Feminism

[obi]

A big misconception is that women are wired to be more "caring", "soft", and less competitive than men. This is a product of socialization more than biology, little girls are raised to adhere to their society's idea of feminine. For example, I don't wear makeup and do my hair because I like to or because I'm more vain than the average man, it's just what women are supposed to do. Women are also extremely competitive, men just don't notice. Believe me when I tell you 90% of the reason women put on makeup and dress up is to trump the competition moreso than attract men.

Prove it. I can cite several chemical / physical differences between men and women, and how these differences can create differences in behavior / personality / ability / whatever. To say that it's either the environment or the genetics is a pretty extreme statement. Both society and biology play a role.

Did you know neanderthals had larger brains than the average modern human? I would hardly call them more intelligent.

The reason men have larger brains is because they are larger and have more muscle mass than women, more neurons are needed for motor control and thus the mass of the brain is larger.

Relative to the size of said Neanderthals, their brains are actually smaller, which is a much more useful comparison.

 

[Hipmonlee]

Which is exactly the point Raikou was making. Men are larger than women.

And I think the onus of proof is on the people making the claim that that men are more competitive than those refuting it.

Have a nice day.

 

[Hyra]

Which is exactly the point Raikou was making. Men are larger than women.

And I think the onus of proof is on the people making the claim that that men are more competitive than those refuting it.

Have a nice day.

Think of it like this, men are more openly competitive while females prefer to do it behind someone's back. Most Men usually would tell someone if they are bothering them, etc. unlike most women usually would result to gossip as an indirect means to resolve the issue. Which one has been more honorable/respected for the last few millennia, talking about someone behind their back or saying it to their face? Obviously, its saying it to someone's face, because until the last century, most world rulers have been male. It's just most people don't recognize the female form of competition as competition, not that it doesn't exist.

My source is some relatively recent (last year or two) Time cover story that I can't be bothered to dig up right now. I will later, I just don't have time now.

 

[obi]

My "prove it" comment was directed at the "gender differences are entirely / almost entirely societal", not at any particular trait that's in one gender over the other.

 

[Deck Knight]

Which is exactly the point Raikou was making. Men are larger than women.

And I think the onus of proof is on the people making the claim that that men are more competitive than those refuting it.

Have a nice day.

When women can seriously compete in the MLB, NBA, MLS, or the NFL with the boys, I'll believe it.

The fact is, given the same height, weight, and training, a man will outperform a woman every time.

But you might be saying "Well, that's a muscle thing, how about work? Equal pay for equal work!"

The toughest, most shark-laden, and most physically demanding professions are still dominated by men. The most vicious, highest-paid lawyers are men. The people who take on the most risky, most dangerous jobs are men. Feminists like to drag out "Equal Pay Day" some time in April. Equal Work-Related Death Day (The day where female deaths in the normal course of their job reach the mortality of male deaths in the normal course of their job the previous year) is in November.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w8574.pdf <-- Paper on WRD.

The way I calculate the number is to take 52, the number of weeks in a year, and multiply it by the percentage of income/work related death(in my case) men made/had. The resulting number is the week of the year that day will fall on. The numbers in that study range from 0.914 to 0.924. All the values result in a number between 47 and 48, or for last year November 23-November 30.

I'm not using the logic to be morbid, but simply to make the case that men get involved in jobs that are more demanding and have more fatal risks. Meanwhile, feminists are whining about the pay scale. My argument is that since men are more willing to put their lives on the line for what they want (even pay, of all things), they are generally more competitive than women.

 

[umbarsc]

The 'equal pay' thing is communism... I'm not saying that an employer should look at a woman and say "You deserve a lower pay check for being a woman", but rather, pay should be judged on who does the most work and the hardest work, and who is most successful at said work.

 

[blastoiselover100]

The 'equal pay' thing is communism... I'm not saying that an employer should look at a woman and say "You deserve a lower pay check for being a woman", but rather, pay should be judged on who does the most work and the hardest work, and who is most successful at said work.

Well said. If a woman can outperform a man, she should get a higher paycheck, whereas if a man can out perform a woman, he should get the higher paycheck.

 

[CaptKirby]

To respond to the SAT post, I would like to say who cares what the average is, because I would rather see what percentage of men or women score over some set number like 650 or 700 in each subject. 530 or so average does not exactly indicate intelligence for males, even if it is higher than the also unintelligent average for females!

 

[Raikou]

When women can seriously compete in the MLB, NBA, MLS, or the NFL with the boys, I'll believe it.

The fact is, given the same height, weight, and training, a man will outperform a woman every time.

But you might be saying "Well, that's a muscle thing, how about work? Equal pay for equal work!"

The toughest, most shark-laden, and most physically demanding professions are still dominated by men. The most vicious, highest-paid lawyers are men. The people who take on the most risky, most dangerous jobs are men. Feminists like to drag out "Equal Pay Day" some time in April. Equal Work-Related Death Day (The day where female deaths in the normal course of their job reach the mortality of male deaths in the normal course of their job the previous year) is in November.

I think you have confused the definition of competitive with physical strength. Are you saying women in the WNBA are less competitive with eachother than the NBA? Fuck no they're not. Women can be just as aggressive as men.

Men have more raw strength, no one is debating that, yet you wrote a wall of text about it. And the biggest example of a job where you risk your life is the military, which has only recently started accepting women, and while fewer women are on the front lines, a greater percentage are things like F-16 and helicopter pilots. Now which is more effective and prestigious, a poor guy fresh out of high school in the marines or a pilot?

These same arguments are what people use to say that black people are biologically inferior to whites by comparing average wages earned and percentage of graduates from college, then extrapolating it to conclude their brains are somehow wired differently. That is simply not true, but it is true that more black people are economically disadvantaged, which produces the lower average performance. Correlation is not causation, and it's the same for women who haven't even been allowed to attain jobs other than nurse/secretary/teacher since after the 60's. Ask a 50+ year old woman what her profession was- 90% chance it's one of those three- and what she would rather do if she grew up in today's environment.

In every major field now, especially the medical field, the percentage of women is rising dramatically (25% female in the US (with 50% of med scool graduates being female) projected to be 33% in a few years and ~50% in more progressive Europeon countries). Same with law school. Graduating medical school is science and math intensive so I guess women don't suck as much as they're made out to.

 

[umbarsc]

No one is saying women suck at those fields. They've been saying that, on the average, men tend to outperform women at SAT scores and at athletics.

 

[Raikou]

Actually,

men tend, again note the word tend, to be physically stronger and slightly better at testing in science and math.

It is something commonly heard in "men are better than women" arguments.

 

[blastoiselover100]

But men are not better than women. Women are not better than men. They are also not equal, that is what makes this such a hard topic to debate on.

 

[umbarsc]

Err, what "men are better than women" arguments? The only time when those would be plausible, women were the property of their husbands, and they would be too busy with housework to think of anything. This discussion is against feminists who go to the point of "women are better than men", rather than demanding equal treatment between sexes.

 

[Raikou]

Which was responded to with arguments by several people that men outperform women in the aforementioned categories and that biology is to blame for the major men/women differences (did you even read the thread before posting?). I simply gave real life practicality to go with those graphs and assumptions.

In my second post I said that both extreme feminists and chauvinists are annoying. However they are annoying because their loud minority tends to be heard and they are a misrepresentation of their group as a whole. There are extremists for just about every group of people.

 

[Echo]

i quite enjoy when a flock of rich privileged white women gather together and talk about how oppressive men are while leaving their mexican or peurto rican housekeeper or babysitter to keep things safe at home

Yes. To me it always seems that the people complaining are the people who have everything they need.

I wouldn't say I am against feminism but I certainly do not appreciate the outer appearance, which most feminists give you: arrogant and nearly female chauvinist.

 

[blastoiselover100]

Feminists are not "nearly female chauvanists." That is what they are; female chauvanists.

 

[Surgo]

Feminists are not "nearly female chauvanists." That is what they are; female chauvanists.

Wanting equal rights for women is female chauvinism? What the fuck?

I guess that makes me a female chauvinist, then.

 

[obi]

Surgo, I think he's using the same definition I used: those that advocate women as superior to men or deserving more than men.

 

[blastoiselover100]

Surgo, I think he's using the same definition I used: those that advocate women as superior to men or deserving more than men.

Obi has got it exactly. Feminists seek superiority to men, not equal treatment. I am all for equal treatment myself, not having one side be better than the other.

 

[Surgo]

You know, all the feminists I've met and talked to in my life (that is to say, most women I've met) have been pretty adamant about wanting equal rights. Where the hell is this "feminists seek superiority to men" bullshit meme coming from?

No, really. I'd like to see a source for this already.

 

[Raikou]

I doubt there's a real life source, probably just some angry man-hating message boards for which there are an equal number of women-hating counterparts. Gotta love the internet.

 

[blastoiselover100]

The actually definition of feminist is to seek dominance for the female gender. Female equal rights activists simply seek equality, not superiority.

 

[Surgo]

The actually definition of feminist is to seek dominance for the female gender.

*airhorn buzzer*
Bullshit alert!

Straight from the dictionary, the definition of feminism is:
1. the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) an organized movement for the attainment of such rights for women.
3. feminine character.

 

[blastoiselover100]

Which dictionary? The Liberal Dictionary of Bullshit? In my dictionary I got
Feminism-
1. to seek seeking the betterment of the female gender

And besides, it is not what the dictionary says that matters, it how the people actually act. Communism sounds great on paper, but has it really worked all that well in the past?

 

[Surgo]

The dictionary.com unabridged dictionary version 1.1:

1. the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) an organized movement for the attainment of such rights for women.
3. feminine character.

The American Heritage Dictionary:

1. Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.
2. The movement organized around this belief.

Princeton University's Wordnet:

1. a doctrine that advocates equal rights for women
2. the movement aimed at equal rights for women

The Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary:

the thought and actions of people who want to make women's (legal, political, social etc) rights equal to those of men

The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (third edition):

The doctrine — and the political movement based on it — that women should have the same economic, social, and political rights as men. (See under “Anthropology, Psychology, and Sociology.”)

But hey, I guess as long as you're pulling things from your Blind Fourteen-Year-Old Conservative Book of Bullshit, you can ignore stuff like that.

And besides, it is not what the dictionary says that matters, it how the people actually act.

Uh, the dictionary entry for feminism is exactly relevent to the definition of feminism. Yes it matters, rofl.