It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Female posters incapable of original thought?

page: 20
65
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2010 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Geeze why did we ever give you women the right to vote and be equal? Let alone start a thread on a web board...bwahahah I'm just teasing. I look forward to input from everyone, male and female. I often find women with a unique insight on certain matters. I worked for the State once in a female dominated section and for them it was okay to make comments without repurcussions because 90% of the bosses were female. If I said half the things they said I'd be fired, or accused of sexual harrassment. I was groped before and made offers and all kinds of stuff. Sometimes it can go both ways. However that doesn't change my opinion of females in any way, it's really an anomoly when you run into such sexist environments, male or female.

Bring on the female insight, I look forward to it as much as I look forward to any male insight.





posted on May, 8 2010 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Byrd
 


Hello Byrd,

I have always thought you were a very intelligent person, so much so that me saying this must seem terribly superfluous to you lol.

But I really interested in you reading this post and responding because I have always been interested in the Feminist mind. I'm not entirely saying your a feminist, but I'm just a bit forced to assume since i really don't know you all that well and can only go by this your post as it has been the only insight to your past as a woman driven to what many perceive as success, myself included in a "The Matrix" kind of a way..But that just me.

Anyway I was wondering how you would view a Man who wanted to assume the role of a 1940 house wife?

As for a hypothetical example If we fell in love and I asked you to marry me, how would you feel about the fact that I wanted to cook, clean and tend to your every need when i'm not taking care of our future children.

Would this be a bad thing in your eyes or would you enjoy such interests in a spouse?

Thanks Izzy.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 05:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 



Aeons,

I don't agree with this at all.


There is a high degree of social group think. Straying from group think is punishable through expulsion, shunning, social cues of disappointment. Conflict and competition are not just discouraged in female groups, but often punished.


While there may be a high degree of social group think....women are highly competitive. Just because a woman does not do competition or perceive competition as does a man..does not mean she is not competitive.
I do know that women perceive competition for men in a very harsh and demanding way...They are highly competitive and sometimes very vicious in this business.
I think alot of males often do not think about it in this light or are not capable.
Also many of today's females are not only competitive and willing to fight other females they will often fight males as well. Some call this conflict.

And this is really tacky....and a low blow to those who can think it through. However not the sports oriented male. He is way to dumb and easily defaults to such as you are want to post here.


And it probably is inherent to a degree. When you consider that women who challenge have been WAY more likely to die unpleasantly at the hands of their "loved" ones for "being out of place," a degree of inherent importance of survival being in being socially malleable is probably necessary as a genetic strategy.


I feel the need for you to consider that the death toll is much higher among men who are WAY more likely to die and unpleasantly for their loved ones than women...across the board...in every category...and for purposes of being socially malleable for the family.
The interesting thing I find is that feminist and popular mentality pretty much ignores this phenomonon and uses guilt reasoning/conditioning to make their points.
They pretty much totally ignore what I am posting here.
The moral ethical crime here..is that women die...ever...not men.

Feminist guilt reasoning and the blame game does not work with me.

Also ..most violence is in America is male on male..not male on female. The noticeable thing to me is that mostly male on female violence is not condoned...nothing much said about male on male violence. Very interesting omission across the board on this....especially by feminists.
The common misconception is that it is mostly male on female violence happening everywhere..coming out of the woodwork.
Once again..the moral ethical crime is that violence happens at all to women ..not men.

It is to me nothing but a silent admission of disposabity and expendability of the male out here...while painting women as "Victims."
People easily emoted...have difficulty thinking this through for themselves.
This is why one needs to be careful about ones emotions..they can easily deceive.


Most of the people who complain that women are "emotional" are often highly emotional themselves - and usually too stupid to realize they are emotional. Or so out of touch with it that they miss vital internal cues.


Most of the women I have ever known are eager to find a man who is more emotional than themselves. A man who is so emotional that a woman must make up the difference across the board.
Isn't this called "high maintenance?" Do you know women who are interested in "high maintenance " male drama queens as a career??

This stuff looks good on paper or in classrooms..in theory...but how does it work out here in the real world??

Most of the women I have ever met want a man for whom they can count on ..not a man with more emotional baggage and drama than that of which they are capable and even take for granted..socially.

What you post totally ignores this reality in favor or your pet beliefs...about women only. Which makes this quote highly suspect.


The people who claim that someone is "too emotional" to think are usually so out of touch with their own emotions that they are lying to themselves. Which should immediately call into question their "critical thinking" since they are already ignoring critical information.


The next time I am approached by one of the women I know with maintenance problems/emotions..I now feel justified in telling her that it is to emotional for me to do this for her. She can get it done by using her emotions for herself and getting in touch with the problem for which she is coming to me for a solution. She can even call it critical thinking...critical informations.

I will be busy catering to my emotions..by watching Dancing with the Stars and American Idol.

Do I need to take a DNA test or a lie detector test on this one??


Jenna,

Sorry Jenna..but I couldnt pass up the public education standards.

However ..continuing on to your post...


It's not that he's intentionally trying to be insensitive, he just has gotten so used to hiding his emotions that any emotional display tends to make him uncomfortable. Over the years we've finally gotten to the point where I don't automatically think he's being an insensitive jerk and understand that due to the risks he faces, controlling emotions is second-nature for him. And now he doesn't automatically say (out loud) that I'm being irrational and understands that having emotions doesn't make my point less valid. It took us awhile to get that understanding of each other, but the battle was worth it since we're now better able to see where each other is coming from.


If you know this about your man...I would say that you know more than a great percentage of the females out here care to know. Your man is lucky and blessed. Well said...Jenna ...well said.

Errrr...do you have any sisters??

Thanks,
Orangetom




[edit on 8-5-2010 by orangetom1999]



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by piedsniper
 



Harry Enfield is a national treasure. Mr Cholmodley- Warner and his ilk are brilliant. It is such a complete pastiche of those days. But seriously I would like to think that in these modern times no one can discriminate or be obnoxious to 51% of the population based on their gender.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Dwellewd
 



"What ever happened to "sticks and stones"? Just like when someone makes a crude racial remark, resorting to ignorant generalizations about someone's sex makes the person making the remark seem like the weaker person; and they immediatly loose all credibility in my eyes."


Yes I fully agree sometimes it is best not to be too sensitive about racism or we would all go nuts. Besides Success in areas that you are barred from is the best revenge.

"Now, that said, I think that the reason these things happen is because it's something called the battle of the sexes. I know I'll be hated for this, but I strongly believe that feminism ruined family life in this country. I can fully elaborate on this if someone wishes to get an earful. "

Well I believe every smart man lives in his wife's house. Every stupid man lives in his house and probably by himself!!



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Copernicus
Its probably because they (the men) get rejected, so they need to come up with some excuse so they dont seem inferior in their own minds.

This is what I don't get. Comments like these are just accepted without scrutiny. The assertion that men who have negative views about women are that way because they "were probably rejected" and couldn't deal with it.


They need to learn to not let themselves get defined by other people. These guys probably dont feel too good about themselves so they take it out on women and/or other people.

Again, it seems like you are implying that men who hold negative views about women are that way because they have been rejected. This reaffirms the idea that women are victims of men that cannot cope with rejection.


Its pretty much a classic behavior in some types of human beings. The only difference is how they do it. Women do it too when they constantly compare themselves with everyone around them.

I agree that the need for positive reinforcement from others is present in both men and women. Which is a shame, because many will tell you that you cannot find happiness from without, until you have attained love from within.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 




Errrr...do you have any sisters??


I do, but you missed your chance. She's already married.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Okee Dokee 20 pages of pseudo hormonal vs. testoseronal psycho babble.

Whadda say we have a little fun since everyone is dancing around the issue.

Visual Aid:


< Runs to tree fort. >

[edit on 8-5-2010 by kinda kurious]



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


BUWAHAHAHAHAHAAH


I didn't see the need for greasy foods cells and the cell for killing things to eat for the men.


I'll let a female dissect theirs


[edit on 8-5-2010 by SLAYER69]



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Yeah, I kinda ducked out. Mostly because I dislike large threads because they are like large crowds, I guess. But I did want to include some more thoughts and this song is a good way to do so.


Now rather than to state the obvious of this as a sort of anthem with lyric analysis, I'd rather look at how it is perceived.

Some people (both women and men) hate this song because Gwen Stefani is singing it. Simply because they do not like her because she is too beautiful or because she is not beautiful. A fairly subjective reason of course but real to the holder of the opinion.

Some people (both men and women) love it but because they see different meanings from the lyrics. The moods that are invoked. Again it is perception.

So as perception is the root cause for how things are understood (hence perceived and therefore the word perception) the question becomes is the sexism deliberate or skewed perception? In some cases, blatant sexism. In other cases, it is not so cut and dry. Much like some cases of sexual harassment are not cut and dry, but are often awarded on the perception of the recipient.

But illustrate my point of perception better. If Gwen Stefani were to ask you out on a date (men or women) your would answer would be either yes or no. The level of how offended you would be would be by her asking you out is based on if you would have said yes under a different circumstance. If you find her repulsive (ideas of lesbianism aside) or if you find her attractive.

DISCLAIMER: The same discussion on perception could be made on many different videos and artists, or even topics other than sexism. I just used No Doubt's Just A Girl as it was the first song that popped in my head. I also have no idea of Gwen's orientation, just made for a convenient person given the video at hand.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 
I like your brain maps!
Had to star that!



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
This can happen both by those making the sexist comments as well those calling attention to them. I can usually keep myself from commenting in a thread (regardless of the topic) when it would only serve as back-up, but I'm sure I've slipped on occasion. All part of being human, I suppose.


Which is why I always fall back on the ATS terms and conditions.

If we're reading them, following them, and using them, we have zero reasons to argue.

Of course, not everyone follows them, but I see them as my back-up.

Hence why I rarely have Moderators in my threads, except as guests.

Because I follow the terms and conditions, because I'm used to policy, procedure, and protocol.


Originally posted by Jenna
That is one of the reasons I've always enjoyed reading your posts, even in threads I don't respond to.


And as well, why I always enjoy yours, you're well thought of in the circles I travel in.

Some of my favorite thread contributors are females.

I tend to not put up with nasty behaviors in my threads and women never give me problems.


Originally posted by Jenna
That's something we should all remember and sexist shouldn't be included in the way we define ourselves. Some people aren't concerned with how they are seen by others, though. In itself, that's not necessarily a bad thing. I'd argue that in a lot of cases it can be a very good thing. But it can become a bad thing when that lack of concern for how one appears leads them to actually speak or behave in a manner that is intentionally degrading to someone else whether it's through sexism, racism, or whatever.


Ah, the world of being "politically correct", sometimes a hindrance, sometimes a help.

I find it helpful when it comes to "office politics" because it forces correction in detrimental behavior.

The "group as a whole" needs to consider all people as equals, male or female.

But in some parts of the world, women are still seen as second-class citizens.

It's a good thing I'm an adult leader in the Boy Scouts of America, it teaches me constantly in how to deal with adults in critical situations, which rolls down hill.

I am trained in conflict de-escalation and conflict resolution and love dealing with crisis situations.


Originally posted by Jenna
I hadn't heard of the FBI agent you mentioned, but I'll be sure to do some reading on her. Thanks for the recommendation.


No problem, I'm always dropping book suggestions, especially to my intelligent friends.

Like you.


Deny Ignorance.



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
reply to post by orangetom1999
 




Errrr...do you have any sisters??


I do, but you missed your chance. She's already married.


Shooooottt!!! Always the best man..never the groom!!

Ahabstar,

I must confess..I have no idea who is Gwen Stefani so I will have to go by first impressions though I did not watch the video...nor do I want to watch it. I don't particularly like to live my life in a song or through a movie/television program I watched.
To much BS out there to suit me.

My first impression is that she is a blond. I am not enamoured with blondes. The movie and news media have ruined blondes for me. To overexposed...and over exposure lowers value in the marketplace by reason of non scarcity.

What is scarce out here is women with dark hair...redheads and brunettes. Today many women want to be a blonde...a bottle blonde...sickening to me. They think it increases their value in the marketplace. Not to me.

I am not arguing the point that even blondes cannot have good or original ideas. They certainly can. Just that this is a song and I'm not interested..but also not particularly interested in blondes.

No I would not want to go out on a date with Gwen Stafani.

KindaKurious,

I too enjoyed your brain maps...thanks for the Humor.

Thanks,
Orangetom


[edit on 8-5-2010 by orangetom1999]



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinda kurious
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Don't worry dude, diamonds might be forever but marriages are not. Regarding your disdain of females with golden hair follicles, seems rather biased. But some guys are into that whole carpet matching drape syndrome.

Heck a pulse is often good enough for me. I draw the standards/morals line there.



LOL LOL LOL...noted kinda kurious..noted...thanks,

I don't actually disdain them...just not particularly interested. As I said...they are not scarce...and scarcity raises value in the marketplace.

What is valuable to me is a woman who understands the concept of Peace....not just Piece. This is far more valuable and rare than what is on the outside.

Peace is the valuable commodity a good woman brings ..and will far outlast any biology/piece she has.

Unfortunately in today's high speed..fast food lane of nonthinking and slick merchandising ..so many have gotten it backwards in order to sustain the consumer angle..and consume each other..as you aptly state by..


Don't worry dude, diamonds might be forever but marriages are not.


Peace is the rare commodity/knowledge/blessing that both women and men bring to each other...in compliment..not competition. Not hair colour...and not diamonds as well.

When I begain reading this thread on page 1...this is the question which came to me...how many males or females here understood the concept of Peace..verses Piece.

When you read some of the posts here it is obvious...male and female.

Thanks,
Orangetom





[edit on 8-5-2010 by orangetom1999]



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Thanks for being gentle. I accept being put in proper place.

I agree that Peace is the supreme/ultimate goal.


You are wise beyond your words. Touché



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 



Jenna has it exactly right when she states complimentary...not competitive.

I salute her for her wisdom in this. I would that more men and women knew this.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999



I don't actually disdain them...just not particularly interested. As I said...they are not scarce...and scarcity raises value in the marketplace.

What is valuable to me is a woman who understands the concept of Peace....not just Piece. This is far more valuable and rare than what is on the outside.

Peace is the valuable commodity a good woman brings ..and will far outlast any biology/piece she has.

Unfortunately in today's high speed..fast food lane of nonthinking and slick merchandising ..so many have gotten it backwards in order to sustain the consumer angle..and consume each other..as you aptly state by..


Peace is the rare commodity/knowledge/blessing that both women and men bring to each other...in compliment..not competition. Not hair colour...and not diamonds as well.

When I begain reading this thread on page 1...this is the question which came to me...how many males or females here understood the concept of Peace..verses Piece.

When you read some of the posts here it is obvious...male and female.

Thanks,
Orangetom





[edit on 8-5-2010 by orangetom1999]

Well im pretty sure that blondes are not that interested in you either


[edit on 8-5-2010 by Lady_Tuatha]



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
AHHHH!

Come on people there are differences!
Is that a bad THING? From year ZERO we males and females have been different! This isn't a bad thing! We are counter parts and need each other. ONE compliments the other!

SEX? Well that's either been a perverse joke or A wonderfully releasing mechanism of being a HUMAN being. Some will say and I'll agree is a God given uniting gift!

Think about it!


PEACE

Slay!

Edit to clarify


[edit on 8-5-2010 by SLAYER69]



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
Which is why I always fall back on the ATS terms and conditions.

If we're reading them, following them, and using them, we have zero reasons to argue.


As do I, though heaven knows there are times I'd really like to do otherwise. They all go back to common sense though. Common sense will tell you that people are people regardless of gender and that if you want to be treated a certain way you should treat others that way as well. As far as interactions between posters here goes, common sense will tell you that if you want your posts and opinions to be taken seriously by the collective, you should take the posts and opinions of others seriously as well. By dismissing the posts and opinions of others based solely on some characteristic they have, to me you are essentially saying that you want your own posts dismissed based solely on some characteristic that you have.


And as well, why I always enjoy yours, you're well thought of in the circles I travel in.


Thank you! Careful though or you'll make me blush.



Ah, the world of being "politically correct", sometimes a hindrance, sometimes a help.

I find it helpful when it comes to "office politics" because it forces correction in detrimental behavior.


Agreed. It's kind of a catch-22 though and I sometimes wonder how much 'political incorrectness' is actually just someone being overly sensitive and/or looking for a reason to be offended. There are obvious cases, like the comments I referred to in my OP, where it really is the comments that are being made. But there are others where it's not really clear to me how much offense was meant vs. how much was taken over an action or comment.

For example, in an office situation a man could say to a woman "You look nice today." The comment was intended as a compliment with no underlying sexist tones. It is far too easy for a woman to turn around and claim that he was being sexist because if she'd been male he wouldn't commented on her appearance. Then it becomes a case where no matter how much he denies it, she'll insist it was sexism.

I think it's instances like that, where someone takes a sincerely meant comment out of context and adds intentions to it that don't exist, that cause every instance of true sexism to be considered as women just looking for a reason to be offended. (Run-on sentence for the win!
)



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join