<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Breaking news: Australia officially declared insane</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.talkingsquid.net/archives/1065/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.talkingsquid.net/archives/1065</link>
	<description>Scientific Romances and Other Curiosities from the Antipodes</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 03:33:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bubkcaroo Banzai</title>
		<link>http://www.talkingsquid.net/archives/1065/comment-page-1#comment-55850</link>
		<dc:creator>Bubkcaroo Banzai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 03:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.talkingsquid.net/?p=1065#comment-55850</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not sure about the &quot;insanity&quot; of not allowing a women-only travel company. Wouldn&#039;t it be somewhat like a white-supremacy/&quot;preservation&quot; group creating a travel agency which refuses to serve non-whites &quot;so that whites feel more safe among themselves&quot;?

I&#039;m not completely against it either. On the other hand I see it just as just a service concept, and I&#039;m quite in favor of free market. 

This is, however, something that goes fundamentally against the notion of equal opportunity. Men simply wouldn&#039;t have such opportunity in such company. And I believe that a men-only version would possibly be thought as troublesome to many people. The only thing that makes it somewhat OK, negligible, is that I don&#039;t believe such thing would expand to the point that men would see themselves almost without access to this sort of service (well, to either all-sexes or all-men travels, not to all-women travel, of course). 

But I&#039;d be afraid that such things could be some sort of legal precedent to justify other things that go against equality of opportunities, other services exclusive to some race or sex, but in a way that everybody would feel more like a sort of neo-KKKlub, rather than something more innocent, like a beauty saloon sort of thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not sure about the &#8220;insanity&#8221; of not allowing a women-only travel company. Wouldn&#8217;t it be somewhat like a white-supremacy/&#8221;preservation&#8221; group creating a travel agency which refuses to serve non-whites &#8220;so that whites feel more safe among themselves&#8221;?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not completely against it either. On the other hand I see it just as just a service concept, and I&#8217;m quite in favor of free market. </p>
<p>This is, however, something that goes fundamentally against the notion of equal opportunity. Men simply wouldn&#8217;t have such opportunity in such company. And I believe that a men-only version would possibly be thought as troublesome to many people. The only thing that makes it somewhat OK, negligible, is that I don&#8217;t believe such thing would expand to the point that men would see themselves almost without access to this sort of service (well, to either all-sexes or all-men travels, not to all-women travel, of course). </p>
<p>But I&#8217;d be afraid that such things could be some sort of legal precedent to justify other things that go against equality of opportunities, other services exclusive to some race or sex, but in a way that everybody would feel more like a sort of neo-KKKlub, rather than something more innocent, like a beauty saloon sort of thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

