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.

 

Are Women Conditioned To Be Weak By Society?

page: 15
4
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


You really need to go back and read what I said and what you quoted me saying. Slowly. I said you accused me of using the word wrong. You replied to tell me that I'm wrong and that you accused me of using the word wrong. You're just making yourself look foolish. I'm not sure who peed in your cheerios this morning, but it sure wasn't me. Chill out.




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 



You really need to go back and read what I said and what you quoted me saying. Slowly. I said you accused me of using the word wrong. You replied to tell me that I'm wrong and that you accused me of using the word wrong.


Well I'll be darned...

You said:


You realize you used the definition I posted after telling me i was still using the word wrong


and I read:


You realize you used the definition I posted after telling me i was still using the wrong word


Well... I guess that I suffer from a slight case of dyslexia.


My Sincerest and most humble apologies.


You're just making yourself look foolish.


Yes, in this regard, it would certainly appear so.



However, my original point is still valid.


"Women are not weaker than men" is both a true and false statement... depending upon which definition of "Weak" one uses.

A statement cannot be both true, and false, at the same time.


If you wan't your statement to be TRUE, then you must SPECIFY what weakness you are speaking about...

Because I think that it has been said before, that men and women have different strengths and weaknesses...

Therefore, claiming that "women are not weaker than men"... is a pointless (literally) statement.


*This* was my entire point.

Do you understand me?

-Edrick



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


okay… I admit…you’ve got a greater command on the English language than I do…


That would be a true statement.... but not "Truer".

Fair point…but do you understand what I was trying to convey? That the only place women are weaker than men in general is physicality.


You are saying that a woman operating a crane is stronger than just a man and his muscles?

That's sort of an insipid argument, actually.

..i said no such thing…I’ve been singing the same tune since my original post, that men and women are different sides to the same coin…as for the crane example, what my point was, let’s say a man can accomplish something by using a crane or his muscles…to accomplish the same thing a woman would have to use the crane…thus, the only difference between the two is muscles, but in the grand scheme of things even that doesn’t matter since they both get the job done.


You are loosing the point.

"Women are not weaker than men" cannot be made TRUE by stating that "but maybe they don't have to be"

This tactic does not make you RIGHT.

…maybe if I word it a different way…women are not weaker than men just because they don’t do “manly things”…


It just makes you Attention Deficit.

Oh my, this one’s got claws.



Can they Fertilize an Egg?

…I have said that men and women need each other…are you sure you’ve been reading my posts…


And neither would be ANYWHERE without Oxygen....


…just goes to show that we all need oxygen doesn’t it?



Are we then to assume that Oxygen is just as strong as Humans?


…your assumptions…not mine…would never compare the two, they’re different…



LOL!... ok, I meant "Thin" as far as depth of personality.... but anyways...


oh hush, I was only trying to have some fun.
I would hope that was obvious.




Well, if it is all just subjective, then I don't see how anyone can claim that women are *not* weaker than men....

...i have told you why I think women are not weaker than men…you can agree with it or disagree, up to you how you want to rationalize things…as for sex and the city clip, I’m in a position where I can’t watch videos at the moment…but tell me the gist of what’s being said and done and I can comment…


Yes... but to what DEGREE are each of the sexes Shallow?

Can we compare them mathematically?

Can we definitively state that one is Worse at this than the other?

…I agree with this 100%...why even try to compare…both are victims to shallowness…



Because if not... then the statement "Women are not weaker than men" is a pointless excersize in emotional futility.

The statement means NOTHING.


...are you trying to say we can’t compare the sexes except on measurable levels such as physical strength…and that women are weaker than men because they have nothing to counter this strength?



Yeah, and women are better at cooking and raising children.... wouldn't that mean, strategically speaking, it would be more advantageous for the women to get back in the kitchen?


…now if that were true would it make women weaker than men?



Can you compare the one to the other?

Can you state that one is NECESSARILY more than the other, or that they are both EQUAL?

Remember, Equal is a MATHEMATICAL TERM.... and as such, does not apply to individual human organisms.



…lol we seem to be saying the same thing…okay, if you want to use equal in the mathematical sense than I’d agree…would be childish to compare sexes then…no different to what I’ve been saying all along…



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 




Can you COUNT how much SIGNIFICANCE each gender plays in this role?

Because if you CAN'T.... then the phrase "Women are not weaker than men" is an absurd statement with absolutely NO basis in reality.

now, going with your logic…saying women are not weaker would be making as much as a comparison as saying women are weaker…wouldn’t it? You want to say women are weaker than men based on physical attributes…but would it be fair to compare the sexes on that? Let’s compare an expert archer and an expert swimmer and see who can shoot arrows better…the archer must therefore be superior?



Volunteering for your nations defensive forces is one of the most noble things that you can do. I will not have you besmirch the name of our Soldiers, just because they were tricked by greedy fascists into killing people for profit.


I am saddened if that is all you took from my comments…I was questioning the fact they were tricked by “greedy fascists” to begin with…the concept of war…can we weigh one’s moral strength on that… greedy fascists are probably not moral people? I sense this will turn into a debate on morality…with regards to staying on topic, maybe better we leave it out…


You mean BETTER morality, or Higher moral ground.... not "More Morality"

Yep. I think you get the gist of it. Do you agree with me then?



Anyways... tell that to the SWAT sniper who has to make the choice to kill someone, in order to save lives.
Then get back to me, ok?

…but why is the sniper in that position to begin with?


Yeah... you COULD say that... but it would be a vicious lie, wouldn't it?


Well, it would be an extreme, like I said…



"WEAK" is a blanket term that is not being defined, and as such, can mean ANYTHING within the context of the statement "Women are not weaker than men"

YOU will ALL communicate CORRECTLY, or NOT AT ALL.

Hehehe you’re funny. I like you.



And I suppose that women can reproduce without men, right?
kinda childish perspective, isn't it?

…it definitely is but I don’t get why you are tying those words to me? I am pretty sure I’ve said men and women are different sides of the same coin from the beginning and that we need each other…however if you can point out to me anywhere I said otherwise I will gladly acknowledge my error!


"Women are not weaker than men"

This is a COMPARISON between two completely different sides of the same species.

Using words that do not fit the context, and are POORLY DEFINED.

So, I think we are on the same page.


I think we may be on the same page too, albeit one of us has a stronger grasp on language than the other.




Yeah, but you keep forgetting about that invisible alien war that men single handedly saved the entire human species from.. and then we all promptly forgot because of microwave pulses....

See? I can make up invisible obstacles too.

…not sure what this is about…are you saying women don’t go through hardships…or that you don’t know what they are and I’ll have to point them out to you?


Find me a woman that can do this....

…and back to the physical…right where we started…


Otherwise, Women are *WEAKER* than men.

Are we CLEAR?

Women are only physically weaker than men yet it means nothing in the end, are we clear?



Oh GOD... you are still missing my entire point... aren't you?

If you are going to State something as BROAD, and SWEEPING as "Women are not weaker than men"

Then it would BEHOOVE YOU TO PICK A SPECIFIC DEFINITION, INSTEAD OF SAYING "ALL DEFINITIONS!"

This is childish.
Stop it.


…honestly…I guess this is about linguistics to you…okay, “women are not weaker than men in any other aspect apart from the physical”... do you agree with this or not?

[edit on 10/8/2010 by noeyesnoearsnofacenofears]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


No worries. It happens. Apology accepted.


For the rest of your post, I've said that women are physically weaker than men, generally speaking, several times now. Just as I've said that physical strength is the only area where women are generally weaker than men. Mentally, emotionally, etc., men are just as likely as women to be weak. The only difference as far as that goes is that women, generally speaking, are more open about those kinds of things than men. Where a woman will usually talk about it if she's depressed or whatever, men usually won't open up except to say they're fine even if they're really not. Men aren't stronger mentally and emotionally, they're just more tightlipped about it.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by noeyesnoearsnofacenofears
 



okay… I admit…you’ve got a greater command on the English language than I do…


Thank you.

I'm sorry if I used it Harshly.



Fair point…but do you understand what I was trying to convey? That the only place women are weaker than men in general is physicality.


I understand your point... but unfortunately it is not entirely correct.


In areas of Complicated, Spacial Awareness and Mathematical problems, men are in greater abundance.

This is due to the Intelligence Distribution between the sexes:


In an investigation of gender-related differences in cognitive ability factors, analyses were undertaken of a series of administrations over a 9-yr period of a comprehensive test battery used to select medical school applicants in West Germany. Fifteen correlation matrices based on a total of 96,968 males and 90,142 females were factor analysed. Three factors were extracted in every case and rotated to an orthogonal simple structure using the Varimax procedure. In every instance, the three factors were identified as reasoning, perceptual speed, and memory with congruence coefficients across administration ranging from 0.89 to 0.99. Highly similar factors were also identified when the data of males and females were factored separately. In all 15 analyses, males scored higher on the reasoning factor than did females, and females scored higher than males on the memory factor, in each case about one-half of a standard deviation. Clear changes over the years were not in evidence, except for a tendency for the female advantage in memory to decline.

Source


Men's intelligence distribution is more varied (Dumber and Smarter) than that of women (which is gathered closer to the average)




What this Means, is that tasks requiring High Intelligence, will be Mostly Men.



..i said no such thing…I’ve been singing the same tune since my original post, that men and women are different sides to the same coin…as for the crane example, what my point was, let’s say a man can accomplish something by using a crane or his muscles…to accomplish the same thing a woman would have to use the crane…thus, the only difference between the two is muscles, but in the grand scheme of things even that doesn’t matter since they both get the job done.


What I meant, is that if you are going to be using Machinery to level the playing field between the sexes in terms of Strength....


Then you are not really arguing for the Strength of Women....

You are in fact, arguing for the STRENGTH of Man's Mind.



…maybe if I word it a different way…women are not weaker than men just because they don’t do “manly things”…


Well, that statement would be true...


Out of curiosity... Manly Things?

Would you mind an example or explanation?




Oh my, this one’s got claws.


Talons, actually



…I have said that men and women need each other…are you sure you’ve been reading my posts…


I've been reading LOTS of posts.............




noeyesnoearsnofacenofears
.in the grand scheme of things were it really matters, they're "equal" in the sense that they can accomplish the same things a man can, one way or another.


Edrick
Can they Fertilize an Egg?



.....


…just goes to show that we all need oxygen doesn’t it?


LOL!



…your assumptions…not mine…would never compare the two, they’re different…


Yeah... Tell me About it



oh hush, I was only trying to have some fun. I would hope that was obvious.


Hey.... I laughed... out loud and EVERYTHING!





as for sex and the city clip, I’m in a position where I can’t watch videos at the moment…but tell me the gist of what’s being said and done and I can comment…


Wow.... it's the Trailer for Sex and the City 2...


I thought that it was all that really needed to be said on the matter.



…I agree with this 100%...why even try to compare…both are victims to shallowness…


Well, honestly.. my point was that one could not compare the two.. hence, subjective measurements such as "Weaker, Stronger, Inferior, Etc...." only apply under SPECIFIC cases, and not as BROAD SWEEPS.

Like saying that Women are Equal to Men.... it is a preposterous statement, really.


If women really WERE equal to men.... then why would we have the two different words?

Women

Men


A Man does not Equal a Woman, and a Woman does not Equal a Man.



...are you trying to say we can’t compare the sexes except on measurable levels such as physical strength…and that women are weaker than men because they have nothing to counter this strength?


Not quite....

The first part was right... we can't compare the sexes except upon measurable levels.... Such as physical strength.

I am NOT saying that women have NOTHING to "Counter" (as you put it)... its just that....



How many pounds of benchpress is equal to the strength of... some womanly accomplishment?

Like raising a Child.....?



I don't think that the two are convertible measurements, and thus, using a subjective term such as "Weaker" in such a broad "Definition" is not rational, as the actual meaning of the words used to convey that point become self defeating.


…lol we seem to be saying the same thing…okay, if you want to use equal in the mathematical sense than I’d agree…would be childish to compare sexes then…no different to what I’ve been saying all along…


YAY!!! COMMUNICATION SUCCEEDS!!!!



You want to say women are weaker than men based on physical attributes…but would it be fair to compare the sexes on that?


No it wouldn't... but how do you quantify the different strengths and weaknesses *TO* compare them?


Let’s compare an expert archer and an expert swimmer and see who can shoot arrows better…the archer must therefore be superior?


Superior at Shooting Arrows.

Yes.

But not "Superior"



I am saddened if that is all you took from my comments…I was questioning the fact they were tricked by “greedy fascists” to begin with…the concept of war…can we weigh one’s moral strength on that… greedy fascists are probably not moral people?


Well, I was meaning more the Virtue required to love one's home enough to volunteer to Defend it.

I think that's pretty good Morals, Don't you?


Yep. I think you get the gist of it. Do you agree with me then?


Oh, ok... excellent.


…but why is the sniper in that position to begin with?


Because someone was robbing a BANK!

?

It was a metaphor.


Well, it would be an extreme, like I said…


Oh... ok.


Hehehe you’re funny. I like you.



HAPPY DANCE!




…it definitely is but I don’t get why you are tying those words to me?


?


noeyesnoearsnofacenofears
death of the species would still be the result if not for women’s existence.



Edrick
And I suppose that women can reproduce without men, right?


I was attempting to point out the Counter Position to your statement.

That was all.


…not sure what this is about…are you saying women don’t go through hardships…or that you don’t know what they are and I’ll have to point them out to you?


Well, technically, I was being Silly....

But how are you going to compare their worth against the worth of the strengths of a Man?

They are Different.


…and back to the physical…right where we started…


No, I was just using it as an example of making sure one chooses their words carefully.


Women are only physically weaker than men yet it means nothing in the end, are we clear?


It means nothing in ALL POSSIBLE ENDS?

Are you sure about that?


What if there was... a Comet or something?

It might mean something then, right?



Oh, and the Intelligence Distribution is Real, btw.




Oh this is GREAT big Fun.


I'm sorry if I was snippy with you, You are a Good sport!

-Edrick

[edit on 10-8-2010 by Edrick]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Edrick
 


Oooh Edrick, you can focus your debate around the fact that men serve their country as a definition to say that women are the weaker sex. Actually it could be said that it is the destruction of the world based on people who decided to fight and continue to wage war or wage war in the name of peace. After all if there was no fighting, no people who sign up to fight, no terrorism, no hostility, no discrimination just acceptance then humanity would be at peace. (I know this is a far out theory but never the less a true one.) Now the weaker sex surely is the one that leads humanity to its death. In our present times men and women join this battle of self destruction all in the name of peace but with the evident killings of our fellow humans.

In fact women where not allowed to be in the forces until a while ago because of sexism. And sexism doesnt mean that women are weak it means that the male perception of the female has been prejudged. in fact if we look further than that, coloured men were not allowed in the army, now this could suggest that males have had a chip in their shoulders for some time and feel a certain pride and need to keep their ways and what they say as factual and as rule of thumb, however its all prejudged.

Nor can you suggest that the word diluted can in any way describe a women, or watery i think you are mixing the use of the word Weak with making a cup of tea!

What it comes down to is that men and women have differences, neither sex is weak or strong to a black and white line, they are simply a balance between the two, by all definitions of the word weak that can be associated with a weakness of a human being.

It could also be said that if humans keep wanting to prove the other wrong either in religion, sex or colour then those people are contributing to the destruction of the human race. Because if we do not come together with our differences and support the EARTH and contribute to teaching good and educating people on fairness and values that can teach us all to learn to love each other then we really dont have any right to be here.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by IandEye
 





hey friend......maybe what we're talking about here is that- because of menstruation woman are so attached to their bodies that they are completely and udderly (haha) unable to be selfless. they can react to things based on how they would feel in those situations but 'selflessness' is forever out of their reach and this is why they are so dependant on the external things around them.



In that way yes, and in other ways yes, there is a big difference between doing something for self, and not being able to do anything else but for self and propagation, we are all selfish to veering degrees, women just don't have the option to be selfless in the exact meaning of the word and that other meaning. Just because females must have kids and do everything for that does not mean you are selfless in there love for such, because you do not have the option to do other then that, and even if you did it wouldn't be good. Selflessness is out of reach for many regardless of gender, but for women they have billions of years of programing by nature for a certain thing...we all know what it is, and what it will be.... there is no mystery in the female species. But whatever they have there path and way, and males have there's, in the end I don't see why it should really matter one way or another, like i said in another post we are equally different so I really see no point in even talking about it.



I am 40 and I am a buddha. you are just dripping with venom. if we went into a room together, you'd come out a different person.



You could be 5000 and a god and I still would not care, if you want to be like the Buddha good for you there are some benefits to that, but don't think that there are no bad sides to it, because there are, I am 28 and I know that much. As for selflessness it's a thing on my prerogative, therefore it's not in anyones interest but mine on why I like or dislike that. And maybe I would come out a different person, depends on how much I would have to listen to, and my patients is getting smaller on some things, so therefore no lecturing rooms for me, least only one of us come out of it.

Like Socrates says, be as you seem to be. friend.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   
These guys vs. girls threads have mad legs.

Whoever is making these is an ATS genius.

[Digs foxhole]

[Checks ammo]

[Eyes perimeter]

[Takes deep consuming breath]

.....silence......

Women's only purpose is to make babies!

...

[It's quiet, too quiet]

[edit on 10-8-2010 by AProphet1233]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:17 PM
link   


like i said in another post we are equally different so I really see no point in even talking about it.


In this entire thread, this one line makes the most sense.

Men and women are two parts of a whole, and to achieve their ultimate "strength" is to work together.




we are all selfish to veering degrees, women just don't have the option to be selfless in the exact meaning of the word and that other meaning. Just because females must have kids and do everything for that does not mean you are selfless in there love for such, because you do not have the option to do other then that, and even if you did it wouldn't be good. Selflessness is out of reach for many regardless of gender, but for women they have billions of years of programing by nature for a certain thing...we all know what it is, and what it will be.... there is no mystery in the female species.


This is also probably truer than most of what has been written so far, and aside from physical strength is the most defining difference between the genders.

Although I wouldn't say us ladies are without our little mysteries.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by galadofwarthethird
 


Selflessness does exist,

As long as it doesn't have to defend itself.

In other words, creatures with no natural predators can "appear" to be whatever they wish.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by AProphet1233]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by AProphet1233
 




Good point all selflessness ultimately is one thing no gauge of self, and we describe ourselves by our surrounding and our world, our predators define our selfs. Selflessness does not last long in the world of the self. Selflessness is it's own predator and prey. But anyways I ain't going to be writing anymore on this its annoying.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Edrick

Well, if we look at Enlistment Numbers for that indication, it clearly reveals that more men care enough about their country to Volunteer to Protect it than women do.

So, under this definition, the statement "Women are weaker than men" is True.

-Edrick


Again, a sweeping generalization that portrays women in a negative light.

Granted, I didn't enlist, however I did go through OCS to earn my commission. Call me weaker than a man, but I guarantee I didn't put up with any sexist BS talk from those under my command, regardless of the offending parties gender. Call me weak, but you'll still do as I say.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blanca Rose
Everyone knows what is always on a man's mind, and it isn't the latest reports from the accounting department.


Actually women in general have sex on their minds much more than men because that's the only thing they can use to suck the power out of men. They actually bring sex to the attention of men who may be trying to concentrate on the latest reports in the accounting department when a woman struts by with her pants up the crack of her butt and her cleavage all exposed and flopping around all over the place.

Many women dress and behave in a way to stimulate sexual thoughts. A person who dresses to stimulate sexual thoughts and behaves to stimulate sexual thought has sex on their minds almost all the time.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Hey Edrick, bottom line we agree upon is that men and women are not directly comparable. I’m satisfied with this. Men and women are geared towards accomplishing different things, traditionally the former being hunters and protectors and the latter being the nurtures and caregivers. I don’t believe women lack the mental strength to invent something like a crane. The species has grown and evolved in such a way that men have been geared towards tasks like that more so than women have, not to mention up until recently women have not been given fair opportunity to take part in such fields dominated by men. Women can do it too, albeit not as quickly and easily as men can because throughout the years it hasn’t been their “specialty” so to speak, they haven’t been geared towards tasks like that. Things are changing now. I think the reason why you get women that feel empowered by doing things that men find “commonplace” is because it shows they too can accomplish tasks that are not their “speciality”. In our previous example, it would be like the swimmer beating the archer at shooting arrows, why wouldn’t they feel empowered by that?

If you’re going to quote me then me you gotta play fair.




noeyesnoearsnofacenofears
.in the grand scheme of things were it really matters, they're "equal" in the sense that they can accomplish the same things a man can, one way or another.


Edrick
Can they Fertilize an Egg?


That quote was specific to the crane example – you are deliberately taking it out of context to suit your own agenda. Women obviously cannot fertilize an egg on their own, nor have I ever claimed they could. Men cannot fertilize an egg either without women there to provide one for them. The sexes are meant to compliment each other.

I know next to nothing about Sex and the City… I suppose the angle you’re going for here is that women who enjoy that show are somehow “dumbed down” for doing so? This is usually nothing more than entertainment, everybody’s got their own tastes – there’s not much to look into here, it’s like saying one person is better than the other because of the genre of music they listen to.

Sure, there is virtue required in sacrificing one’s self to defend their loved ones. I was thinking more on the lines of why they’d have to in the first place. Statistically speaking, men commit far more crimes than women do in every part of the world. Because someone was robbing a bank you say – what are the chances it was a woman compared to those that it was a man? While it may be virtuous to stand for your country it’s not virtuous to start the war that put people in that position to begin with… men are more inclined to do both these things, and in a way they sort of cancel each other out if you know what I mean.


noeyesnoearsnofacenofears
death of the species would still be the result if not for women’s existence.



Edrick
And I suppose that women can reproduce without men, right?


You’re doing it again, Edrick.

That is just a snippet of the whole point I was trying to get across which was basically that men need women and vice versa. Of course it will sound suspect if you’re just going to take the bits that suit your argument and use them to misrepresent my statements. Do you really think I’d claim women can reproduce without men and then go on to contradict myself several times in the rest of post by saying both sexes need each other? C’mon. Nonetheless, I think you’ll agree the little snippet you did quote is a true statement and does not imply women can reproduce without men at all. You’re point is moot on this one.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:51 AM
link   
Also...I’m not totally convinced by your Intelligence Distribution either. Let me see if I understand this right. Assuming the graph is a fair representation, let’s split it into 3 sections. From 60 to 85, lets call these people “low-end achievers”, from “85-115” we’ll call these people the “average achievers”, and from 115 up, the “high-end achievers”. According to the graph, there more male low-end achievers than they are female low-end achievers. This would mean on average, you will get smarter women in this category, right? Moving on to the average achievers, there are greater females in this category than they are males, which would mean you get more female average achievers? And finally, at the end, you will get more male high-end achievers than female high-end achievers – however this category only accounts for 1/3 of the total representation whereas the other 2/3 is dominated by women. There are more genius men out there but this fact seems to be balanced out by the fact there’s a greater number of smarter women in other categories – which make up more of the sample size nonetheless. It’s inconclusive to say one sex is smarter than the other based on this. Not to mention, mathematics and other academics are not the only forms of intelligence out there. Problem is we can’t cross compare between different forms of intelligence, and we can't say in every case which is more important than the other.

Oh, and if a comet hit Earth we’d all be screwed. I don't see big manly muscles getting us out of that one.


It doesn't seem I'll be doing much else other than repeating myself and being asked to defend claims I never made in this thread… so forgive me if I choose to walk away from this discussion now…

On another note…how do you manage to limit yourself to one post…4000 characters is almost never enough for me. I guess I tend to ramble on a lot more than I realise.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by misuneko
 



Oooh Edrick, you can focus your debate around the fact that men serve their country as a definition to say that women are the weaker sex.


Well, we can Chose to Define our words, and then look for examples *IN THE REAL WORLD* that prove us right, or wrong.

OR

We could use the words how we *FEEL* they should mean, and then screw up communication FOREVER, as the HEART invades the TOWER OF BABEL, and makes everyone speak in Emotional Gibberish where Everyone is the exact same in all capacities (Despite evidence to the contrary) just because someone's EGO might be CRUSHED for not being the BEST AT EVERYTHING.


There is a Reality that Exists... that does not give a [snip] about what you Feel.


This is the part that contains World Shattering Asteroids that do not respond to Appeals to the Heart.

This is the same part that Contains Cranes capable of lifting Cities into the sky.



Actually it could be said that it is the destruction of the world based on people who decided to fight and continue to wage war or wage war in the name of peace.



Defense is a part of life.


What do you think A Cell Wall or Cell Membrane is?

Your Immune System?


This is your Bodies mechanism through which it WAGES WAR ON ALL PATHOGENS WHO WOULD ATTEMPT TO CONQUER OR KILL YOU.


Predators Exist In This Reality, Child.

Things that Will Kill you and Laugh about it.










What Are *YOU* going to do about it?



"Waging War is Wrong... and Fighting is Wrong!" You cry.



Then lay down and Die.


To live is to Fight.


There exist Creatures in this world, AND FORCES, that will Take your life, if you do not Prevent it from happening.


"Trust in Mother Nature and stop Shaping the World" you scream.



"Dinosaurs" I reply.


en.wikipedia.org...



I do not wish my species to be killed


You are not going to tell me, that I cannot defend myself


Against threats to my Existence


[Size=5]Be it from Man, Woman, Animal, Alien, or Natural Forces



This is why we have:

1: Government...

To pool a part our collective resources to make large scale plans that benefit us all (Bridges and the like... Or a space Ship Carrying enough Nuclear ordinance to divert a potential world killing Meteor)

2: A Military.

So that we can kill anyone who tries to Kill Us.... Except we kill them First, Deader, And Quicker.

3: Police.

To protect our Rights, From *THOSE* who would wish to take them from us.



After all if there was no fighting, no people who sign up to fight



If it were such a World.... we would already be in Heaven.


But this is Reality.


This is not what we think SHOULD BE....


This is *WHAT IS*



no terrorism, no hostility, no discrimination just acceptance then humanity would be at peace.


Yeah... Humanity WOULD be Resting In Peace, then... wouldn't it?



I know this is a far out theory but never the less a true one.


Yup, all it takes is One Extinction Level Event.



Now the weaker sex surely is the one that leads humanity to its death.


Wow... that is almost poetic, isn't it?


Should we stop fighting to Survive?

And Just lay Down and Die?


Where are you trying to leading this species, anyways?


In our present times men and women join this battle of self destruction all in the name of peace but with the evident killings of our fellow humans.



So, you are saying that if We Abandon our Military..... that no-one will want to kill anyone Ever Again?



Really?



Unicorns and Rainbows... All the Way.


This is Fantasy.


Reality exists *BEYOND* your concepts of what you Feel Should Be.





What are you going to Do?

Ask it to Forgive you?


The Universe is a Tough Place, where Wimps Eat Flaming Plasma Death.



In fact women where not allowed to be in the forces until a while ago because of sexism.


Yeah... because Us guys are worried about you getting Captured and Raped in Battle.

That, and women are not as physically Strong as men.


Battle is a Full Contact Endurance Sport.


There are problems in the world, that Explode to Kill You....


You have to be FIT, and Strong, Physically, to survive..... *AND WIN*


We haven't been using Women for combat... Because we Wanted to Win.


Women have historically been a VERY small part of overall Military Strategy... and these have all been:

1. Used Sparingly, as a light sprinkling.

2. Used in Small Dedicated Forces for Defense.

3. Used in support Positions.


There is a Larger Pool of Available, Willing, And Capable Men to use in the Military....

There Are SIGNIFICANTLY LESS WOMEN who posses these three qualifiers.


So, yeah... if you want to Call it Sexism.... Go right Ahead.


I call it: Acknowledging Reality.



And sexism doesnt mean that women are weak


Correct.


it means that the male perception of the female has been prejudged.


Incorrect.



Sexism Means: the Belief that One Gender is Superior to another.


If I were to say that Men are overall Better Suited to the Challenges of Physical Endurance than women....

THAT Would be Sexism.

It would Also, happen to be a Scientific Fact.



in fact if we look further than that, coloured men were not allowed in the army


This is known as a Tangent.


Now, instead of Attacking Men.... you are Attacking *WHITE* Men.


Or do I have to remind you that Black men Serve in Armies (and have since the Dawn of Time) In Nations Across the Globe.

Or did you think That America was All that there Was?



now this could suggest that males have had a chip in their shoulders for some time and feel a certain pride and need to keep their ways and what they say as factual and as rule of thumb, however its all prejudged.


Or, You are Being Racist.



Nor can you suggest that the word diluted can in any way describe a women, or watery i think you are mixing the use of the word Weak with making a cup of tea!


I don't think that you are even Thinking about what you are saying at this point.



What it comes down to is that men and women have differences, neither sex is weak or strong to a black and white line


I find the way you phrased that interesting.


they are simply a balance between the two, by all definitions of the word weak that can be associated with a weakness of a human being.


And, THEN you said exactly what I said.


I'm just shaking my head now...



It could also be said that if humans keep wanting to prove the other wrong either in religion, sex or colour then those people are contributing to the destruction of the human race.


You are Attacking Religion ALSO now?

Wow...


Because if we do not come together with our differences and support the EARTH and contribute to teaching good and educating people on fairness and values that can teach us all to learn to love each other then we really dont have any right to be here.


Teach them the Values of Whom?


-Edrick

[edit on 11-8-2010 by Edrick]



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Vixen~

Originally posted by Edrick

Well, if we look at Enlistment Numbers for that indication, it clearly reveals that more men care enough about their country to Volunteer to Protect it than women do.

So, under this definition, the statement "Women are weaker than men" is True.

-Edrick


Again, a sweeping generalization that portrays women in a negative light.


We are attempting to Agree on our Definition of Words, Dear....

And Some Sweeping Generalizations are True.


Like that Men are Physically Stronger than Women.


That puts women in a negative light (compared to men) but it happens to be True.


Granted, I didn't enlist, however I did go through OCS to earn my commission. Call me weaker than a man, but I guarantee I didn't put up with any sexist BS talk from those under my command, regardless of the offending parties gender. Call me weak, but you'll still do as I say.


No, I won't


-Edrick



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by noeyesnoearsnofacenofears
 



Hey Edrick, bottom line we agree upon is that men and women are not directly comparable. I’m satisfied with this.


Agreed.


I don’t believe women lack the mental strength to invent something like a crane.


I don't really see how that is applicable...

We have already INVENTED the Crane.

Why would we need a woman to invent it again?




The species has grown and evolved in such a way that men have been geared towards tasks like that more so than women have, not to mention up until recently women have not been given fair opportunity to take part in such fields dominated by men.


You'll have to take that up with mother nature.



Women can do it too, albeit not as quickly and easily as men can because throughout the years it hasn’t been their “specialty” so to speak, they haven’t been geared towards tasks like that.


It depends upon the specific task that you are talking about, but generally... yeah... I agree.


Things are changing now.


Aren't they always?




I think the reason why you get women that feel empowered by doing things that men find “commonplace” is because it shows they too can accomplish tasks that are not their “speciality”.


Nope.... that's women discovering the "Creative High", or the Joy of Learning and Producing.

It is a good feeling.




In our previous example, it would be like the swimmer beating the archer at shooting arrows, why wouldn’t they feel empowered by that?


I don't know why they would feel empowered, not by the act of Accomplishing something.... but by Being BETTER than someone else at it....

I mean... Take Pride in what you Do....

But Competition should not be ones Primary Motivation.


That quote was specific to the crane example – you are deliberately taking it out of context to suit your own agenda. Women obviously cannot fertilize an egg on their own, nor have I ever claimed they could.


You said that women can accomplish the same things that a man can....

I gave you an example that proved you wrong.


There is a Problem with that?


I know next to nothing about Sex and the City… I suppose the angle you’re going for here is that women who enjoy that show are somehow “dumbed down” for doing so?



Oh... you just have to watch the Trailer in order to understand my point on that one....


I'm sorry, but there really is no other way.


This is usually nothing more than entertainment, everybody’s got their own tastes


So were the gladitorial games in Rome...

But they also served to distract the publics attention away from Rome's crumbling Economy and Infrastructure.


Sure, there is virtue required in sacrificing one’s self to defend their loved ones. I was thinking more on the lines of why they’d have to in the first place. Statistically speaking, men commit far more crimes than women do in every part of the world.


Yes, this is true...

But statistically speaking, men PRODUCE far more than women, in all parts of the world.

So, logically... Men are also the Most likely targets FOR theft.


Because someone was robbing a bank you say – what are the chances it was a woman compared to those that it was a man?


It was just a metaphorical Example.

But Women can do anything that men can do... right?


Aren't you being sexist assuming that a Bank robber Has to be a Man?




While it may be virtuous to stand for your country it’s not virtuous to start the war that put people in that position to begin with


True... but you and I both know that there ARE, and in all likelihood WILL ALWAYS BE those people for who the Ends always justify the means, and their desired means are POWER over other people.

We have Militaries and Police officers to protect us from people like that.


men are more inclined to do both these things, and in a way they sort of cancel each other out if you know what I mean.


Yup, like algebra.


You’re doing it again, Edrick.
That is just a snippet of the whole point I was trying to get across which was basically that men need women and vice versa.


Yeah...

But when you say that "Without Women, there would be no men"

You are not completing the Entire statement... and I would Choose to correct it.

The entire statement IS:

"Without women, there would be no men; and without men, there would be no women."


IF you don't finish the sentence, it has the unwritten implication that Women do not Need Men....

And this is just untrue.



Have you ever seen a Bicycle Making Babies with a Fish?

-Edrick



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by noeyesnoearsnofacenofears
 



According to the graph, there more male low-end achievers than they are female low-end achievers. This would mean on average, you will get smarter women in this category, right?


Correct.

Women are the Smartest of the Dumb.


Moving on to the average achievers, there are greater females in this category than they are males, which would mean you get more female average achievers?


Correct... there are more average intelligence women than there are Men.


And finally, at the end, you will get more male high-end achievers than female high-end achievers


Correct.


however this category only accounts for 1/3 of the total representation whereas the other 2/3 is dominated by women.


Um... you are the one that divided the Graph into Thirds.....


There are more genius men out there but this fact seems to be balanced out by the fact there’s a greater number of smarter women in other categories


So you are saying that Two Dumb people equal one Genius?


Really?

A smart woman in the Catagory of DUMB is just as smart as a Smart man in the catagory of Smart!

YAY!


People who Lack an ability, have just as much of that ability as people who excel at that ability!


Up is Down!

Left is Right!

In is Out!

Dogs and Cats, Living Together.....

MASS HYSTERIA!



It’s inconclusive to say one sex is smarter than the other based on this.


Well, If you phrase it like that, then yes... that is correct.

But that was not my point, was it?



Do you know what delta Velocity is?


It is the total capability (in terms of final speed) of a rocket.

The calculations for Rocketry are slightly complex.... and there are MANY of them.

Not to mention calculations for changing the orbital trajectory of a moving body inside of a gravity well.

This is some heavy, heady stuff.....

And it takes the Upper 1/3 (as you put it) to understand it, and work with it.


Dumb People are Not Rocket Scientists.


And your entire world, Depends upon Rocket Science.


Do you want me to explain it to you?


Not to mention, mathematics and other academics are not the only forms of intelligence out there.


You should stop using the Internet Now.



Problem is we can’t cross compare between different forms of intelligence, and we can't say in every case which is more important than the other.


There are no different forms of intelligence.

That is a Fallacy.

Please stop doing this.


Oh, and if a comet hit Earth we’d all be screwed. I don't see big manly muscles getting us out of that one.


Oh, we already got that Covered:

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...


You keep thinking that Muscles are the only thing that MEN have to bring to the Table.


You are currently LIVING inside of Evidence to the Contrary.... AND typing on it.


Please Stop doing This.


-Edrick



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 12  13  14    16  17 >>

log in

join