Kamala blasts Pence for refusing to meet women alone

[_Jersey Girl]

It mostly exists in the same pockets of people who think women should submit to their husbands.

More stuff and nonsense. The policy (which you have yet to quote from Pence himself) is protective of the workplace, the positions, and the people who hold them.

[_Jersey Girl]

Mike Pence himself said he won't meet women alone for meals such as business lunches.

And? That's his business.

I think it's already been explained why gender discrimination in this way is bad. If you want to say that's his prerogative, it's also our prerogative to condemn people who do that.

We're not talking about gender discrimination.

You are. Yet you have failed to supply proof that any gender discrimination has taken place or women denied access to Pence. Next you'll complain that Pence prefers to pee in the men's restroom without women present because the potential for business discussions to take place over the urinal exists and therefore his personal policy to use the men's restroom or fail to equally visit the women's restroom is discriminatory.

[_Maksutov]

Will Pence meet alone with gay guys?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Pence's inner circle of friends are mostly male. They hold sway over his views and behaviors toward the world. What a disgusting misogynistic piece of crap pig. Unless he's willing to have a 50/50 split between men and women who call themselves his friend he's guilty of slavery and is a fascist, racist animal who can't control any of his inner demons around anyone who is of a lesser status in the White Heterosexual Power Hierarchy.

CLEARLY.

- Doc

[_Jersey Girl]

Will Pence meet alone with gay guys?

You're getting too far ahead of the thread, Mak. We don't even know, with accuracy, what Pence's policy is regarding meeting with women.

Everyone is spitballing here. Except for EA. EA is making crap up.

[_EAllusion]

We're not talking about gender discrimination.

You are.

Mike Pence is. It's the literal definition of gender discrimination. No one can help it if you don't like words.

Yet you have failed to supply proof that any gender discrimination has taken place or women denied access to Pence.

Mike Pence's abstract support of gender discrimination is likely to have resulted in actual gender discrimination, but the fun thing here is that isn't necessary to have a problem with Mike Pence's support of gender discrimination.

Next you'll complain that Pence prefers to pee in the men's restroom without women present because the potential for business discussions to take place over the urinal exists and therefore his personal policy to use the men's restroom or fail to equally visit the women's restroom is discriminatory.

So, the argument here is that using gender segregated bathrooms is analogous to gender segregated meals? Putting aside the existence of explicit business lunches, eating while working late, etc., it appears that you are unaware that one of the ways you get ahead in business relationships is by developing rapport with others. That occurs at things like meals. You seem to think unless business isn't discussed, that doesn't count. Since no one can prove Mike Pence, a US Congressman and Governor, ever had a meal discussing business that a woman wasn't invited to, you can't prove discrimination occurred. So, it appears you need to 1) expand your understanding of how this unequal treatment creates unequal advantages, 2) recognize that the existence of gender segregated bathrooms are not a great analogy for all other types of professional gender segregation, and 3) read about how politicians work.

[_Jersey Girl]

We're not talking about gender discrimination.

You are.

Mike Pence is. It's the literal definition of gender discrimination. No one can help it if you don't like words.

Yet you have failed to supply proof that any gender discrimination has taken place or women denied access to Pence.

Mike Pence's abstract support of gender discrimination is likely to have resulted in actual gender discrimination, but the fun thing here is that isn't necessary to have a problem with Mike Pence's support of gender discrimination.

Next you'll complain that Pence prefers to pee in the men's restroom without women present because the potential for business discussions to take place over the urinal exists and therefore his personal policy to use the men's restroom or fail to equally visit the women's restroom is discriminatory.

So, the argument here is that using gender segregated bathrooms is analogous to gender segregated meals? Putting aside the existence of explicit business lunches, eating while working late, etc., it appears that you are unaware that one of the ways you get ahead in business relationships is by developing rapport with others. That occurs at things like meals. You seem to think unless business isn't discussed, that doesn't count. Since no one can prove Mike Pence, a US Congressman and Governor, ever had a meal discussing business that a woman wasn't invited to, you can't prove discrimination occurred. So, it appears you need to 1) expand your understanding of how this unequal treatment creates unequal advantages, 2) recognize that the existence of gender segregated bathrooms are not a great analogy for all other types of professional gender segregation, and 3) read about how politicians work.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Well, first off gender is just a social construct, and, as Harvard's LGTBQ+ student coalition has taught us, anyone can change their gender at any time so really, there can't be gender discrimination because no one is *really* male or female. This just seems to me a desperate attempt to define Mike Pence into a category that doesn't really apply anyhow.

So, from my perspective EA is guilty of misgendering people into social constructs and perhaps Mike Pence just chooses to spend time with the *personalities* he feels are worth his time?

Ugh. So regressive.

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

It mostly exists in the same pockets of people who think women should submit to their husbands.

Again, more complete nonsense from you. by the way, Over the last 30 years, I have never met one on one with a female for any type of business lunch, etc - and while I am certain that you wouldn't understand my reasons for such a personal and conscious decision, I can assure you that it has nothing to do with thinking that women should submit to their husbands.

I think you need to reread what I said. Put another way, if you draw a Venn diagram of people who think as a man you should never be alone with a woman who isn't your spouse, including for meals, and people who think women ought to submit to their husbands, you are looking at heavy overlap. This doesn't mean that thinking women should submit to their husbands causes you think to this. More accurately, both ideas tend to flow from the same religiously conservative cultural mores, which is why you often see them together and less often apart.

That you think one, but not the other isn't some gotcha refutation. Showing that both groups don't intersect in the way I said would be.

I'll assume the best case scenario of you and presume that you have a job where you've never had to meet one on one with anyone. Congrats, but that is not remotely feasible for a lot of work, including the type of work Mike Pence has performed. In that type of work, having such a rule inherently disadvantages women.

If, instead, you have a job where you are meeting with men one on one, but are refusing to do so with women, that's not something to brag about. It's one thing to deny women opportunities afforded to men out of misguided ideas about gender roles or sexual relationships. It's another to pat yourself on the back about it.

You suggesting something about my imagination is priceless.

Is what's "insane" about this thread people criticizing Mike Pence and, I guess, you or people defending him?

Oh, I think I knew where you were going just fine.

[_EAllusion]

Well, first off gender is just a social construct, and, as Harvard's LGTBQ+ student coalition has taught us, anyone can change their gender at any time so really, there can't be gender discrimination because no one is *really* male or female.

Because hours and minutes are social constructs, did you explain to your employer that you can't ever *really* be late because social constructs aren't real?

It's kinda sad that you think this is clever because you don't understand what a social construct is. It's the sort of argument you'd expect on a meme shared by elderly people on Facebook.