Feminism

[chaos]

What's annoying is that you automatically assumed Dr. Baumeister would be whining about women when straight from the introduction of his article:

Hence this is not about the “battle of the sexes,” and in fact I think one unfortunate legacy of feminism has been the idea that men and women are basically enemies. I shall suggest, instead, that most often men and women have been partners, supporting each other rather than exploiting or manipulating each other. Nor is this about trying to argue that men should be regarded as victims. I detest the whole idea of competing to be victims. And I’m certainly not denying that culture has exploited women. But rather than seeing culture as patriarchy, which is to say a conspiracy by men to exploit women, I think it’s more accurate to understand culture (e.g., a country, a religion) as an abstract system that competes against rival systems — and that uses both men and women, often in different ways, to advance its cause.
Also I think it’s best to avoid value judgments as much as possible. They have made discussion of gender politics very difficult and sensitive, thereby warping the play of ideas. I have no conclusions to present about what’s good or bad or how the world should change. In fact my own theory is built around tradeoffs, so that whenever there is something good it is tied to something else that is bad, and they balance out.
I don’t want to be on anybody’s side. Gender warriors please go home.

If you can't be assed to give anyone elses views a chance, I can't imagine anyone wanting to give a flying fuck about yours.

 

[Hipmonlee]

My superior age and experience is telling me to tell you that you arent going to convince anyone of anything just because you are old.

I think the reason this topic has derailed to this degree is because there isnt really anything being discussed here. Like, nobody disputes that unfair discrimination against women exists. So what is being argued?

Have a nice day.

 

[Raikou]

What's annoying is that you automatically assumed Dr. Baumeister would be whining about women when straight from the introduction of his article:



If you can't be assed to give anyone elses views a chance, I can't imagine anyone wanting to give a flying fuck about yours.

I think they do, I'm getting plenty of responses.

If you had paraphrased it into the thread I would have read it initially. I clicked the link and TL;DR

To Teifu, I am also being misinterpreted, I'm pretty sure I don't have a personal problem with porn/strip clubs/etc and stated it explicitly, I was using it to make a point.

Take it or leave it, this is the internet after all, and this is a thread full of male opinions with very few female ones due to the nature of the message boards its on. I'm 22, not old enough to know everything but I do know a lot about being female.

 

[Dragontamer]

Oh, but they do go by merit. Get one ticket or have an accident, there's your merit down the toilet. Or would you rather have every insurance agency send an agent to sit with you as you drive and give you a personal merit evaluation? This would cost the company more money, since they have to pay all of these evaluators, so the end result would be more expensive insurance, not cheaper.

And businesses don't go by merit? Even if a business is extremely sexist / racist, it has to go by merit to stay competitive. However, once they base their decisions on gender, then it is clearly gender discrimination.

What I'm saying is that a man who has the same driving record as a woman (the same merit) has to pay more for his insurance. Clearly, this is not equal treatment between the sexes.

And btw: the insurance rates would be cheaper for men, and more expensive for women. This I believe is the reason why feminists dodge this subject. Because in this case, equal treatment would be a disadvantage for women (when in actuality, it would only make car insurance rates an equal playing field for men and women)

And if you want to be mad at someone about paying marginally more money for a mere 3-4 years, get mad at all those high school retards with fart cans on their hondas who wreck all the time and drive up your rates. They are everywhere, at least where I live, and they're almost always reckless and terrible drivers- and hate to break it you, they're almost always male.

You are missing the point time and time again.

I am not mad. I am simply pointing out a single thing: that car insurance rates are partially based on gender, instead of entirely by merit. That is the first point I wish to point out.

Second: I only wish to point this out because I feel that this is a contradiction in the general feminist mentality. What pisses me off is that because society defends car insurance rates at the advantage of women... while any decision based on gender that puts women at a disadvantage is looked down upon.

Also, your example is not all-encompassing, I have a nearly perfect driving record and my boyfriend does not. He pays less.

Car Insurance rates are based on many factors. Among them, the price of the car you drive, the grades you get, the amount of coverage in the car insurance, etc. etc.

However, for the same coverage, for the same driving record, for the same age and for the same grades, women pay less than men when it comes to car insurance.

If SAT scores are indicative of intelligence and success, how come more college graduates today are female?

http://www.engineeringwomen.org/

Today, just 20 percent of undergraduate engineering students are women.

Why is this about "help?" Why does this have to be a battle of the sexes? I really urge everyone to read the link I posted earlier in this thread. If you're going to be a crusader for equality, then stop making it a holy war where one side has to be better than the other. I wonder how THAT's gonna end? ;)

Hmm, I just find it so hard to continue this argument without it degrading into battle of the sexes. >_> I again, personally don't mind. I just feel like it is hypocritical to critisize businesses for unfair treatment of women, while they defend other decisions based on gender.

I'm fine with "equal rights" or even "unequal rights" as long as the opposition is willing to be consistant in their application.

And I love how "culture exploits men", meanwhile you turn on the TV, a movie or the internet and you see half (and fully) naked women all over the place. That's not catering to women, sounds a little exploitive to me. And why aren't there any male strip clubs that cater to women?

Yaoi fangirls creap me out as well. As does Atlas's avitar and signature... >_>

Not anywhere where I live. Here it's more "girl claims rape, there is no evidence at all aside from this, guy is convicted and sent to jail for several years".

There's a big problem with rape. I've seen that happen myself but also the other side. I'm not saying that the opposite doesn't happen... the problem with the current system is that it is set up so that if a girl wants to get back at the male for whatever reason... she can through the legal system.

And yet there are enough holes in the legal system to allow the opposite to happen. The system is simply broken on both sides.

I assume you aren't in college so I will explain it for you. Whether or not you graduate depends on whether you pass all the degree required courses and whether your final GPA meets the minimum necessary. The professors do not grade you subjectively, they grade you on your tests and papers based on whether you fulfilled the requirements of the assignement. In many cases it is simply based on tests, no professor is going to intentionally mark your correct answers wrong unless he wants to endanger his job.

Lol. You've never taken an english class before, have you? Especially one on woman's literature? Essays and papers are about the most subjective pieces of **** grades I've ever had.

Even in engineering-related courses, the performance of your design and design report is subjective, as are your reports and so forth. Why? Because it has to be. There is no "correct" design for unsolved problems, and even solved problems tend to have multiple solutions.

Don't get me wrong... I've had many totally test-related classes. Differential Equations was entirely based on ~3 tests across the semester. But regardless, its not like every class is not subjective. On the contrary, I'd assume most classes that matter are subjective.

I've also had several jobs and yes, some bosses are downright sexist. And they give you a salary subjectively.

Cracker is not offensive on the level of some other insults, in most cases it is more comical. If you call a white person a cracker they may chuckle, and if they take offense to it they are probably a bit thin-skinned. It's like calling someone an asshole, there's no real historical context that makes it hurtful.

Now go into a group of black people and call them (BAN ME PLEASE)s. Call some women at your work stupid cunts. Or bitches, or whores. See if you a) make it out alive and b) keep your job.

Have you ever dared called your boss a cracker?

I can go up to my black friends and say "wassup (BAN ME PLEASE)s?" and they'll laugh it off with me. When you're with friends, you laugh everything off. He calls me a chink, I call him a (BAN ME PLEASE). We don't care (and I'm not even chinese >_> Pinoy ftw).

It is comical as long as you are within your group of friends. But in a professional environment, you'd be an idiot to actually say those terms.

 

[n3ther]

Why should I? I have plenty of personal experience and education in the matter to go on, all of it supported by real evidence. That's more than most of the people I'm arguing with can say. No offense to anyone still in high school but you will only realize how myopic your views of the outside world are once you are actually out there.

But if you insist I will read this poor, underprivileged white man's whining, if only to prove that women have more and bigger issues than he does.

Raikou, you should have really read the article before responding about it incorrectly. This response really makes it seem like you have some superiority that allows you to skim other people's arguments while expecting people to thoroughly read everything you write. Other people aren't going to take your posts as seriously if you decide to keep this attitude. Nobody likes to make themselves look foolish even over the internet.

In regards to feminism, I really don't have anything significant to contribute to the argument. I feel that women are very capable of most jobs that men can attain. I say most here to be reasonable since obviously there are some professions only men can be in such as professional Football or Rugby. Repeating what has been said before, men and women are very different in many respects and shouldn't be expected to be equal in everything.

I still don't quite understand what feminists (in the U.S.) are currently trying to achieve other than being part of a cause but perhaps I should devote time researching the most important problems women in the U.S. face today.

 

[Dragontamer]

Hey, my views are on the table for everyone who has stated that "women have smaller brains" "women cant do math or science" "women suck at SATs" or "women lack the mental and emotional capacity to do the kinds of jobs men do", all gems from earlier in the thread. I don't sugarcoat, I mean it's the internet so why would I? And yes, in some arguments your age and experience do matter, like a 17 year old giving marriage advice, translate that into holier than thou if you will.

Amazing. Thanks for misrepresenting my views.

I brought up the SAT thing first to stir the pot up, I'll admit that. This debate wasn't really going anywhere in the first few pages... The 2nd time I brought it up is to point out the hypocracy between car insurance rates and SAT.

I never wished to conclude that women were in any way inferior. However, if you use those statistics in a similar way to how insurance companies use those statistics to conclude that males are worse drivers... then the only possible conclusion is that women suck at math.

It is this inconsistancy that my entire point has been since whenever I first posted that car insurance fact.

 

[Raikou]

Lol. You've never taken an english class before, have you? Especially one on woman's literature? Essays and papers are about the most subjective pieces of **** grades I've ever had.

Even in engineering-related courses, the performance of your design and design report is subjective, as are your reports and so forth. Why? Because it has to be. There is no "correct" design for unsolved problems, and even solved problems tend to have multiple solutions.

I was a business major, I've taken a english and politcal science classes where all you do is write but they were not the bulk of my major. I still disagree they they judge them like you say, usually you just have to stay relevant to the topic, provide well supported evidence, have good grammar and bam "A".

And my point about characteristically male degrees is that the amount of women graduates is rising, not at its peak. In medical however, 50% of graduates are female, so it's risen more quickly than some. In engineering I simply imagine it's due to the fact that less women like the field in the same way less women are into cars, it's an interests thing, not a matter of capability. If there was a dance major men would shy away from that too.

And I meant going up to strangers or women who you are not on friendly terms with and calling them those names. Even your boss would just look at you funny if you called him cracker. I have never heard someone call a white person a cracker as a real insult, actually.

 

[Raikou]

Amazing. Thanks for misrepresenting my views.

I brought up the SAT thing first to stir the pot up, I'll admit that. This debate wasn't really going anywhere in the first few pages... The 2nd time I brought it up is to point out the hypocracy between car insurance rates and SAT.

I never wished to conclude that women were in any way inferior. However, if you use those statistics in a similar way to how insurance companies use those statistics to conclude that males are worse drivers... then the only possible conclusion is that women suck at math.

It is this inconsistancy that my entire point has been since whenever I first posted that car insurance fact.

Insurance companies don't say males are inferior drivers. Just teenage males. They're speaking more to your age than your gender. And they're fucking insurance companies, everybody hates them.

And if you were trying to stir the pot up, then you succeeded, as did I with some of my comments about males dropping out of high school. I also never said the average teenage male was a bad driver, I gave specific examples of the ones who tend to skew the whole group. You said girls on average are bad at math..

And I'm on a Pokemon message board, I'm not trying to convert anybody, just kill some time while I search the wifi forum. I read chaos' essay and I do not fully agree with it, nor do you have to agree with me.

 

[Dragontamer]

And I meant going up to strangers or women who you are not on friendly terms with and calling them those names. Even your boss would just look at you funny if you called him cracker. I have never heard someone call a white person a cracker as a real insult, actually.

It was the start of a couple of fights in my High School actually. I haven't seen it since then... but there was some racial tension going on in that hallway anyway...

Insurance companies don't say males are inferior drivers. Just teenage males. They're speaking more to your age than your gender. And they're fucking insurance companies, everybody hates them.

If it was speaking to our age, then female drivers at the same age would have the same costs. They do not however. Clearly, it is a gender gap.

 

[Synre]

Also I've been meaning to jump on it for a while but we really need to get rid of the car insurance whining.

I'm sure you're all aware of this but insurance is all based on statistics. There is no complaint here - they have proven that as a teenager, and as a male teenager, you are more likely to get in an accident than a female teenager or an adult. This is not a stereotype, it is a fact. It's not like the Insurance companies just made up some table about what types of drivers get into accidents based on conjecture, they have years and years of evidence to base their numbers on. It sucks for those of us who don't frequently get drunk and drive our cars into walls, but there's no valid complaint against this one - the facts are the facts.

 

[Dragontamer]

I'd hate to go into a circle again... but lemme sum up my strategy from this point again.

1. I claim inconsistancy in car insurance and feminism's treatment of it.
2. Someone claims the base is based on statistics.
3. I bring up sources of racism / sexism that are based on statistics. IE: SAT Math scores and so forth.
4. We begin argument on whether those statistics are valid.
5. We get derailed into women vs men argument.
6. I reset the derailed argument back into car insurance.
7. Lather, rinse, repeat.

I'm not complaining about car insurance. I'm complaining about the fact that feminists inconsistantly apply the ideal of meritology towards car insurance. As colleges ignore the "average woman's SAT score" when accepting students (in favor of say... the actual student's SAT score), car insurance should ignore "average male driving records" and instead look at the actual driving record of the person.

There's a slight difference. I really don't care which way it is, as long as it is applied consistantly.

And lets begin iteration #4 with your response >_>

 

[Altmer]

Insurance companies don't say males are inferior drivers. Just teenage males. They're speaking more to your age than your gender. And they're fucking insurance companies, everybody hates them.

And if you were trying to stir the pot up, then you succeeded, as did I with some of my comments about males dropping out of high school. I also never said the average teenage male was a bad driver, I gave specific examples of the ones who tend to skew the whole group. You said girls on average are bad at math..

And I'm on a Pokemon message board, I'm not trying to convert anybody, just kill some time while I search the wifi forum. I read chaos' essay and I do not fully agree with it, nor do you have to agree with me.

Girls are, statistically, less gifted at math. This isn't a subjective claim, this is a fact proven by numerous studies. Love it or hate it, that's how it is. Opinions are not immunity to being told you're wrong.

 

[akuchi]

Not anywhere where I live. Here it's more "girl claims rape, there is no evidence at all aside from this, guy is convicted and sent to jail for several years".

Sadly here it's girl claims rape with massive amounts of evidence, police treat her like a whore, CPS write her a nasty letter saying "You had been drinking and taking drugs, what happened to you is your own responsibility", I believe locally we've something like a 2.6% conviction rate and no more than 4% nationally.

It's a genuinely appalling state of affairs and one that needs to be rectified.. but that won't happen until the attitudes of the public change.. something like 60% of men think a woman is at least partially responsible for her own rape if she's been drinking/flirting/wearing revealing clothing, god knows how many think she's responsible if she's been doing all three.

 

[QuickDraw]

this is more about the feminism topic than whatever else is going on right now but did you know that for every male exclusive group there are 100 female only groups? just thought that was an interesting fact.

 

[Raikou]

Girls are, statistically, less gifted at math. This isn't a subjective claim, this is a fact proven by numerous studies. Love it or hate it, that's how it is. Opinions are not immunity to being told you're wrong.

Then why, statistically, do more women graduate college than men and the same amount of women graduate in a field which is math intensive, such as medical school? That's also proven by actual data.

Found a link for you: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070124104155.htm

It's short but the TL;DR version is women who associate themselves with traditionally feminine qualities are the ones who tend to do poorly in math. Women who rid themselves of these stereotypes and ignore the people telling them they inherently suck because they are female, do well in math and science.

 

[Dragontamer]

Then why, statistically, do more women graduate college than men and the same amount of women graduate in a field which is math intensive, such as medical school? That's also proven by actual data.

Found a link for you: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070124104155.htm

It's short but the TL;DR version is women who associate themselves with traditionally feminine qualities are the ones who tend to do poorly in math. Women who rid themselves of these stereotypes and ignore the people telling them they inherently suck because they are female, do well in math and science.

Medical School is math intensive?

(I'm doing Yale and UPenn because they were the first hits on google.)

http://www.yale.edu/career/students/gradprof/medschool/studies.html

You must complete two terms of general biology, inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry, physics, college-level mathematics (calculus is preferred), and English. All science courses must be accompanied by labs, and all courses must be completed for a letter grade.

http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/gradprof/healthprof/premdcourses.html

Students should take Math 104, plus one additional mathematics course. Some medical schools require a second semester of calculus (Math 114/115); at this time, the schools that require a second semester of calculus are Harvard, Duke, and Washington University in St. Louis. To determine whether Math 114 or 115 is appropriate for you, please visit this Math Department web page. Many medical schools recommend statistics. Math 103 is an introductory course and does not count toward the Calculus requirement for medical school.

Why, pre-med degrees don't even go into differential equations, linear algebra, or calculus 3.

Hardly math intensive IMO.

----------

On the other hand, your own article is poison to your own argument.

This research helps to shed light on why women are less likely to complete a major in mathematics in college, pursue math-intensive careers such as computer science or engineering, and are more than twice as likely as men to drop out of these fields once they begin

 

[Raikou]

First of all, physics and most science classes a doctor takes are math intensive by nature, and the field is far more math intensive than anything outside of a mathematics or engineering major. Compare that list of math courses to what a lawyer takes. Also, differential equations and linear algebra are not high level math last time I checked.

You also misunderstood the article. People who perpetuate the stereotypes that women suck at math, science, leadership etc. set the bar low for those women, and if you set yourself up to fail chances are you will. If we get rid of these "you are a woman so you can't do this, sorry" attitudes, women become just as successful in all fields that they have interests in.

The article says that the attitudes are the causation of failure. If I was failing a math course and was told that's normal for a girl, why would I bother to keep trying? My gender is limiting my abilities right?

It's the exact same reason a lot of black kids perform more poorly in school. They're not less capable, but they are told that and thus they don't try nearly as hard. Most formerly oppressed groups are like this.

Here's something interesting. A transexual scientist comments on how he is treated with more respect and held in higher esteem than when he was a woman. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/12/AR2006071201883.html

 

[The.Lost.Hylian]

I get a little agitated with women I meet that make it a point to know that they are women and they should be treated equally, only to later get pissy when I don't do all the "gentleman" stuff. I mean sure I hold the door, and I usually pay for the first date or two; but after that, I get aggravated with all the "extra baggage" women expect out of men. You fought for equal rights, ladies, so that doesn't mean you get to pick what you're equal about. You wanted the right to vote, you wanted equal opportunities and equal freedoms, you should have an equal part of the social structure. Women who demand equality and extra special treatment can suck my left nut. I don't fraternize with women like that. I date women who see themselves as my equal, not my master and I their bitch.

 

[Dragontamer]

First of all, physics and most science classes a doctor takes are math intensive by nature, and the field is far more math intensive than anything outside of a mathematics or engineering major. Compare that list of math courses to what a lawyer takes. Also, differential equations and linear algebra are not high level math last time I checked.

I agree. They aren't high level math. Nonetheless, pre-med students at both Yale and UPen don't require to take them.

So how can you claim that medical students are taking high level math, when in fact they do not take even more basic forms of math like differential equations and linear algebra? The highest needed for pre-med students at my university is Calc2, which really is just about where business majors, philosophy majors and so forth all stop.

Further, Lawyers can come from any degree. There are lawyers from engineering, particulary those who wish to go into Patent law get a bonus for an undergraduate engineering degree. Compared to these lawyers, pre-med students certainly take much fewer math courses.

I'd say that medical degrees are just as "math intensive" as a typical degree. They go upto Calc2 or in some cases only upto Calc1 and then they stop.

You also misunderstood the article.

No, I'm cherrypicking facts from the article. There is a difference. I could not find a single reference that states the statistics that Females drop out of math-intensive degrees. Your article finally gave me the quote I was looking for, and I was surprised to see that even I underestimated the female dropout rate in comparison to males. And considering the stance from the article, I'd assume that it is correct or at least well researched.

Nonetheless, I have some beef with the main article now that you bring it up.

The article says that the attitudes are the causation of failure. If I was failing a math course and was told that's normal for a girl, why would I bother to keep trying? My gender is limiting my abilities right?

You cannot make an argument of causation without a scientific experiment. The article is ambiguous on this point, but I would assume that what they did was a survey, not an experiment.

Correlation is not causation.

It's the exact same reason a lot of black kids perform more poorly in school. They're not less capable, but they are told that and thus they don't try nearly as hard. Most formerly oppressed groups are like this.

Again, correlation =/= causation. Of course the people who do better assume that they are as capable. I've seen white males think that they are less capable than an A student and they get the grades that they expect.

This effect is across races and genders. Until you can prove that the bad thoughts cause poor grades... I'll have to assume the obvious conclusion from this survey: that bad grades lower self-esteem.

But I already knew that and this really isn't groundbreaking at all if you look at it from that perspective. This can be a classic case of "holding the graph sideways", along with all those other correlation mishaps.

I don't have access to the study performed by Amy Kiefer, which is what your article references. If you have access, it would be nice if you could check for me if the study was an experiment, or a survey. If you argue causation, it must be an experiment to support your argument.

 

[Raikou]

Saying bad grades lower self esteem without any evidence to support it is kind of presumptuous, especially when this study concluded the opposite: low self esteem contributed to failure. It was a psychological study, I don't personally know how they conducted it.

It's very true that if you tell someone they're stupid enough times they will start believing it regardless of validity. My mom grew up thinking she was ugly because that's what her mom beat into her head, even though my mom was very attractive. She didn't realize it until she was well into her 20's.

Lower expectations and socioeconomic status contributing to poor school performance is well documented, so don't throw correlation and causation at me, look it up. It just so happens that blacks and women both fit into recently repressed groups that have many stereotypes working against them, even from their own teachers. Note that asians of both genders outperform american males in math. In Japan, more women have careers and good work ethic than american women- there's a correlation that makes much more sense than what you proposed. I'd say the deciding factor is motivation moreso than ability, there's still a lot of dumb broads who want to sit at home all day with 10 kids and that shows up in the data.

Also, I'll commit the same fallacy as you. Men on average fare more poorly in verbal, english and writing. English, humanities and psychology fields tend to have more women than men. Of course, my personal reasoning is that it has more female appeal, but using your logic I will say that men are simply inferior in those areas. Men are also morally undeveloped compared to women, which is why 99% of all rape cases are committed by men, as well as most other crime. See what I did there?

I'm not saying men and women are 100% biologically identical. Just that most of these attitudes are based on social conditioning and inhibit true performance dramatically.

 

[Kikuichimonji]

I was almost raped in a bar last year. I had a couple drinks, then a guy came up to me and we started talking. Later, he asked "Do you want to have sex?" and I said "yes". We went back to his place, got naked, I sucked him off, and just as he was about to place his penis in my vagina, I screamed "OMIGOD YOU SICK FUCK!" and called the cops. He's currently serving a 10 year prison sentence.

 

[Hyra]

Also, I'll commit the same fallacy as you. Men on average fare more poorly in verbal, english and writing. English, humanities and psychology fields tend to have more women than men. Of course, my personal reasoning is that it has more female appeal, but using your logic I will say that men are simply inferior in those areas. Men are also morally undeveloped compared to women, which is why 99% of all rape cases are committed by men, as well as most other crime. See what I did there?

Because its a lot harder to force a guy to get an erection when he doesn't want sex than it is for a rapist to get an erection and find a way into the pants? Yeah, I still don't exactly understand how a female could rape anyone... I know its possible, but the fact that a guy has an erection kind of says he is turned on, which means he wants to have sex.

 

[Dragontamer]

Saying bad grades lower self esteem without any evidence to support it is kind of presumptuous, especially when this study concluded the opposite: low self esteem contributed to failure. It was a psychological study, I don't personally know how they conducted it.

The article concluded the opposite. If you had the paper itself, then you would know whether or not this was a survey or an experiment. A "study" is ambiguous. You appear to understand the difference between correlation and causation and I would assume you would understand why this point is key to your argument.

I cannot accept your article as evidence for causation until you actually show me that a core point of the paper was in fact for causation.

It's very true that if you tell someone they're stupid enough times they will start believing it regardless of validity. My mom grew up thinking she was ugly because that's what her mom beat into her head, even though my mom was very attractive. She didn't realize it until she was well into her 20's.

And if you have your report card telling you that you're stupid for 12 years, I'd assume that you'd think that you think that you were pretty bad at math.

Lower expectations and socioeconomic status contributing to poor school performance is well documented, so don't throw correlation and causation at me, look it up.

On the contrary. You are the one arguing this point to me. You appear to have articles at the ready. I'm simply waiting for them to come in.

Further, your particular article you referenced earlier makes no distinction between correlation and causation.

Also, I'll commit the same fallacy as you. Men on average fare more poorly in verbal, english and writing. English, humanities and psychology fields tend to have more women than men. Of course, my personal reasoning is that it has more female appeal, but using your logic I will say that men are simply inferior in those areas. Men are also morally undeveloped compared to women, which is why 99% of all rape cases are committed by men, as well as most other crime. See what I did there?

*dragontamer uses endure*
*Salac Berry activates*
*dragontamer uses reversal*

Sorry, we really need to be a little less serious about this. :-)

Anyway, back to the reversal. Yes, I do see what you did there. And it is precisely the same thing that you've been doing to defend Car Insurance rates for men this whole time. Which is and has always been my primary point.

My question is this. Why is your argument here, on verbal scores and graduation rates for males somehow wrong, when your argument on the discrepency between car insurance rates between genders is all fine?

 

[Kikuichimonji]

Hey guys, I found an article proving how heartless and ruthless all men are. Excerpt: "Between 50 and 60% of all domestic abuse and violence is against women."

Oh, and from another source, reporting that "Men were more likely than women to strangle, choke, or beat up their partners."

This is obviously why centers for abused individuals are exclusively for women. Anyone who believes that only men are capable of perpetrating domestic violence is totally and absolutely justified in their belief because statistics show that it is a reality, and no man in the history of the universe has ever been the victim of domestic abuse.

If there are still those among you who are not thoroughly convinced that men are the cause of all strife on this planet, I'll do my utmost to persuade you otherwise, although you must be legally insane.

 

[Raikou]

I know you like beating the dead car insurance horse, but it is an improper comparison. Insurance companies have data where 18-22 + male = accident prone, which is statistically true. It is also statistically true that men do better in math on average, but if you take that at face value and make the conclusion that women aren't as smart, you must also deduce that whites are better than blacks and asians are smarter than everyone. Is that what you actually think? Because there is raw data that supports your claim, if you conveniently ignore underlying factors and turn a 3 dimensional situation into a 1 dimensional number. So the data is not apples and oranges, there are many more factors contributing to academic performance than just raw numbers, which I explained very clearly in my last post. In the case of teenagers wrecking cars, it is cut and dry. Would I personally care if they lowered rates for you? Not at all, go ahead. But if that's the best example you have for gender bias against men, even if the comparison is flawed, be thankful.

Hey guys, I found an article proving how heartless and ruthless all men are. Excerpt: "Between 50 and 60% of all domestic abuse and violence is against women."

Oh, and from another source, reporting that "Men were more likely than women to strangle, choke, or beat up their partners."

This is obviously why centers for abused individuals are exclusively for women. Anyone who believes that only men are capable of perpetrating domestic violence is totally and absolutely justified in their belief because statistics show that it is a reality, and no man in the history of the universe has ever been the victim of domestic abuse.

If there are still those among you who are not thoroughly convinced that men are the cause of all strife on this planet, I'll do my utmost to persuade you otherwise, although you must be legally insane.

I'm guessing you're like 110 lbs, so I suppose a woman would be a dangerous foe indeed. You fail at trolling.