection (women might give subtle hints, but under no circumstances will they ask the man out - that is "his job")
- pay for the first date (and possible subsequent dates as well)
- propose to the woman
- treat her with meals/gifts
- hold open the door for her
- give up his coat if she's cold, so he can freeze (but never the other way around)
- put the majority of effort into sex (this is centered around pleasing the woman - the man's enjoyment is always assumed)
- be manly and dominant, never show any weak emotions, keep his problems bottled up because otherwise it's "unmanly"
- household chores must now be shared. Women no longer have to do all the cooking and cleaning, it's shared equally between men, because otherwise it's gender discrimination/oppression. Despite the fact men are still seen as the primary breadwinner in the household and a man without a job is a virtual disaster.


So back to the original question: Why do women want gender equality in the workplace (and indeed many other areas), but not in dating? I'm interested to hear to views of men, women and any feminists.

Okay firstly if you seriously think that just because paying different wages is illegal, it doesn’t happen then you’re delusional. It does, everywhere and there are so many statistics proving that idk how you can deny it.

Secondly, the number of women who genuinely get sexually assaulted FAR exceed the number that falsely accuse men and most women would and should agree that the latter group are absolute scum.

Third, how do you expect your children to be raised if women don’t take maternity leave. It takes time to recover after birth and men are generally opposed to being the ones to look after the children.

I don’t think that men should have to pay for dates or have to ask out the girl, and more and more women have begun to share this view and make this part of relationships more equal.

The chores part is bs. Women increasingly earn just as much of not more than men and regardless of salary, after working the whole day why is the women any more responsible for the chores. Women who don’t work however do generally take responsibility for the household work.

Why lmao? Why are you happy with the murder of babies? It is this casual indifference that gets me with some women. It is very sad.

It is not a woman’s right to do whatever she wants with her body when another person’s life is at risk.

This is dumb since they wouldn't even have developed to a baby. They have no feelings so it's not murder. Again, they are many reasons why women get abortion.
I feel sorry for people that think like you, and whatever person who repped you.

If someone would die without a kidney transplant and you are the only perfect match available, should you be forced against your will to give it to them?

This is really sad. Rather than acknowledging the presence of life, you are now trying to use “feelings” to justify the murder of unborn children.

There is an ailment called locked-in syndrome. Essentially due to paralysis, the person is unable to move without any feelings. The only major indicator of life is the beating heart. Using your example, then it should be good to murder these people since they have no feelings.

A baby is formed at conception. I wonder what you would use next to try to normalise murdering children. Maybe you can argue that they are unable to speak or solve basic math problems, so the woman is justified for ending the baby’s life.

The whole ‘dating’ paragraph sounds like an emotionally abusive relationship to me, that ain’t healthy. If a guy wants to “take charge” and pay for everything and shuts me down when I say i’m not comfortable with it that’s a big ol no from me. Both parties should put in equal amounts of effort, expense and work.

I think women who campaign for the top list are very rarely the same women from the bottom list. The contradiction is only if you generalise “all women” as one group. Then you see one woman wanting something, another woman wanting a contradicting thing, then your head explodes because what a feminist wants isn’t the same as what a gold digger wants. Once you figure out women don’t all have one list of desires to go off, the confusion is easily banished.

Relationships should be balance and respect, seeing your partner as an equal not just a pay check or a sex doll.

Completely agree with everything you’ve said there. And when a man breaks up with a women, men are ********s etc etc. But when women break up with men it’s ‘you go girl atttiude’ you don’t need him he’s a looser etc etc. Women are very strange creatures.

Yet another moronic example from another woman. A kidney donor is completely different to the mother of a child.

A woman gets pregnant and for some reason believes that she is better off killing her unborn child. So she ends its life. This is a very different story to a person needing a medical organ replacement and struggling to find one.

This is one of the issues raised on this thread. The apparent ruthlessness of some women without fear or remorse. Personally, i think some women are the real savages. They are capable of murder, but yet try to justify or normalise it and then pretend to be the “fairer” sex. It is truly troubling to read.

How is it really that different? You said that a person does not have the right to do whatever they want with their body where another persons life is at risk.

No, under 24 weeks the foetus is not a "child". It cannot feel pain or function as a human. So a women should get an abortion before then.
You are really ignorant. Women can get pregnant due to rape, due to being in a unstable financial position, failed contraception but to you, women should keep the baby because it's "murder" (which it isn't)
What I would say I am against though is women using abortion as a contraception, I do think that is wrong.

They are two different people in different bodies. A pregnant mother has her unborn child in her and completely dependent on her. Those are very different things. That is why the mother does not have a right to end the child’s life.

And the person in desperate need for one kidney is totally dependent on the only perfect match who has two healthy kidneys in their bodies.

All you keep saying is ‘they’re completely different things’ but tbh, it follows the same principle: Person A has the ability to allow Person B to continue living (I assume you believe that life begins at conception) and is the only one who can do so, however the only way to do that is if person A undergoes a procedure that could be dangerous. Person A refuses because they believe that they should have autonomy over their body and they don’t want to risk the pain, complications or side effects that could arise. As a direct result of person A’s refusal, person B dies.

You are still using two different argument points. Person A and Part B are two separate entities but in a pregnant woman’s case, Person A (baby) is IN Person B (mother).

Due to the strong nature of child dependence on mother, if a child dies under the care of the mother, the first point is negligence, then manslaughter and murder. There is no argument of “it is the woman’s business what she does with her child”.