Concrete changes in how you travel during the crisis (page 8 of 9)

you forgot the ban on the living room without slippers and the right to drive a car! Your "experience" is actually a very male and quite reactionary perspective!

Men often didn’t have a driver’s license back then. As for the slippers, it’s just a figure of speech. In reality, sailors’ wives often banned their husbands from certain rooms. And the husbands were often quite happy to head back out to sea after three days.

Michel

Tatra is playing a game. The guy who acts like a clown at parties, spouting nonsense just to come off as someone different

It’d be reassuring to think this is just a pose or some marketing angle, but I’m not so sure. The last time I read someone who, in one breath, challenged a cornerstone of modern democracy while also claiming Western women have it worse today than yesterday, it was from Tariq Labstinan (or something like that—his go-to authority on these issues was Iran).

What shocks and disappoints me is that after these outbursts—and with one notable exception who calls it out—people just carry on chatting about their grandma, their digs, or their duchess. I’d be curious to hear what the delightful Caro&Coco thinks about this. 😇

Contraception has also been practiced since time immemorial; and you’d be surprised to learn that Chinese women still possess knowledge in this area that has been lost in the West.

A question’s been nagging at me: will this whole situation change how you travel during the crisis?

Men often didn’t have a driver’s license.

What about a pilot’s license?

And soon we’ll need a license just to ride an e-scooter...

Hi there,

One thing’s been nagging me—is this going to change how you travel during the crisis?

It’s made me use my car more, yeah. And visit countries with reasonable restrictions. Didn’t I already say that?

Michel

Haven't I already written this?

Sorry, my bad...

Good evening my dear Jean Luc,

You’d be quite disappointed if I didn’t reply, and since I’ve got a few minutes to dash off a few lines and dot the i’s.

The last time I read someone who, in one fell swoop, challenged one of the pillars of modern democracy while also considering the condition of Western women to be less enviable today than yesterday, it was under the keyboard of Tariq Labstinan (or something like that; his absolute reference on these issues was Iran).

Consumerist universal suffrage, where everyone votes according to their passions, grudges, or interests, has nothing to do with the principles of democracy—neither modern nor ancient. So as it stands, it doesn’t exactly fill me with naive enthusiasm. Is that a problem? When it comes to the condition of women, I’ll sign on to the cause as soon as it distances itself from Marxist postulates.

Michel

"Banter" really? That word isn't appropriate at all. With Choucarde, we talked about the Duchess Anne, as she was a woman who left her mark on history. And sometimes, you just need to lighten the atmosphere.

"Marxist postulates"—I’ll tell you right away that I don’t feel targeted or concerned by your statement at all. On the contrary, I feel completely objective, with no connection to any political ideas you’re implying.

Good evening,

"Marxist postulates" I’ll tell you right away that I don’t feel targeted or concerned by your statement at all—I actually feel completely objective, nothing to do with any political ideas you’re implying

I won’t tease you by pointing out that Marxism *does* aim to be scientific, materialist, and objective—that’s literally its whole purpose. My point was to highlight the power and class dynamics that feminist arguments often imply.

Michel

Goal: you add this to suit your needs. You’ve got some pretty old-school ideas—been a while since I’ve heard those!

I don’t feel particularly targeted either. Catholicism here is complex, much like Marxist ideology. In fact, like that famous figure from Douarnenez once said to some foreigner who was surprised that the Sardinian women sang both red songs and hymns: "You know, around here we’re more like catho-commies" 😲 😇! We complain when we need to, when things are unfair!

Did you get a chance to read the links I shared?

As for the rest, what was the question again? Since I haven’t answered yet, well, I’m still not sure about my travel plans—just figuring out the timing to throw a wrench in the works and get some results. For now, though. I’ve been exploring my region a bit this summer.

objectif, it's up to you to add this as you see fit. You have some pretty old-fashioned ideas, the past really has a hold on you

"Objectif" is an assertive claim of Marxism, of "scientific socialism," as they call it. That said, to echo what Choucarde wrote, the matrix of Christianity and that of Marxism are twin sisters. The two are very close.

Michel

Ah, finally Sancho Pança arrives at a gentle trot to come to the aid of our fighter against the windmills of here and before...

cqfd my poor Tatra, it was better before, because before you wouldn’t have been so vilified by all those hypocrites.

Really? And who invented the term "hypocrite"? That was a few centuries ago, when they apparently weren’t vilifying anyone—everyone was so nice, clouds were made of cotton candy, and rivers flowed with rose water... It was *so* much better.

These days, all it takes is stating a few well-worn truths

Which ones, exactly? Because they don’t seem so obvious to us green, pink, or red common folk. Was it better in the 20s than now? Is it better under Erdogan than in France? Is a gulag better than a retirement home?

Those are opinions, sure. But obvious truths? Seriously? Are you Hibernatus, pining for the time before you were frozen, or what?

the green and pink politically correct crowd,

No red? How colorful you see life—it’s almost charming. Personally, I prefer green, pink, or even blue over gray-green or brown.

A nice Prévert-style hodgepodge—confusing and pretty nonsensical. The truth hurts, as they say.😎

Truth hurts, as they say

That’s true, it’s something people say. On the playground.

Thanks to everyone who took part in this discussion. I see it sparked a lot of interest, and I’m really happy about that. I’m also thrilled to see how you went beyond the original question and explored such varied topics as the status of women in Brittany during the Middle Ages or Marxist ideology. Finally, thanks to Michel for adding his touch, knowledge, and patience to this passionate discussion.

Bravo and great to see this little conclusion—it’s rare to find people who thank participants on top of showing interest in their contributions!

zécèlles

Watch out, you're starting to sound a bit preachy.

And it's you who says it was done in secret, everyone knew about it.

So much so that a backstreet abortionist was guillotined in France. So much so that those who could afford it went abroad. So much so that the WHO provides this recent information:

Scope of the problem According to estimates from 2010 to 2014, unsafe abortions are around 25 million per year, with a third—approximately 8 million—performed under the worst safety conditions by unskilled people using dangerous and invasive methods. Unsafe abortions result in over 7 million complications. In developed regions, it’s estimated that for every 100,000 unsafe abortions, 30 women die. This figure rises to 220 deaths per 100,000 unsafe abortions in developing countries and 520 deaths in sub-Saharan Africa. Mortality from unsafe abortions disproportionately affects women in Africa. While this continent accounts for 29% of all unsafe abortions, it bears 62% of the deaths attributed to them.

Thanks for the numbers, but that’s peanuts for the guy in question. Plus, he doesn’t know anything south of the Loire. And as for Sub-Saharan women... In France, for several years now, women have been directed to Spain due to exceeding time limits—all because of a lack of doctors. Everything’s just fine in the best of all possible worlds under Tatratism.

You're right, it's pointless, but sometimes you just can't stay silent in the face of blatant sexism.