Should man rule over women for women’s own good?

Originally posted by MagnumOpus
It gets down the the simple fact that man rules over women for their own good,

Now be honest. The men who want to "rule over women" aren't doing it for the women's own good, they're trying to do it for the man's own good. When a sexist, egotistical bigot tries to rule over someone else, it's for their own reasons to try to gain something, not for the good of the person they are trying to subjugate. Fortunately, most women are smart enough to not fall for that and most men are smart enough to not try. There are a few men out there with really big mouths and really small brains and a few women out there with no sense at all who are going to do stuff like that, but most people have more sense.

Maybe it's just me, but I can't see her:


needing his protection for any reason


additionally, most of the ones going on and on about a man being in charge of a woman, paints the picture of Barney Fife in my mind.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
you'd probably be right

What I'm seeing is a group of men who are single and not by choice with another group of happily married men trying to explain to them but they don't want to listen. Probably a few women here and there as well, but mostly, the sexist posts are the guys who can't find someone who wants to be in a relationship with them due to their attitudes and probably never will... unless there's a sale on doormats somewhere.

I am talking about general reality of today's dating community, I know it is so hard to generalize the people of the world because we are so diverse. My generalizations have to break down into different areas because I am sure there is a place that is evolved spiritually and emotionally, a place where literally everybody loves everybody. Every time I see the 70s I think there looks like so much more love in the world.

If you watch the show Survivor you can see in most seasons that the women form an alliance to oust the men, I believe it would be similar if they had the chance to rule the world, and they may in the future who knows.

Originally posted by Greatest I am
Poor puppy has been deceived.
Grow up and get over it.

It is healthy not to hold grudges pal.
As you can see, it has made you hate and fear all women.

Regards
DL

What makes you think I was feeling like a poor puppy? Did I really present that I was feeling depressed in my writing? Why don't you think I was smiling?

You are one of the women who would be like one of hitler's solders, a ruthless woman if you all ruled the world.

Hate and fear all women? Those are very strong words. I am a creative writer and I love ATS. That means everybody. You have no idea what kind of a person I am when I step out of that door, and just so everybody knows that you a judging person, they can laugh and acknowledge how ignorant it is.

Here is the truth - these days women will lie to men and have no problem about it, because their purposes are for responses. We are talking majorites here and since you're so wrong I'm probably right.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by MagnumOpus
It gets down the the simple fact that man rules over women for their own good,

Now be honest. The men who want to "rule over women" aren't doing it for the women's own good, they're trying to do it for the man's own good. When a sexist, egotistical bigot tries to rule over someone else, it's for their own reasons to try to gain something, not for the good of the person they are trying to subjugate. Fortunately, most women are smart enough to not fall for that and most men are smart enough to not try. There are a few men out there with really big mouths and really small brains and a few women out there with no sense at all who are going to do stuff like that, but most people have more sense.

You might need to be honest with yourself. Afterall, most consider god as male and he rules over women. Supposed to be for benevolent purpose.

Most guys take good care of their wives, also benevolence.

Ever seen a female car mechanic at the dealership? They rule over women's cars since none of them seem to be able to work on mechanical things.

Ever seen a female plumber? The plumbers are generally all males and they do all the dirty work that lazy women cause for stopping up drains.

How many female engineers do you see? Just about zero doing real engineering work. So, the males end up making the technology that takes care of women, as they sure don't get into the technical issues much.


How about hunting in the dark ages? Who did that. Ah Yes, the males.

How about building the houses historically? Oh yes, the males did that too.


Looks to me like men rule over women in all things that really count.


Ever seen a female doing really highly technical work? It basically doesn't happen. The few females in enigneering schools usually end up getting married and nearly zero get into the work force. Most of the are going for what are called MRS degrees to pick up a guy that makes a lot of money for them.


It gets down to the simple issue of nature isn't very fair at times. And the general equation tells the women don't contribute much to the most critical of functions that keep society running.


Just ask a female that took her car to the shop how much they hate the mechanics costs. Anytime females want to stop being Daddy's little darlings and want to join in the serious tasks that keep the world running there is room for those that can do the jobs. If you just want to be a seat ornament and fashion model stay home and don't get in the way of society's needs.

As it stands, even in this day and age, the man rules extensively over almost everything the female uses. To resist that basic issue is to fight with the very issue of god itself, as that is what cast the DNA ballot for females. Biblical issues support the same conclusions.

Females either need to put up or shut up griping and having males have to triple their efforts to include females in areas of work that just are not appropriate. In America, too many females have become spoiled brats. These females are more than willing to use the system to marry for a few years, churn out a few kids, get the divorce, and live off welfare and allimony.

In the US, the system is broken and it is slowly tearing the family units apart, and the nation as a whole.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


Wow.

You know what? I think this may be the most ignorant, absurd, mysoginistic posts I've ever read. And frankly, that says something about the character of the poster.

I'll stop there.

Originally posted by smyleegrl
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

Wow.

You know what? I think this may be the most ignorant, absurd, mysoginistic posts I've ever read. And frankly, that says something about the character of the poster.

I'll stop there.

Generally, when something so obvious that it can't be refuted, the move is to attack the person's character.

Right. Personal attack mode is the only thing you could come up with?

You stopped because the examples were so typical in the population it was impossible to deny without others chuckling.

Might you also want to attack god as he is where the female DNA comes from.

How about the Bible Narratives, as they don't hold women in too high a position. Except for maybe Semiramis, who gets close to being that Babylon Problem they spoke about in the old days of Jesus and the 2nd temple. You know the mother that married her son for power and control.

Might we need to ban religion because it doesn't support the female to your liking? Or shall we play lets believe this part, but not that part about females level of respect in the Bible Narratives?

You are invited to speak intelligent on the subject, that means no little perjoratives, or blame the guy for stating the issues bluntly..

reply to post by MagnumOpus


I am quite aware of the treatment of women in the Bible. It was part of my theology degree.

So you propose a literal translation of the Bible? That the writings concerning women are both canonical and God's will?

Do you consider the culture of the times? Seems to me this is a major factor in determining anything proposed by a religious text.

But let's go secular for a moment. Two hundred years ago, many white slave owners justified slavery because "the black race was inferior, barbaric, and incapable of competing with a white man's intellect. There are books from that time era that promote this viewpoint. Why the negative view? It was the culture of the times.

Do you consider African Americans inferior?

Another example, this one more modern. In the 1930s, an idea about racial purity began to circulate in the US and Germany. This idea eventually led to the Holocaust and the death of countless people. During this time period, there were books and articles written about the smaller brain of the Jews.

In both of the incidents referenced above, one group of people felt justified in subjacating another group of people. There is no difference with regards to women.

Originally posted by MagnumOpus


Ever seen a female car mechanic at the dealership?

YES

Ever seen a female plumber? .

YES

How many female engineers do you see? Just about zero doing real engineering work. So, the males end up making the technology that takes care of women, as they sure don't get into the technical issues much.

MANY, have you been out in the real world in the past 10 years????

Looks to me like men rule over women in all things that really count.

actually, with your examples, they just do the grunt work and the women are in charge

Ever seen a female doing really highly technical work?

YES

The few females in enigneering schools usually end up getting married and nearly zero get into the work force. Most of the are going for what are called MRS degrees to pick up a guy that makes a lot of money for them.

again, have you been out in the REAL world in the past 10 years????
I know several women with engineering degrees, in fact, I know more women with engineering degrees than men.

One more time for good measure, have you been out in the REAL world in the past 10 years??? You really have no clue. Your mentality is from the 1950's. That's not the way it is anymore (not the way it was back then either, that's just what they showed on TV)

You have some serious issues.
Wow... hard to believe that someone in today's day and time is really that blind..... WOW

To respond to the female engineer question:

One of my childhood friends has a phd in engineering. She works for Boeing in the aviation design area.

My 21 year old cousin just graduated with a 4.0 in a double major: chemical and mechanical engineering. She's now overseas in Japan

Women are in the technical fields, my friend. You just have to look.

Originally posted by smyleegrl
To respond to the female engineer question:

One of my childhood friends has a phd in engineering. She works for Boeing in the aviation design area.

My 21 year old cousin just graduated with a 4.0 in a double major: chemical and mechanical engineering. She's now overseas in Japan

Women are in the technical fields, my friend. You just have to look.

Lets take a look at the statistics on just the engineering graduates.

en.wikipedia.org...

only 11% of the engineering workforce in 2003 were women.

It would appear that women just cannot handle engineering, else there would be an equal proportion of male and female graduates.

It also matters if they get jobs and if they stay in the jobs or go home to play Mom.

It also matters if they take up the difficult and demaning research and development type positions or house keeping and very easy Civil Engineering jobs.

So, explain why, with all the incentives females have to get into these harder and well paying jobs, they don't take off with the opportunity and we see equal numbers of male and female?

The problem usually is that one doesn't get to play in the more difficult engineering studies.

Also examine what they do, as females, moving into the corperate positions, like Sales.


Lets also do another type measure of looking at the Nobel ratios of male to female:

chartsbin.com...

The ratio of women significant in sciences is about 2 percent.

All the doors have been wide open to women to enter sciences for a long time.

Originally posted by smyleegrl
To respond to the female engineer question:

One of my childhood friends has a phd in engineering. She works for Boeing in the aviation design area.

My 21 year old cousin just graduated with a 4.0 in a double major: chemical and mechanical engineering. She's now overseas in Japan

Women are in the technical fields, my friend. You just have to look.

He can't look, he never leaves the house and didn't graduate from high school so he doesn't know where to find actual engineers, he keeps looking for guys with sriped hats who drive trains.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


Seriously, get out in the real world more often....or do they not allow you to leave the "home'?

Originally posted by smyleegrl
To respond to the female engineer question:

One of my childhood friends has a phd in engineering. She works for Boeing in the aviation design area.

My 21 year old cousin just graduated with a 4.0 in a double major: chemical and mechanical engineering. She's now overseas in Japan

Women are in the technical fields, my friend. You just have to look.

I've been watching that progress for a long time. A few females are in the highly technical science fields, a very tiny few.

One can't say the Bible is holding females back, so it must be females can't keep up to the challenges at the same rates as the males.

The door has been wide open for these high paying jobs for many decades. So, why only the few females can take the opportunity?

Might it be it is easier to get married and let someone else do the work? Or having kids is a good excuse?

Might it be that the general theme of most women is playing the pretty thing, dressing provacatively and such. One can really tell that females have been held back by males or made victims of society when they intentionally chose the fun, attention grabbing ways, of females that dress to impress the guys.

The guys appear more than willing to get some females in the field, they just don't show up for the task. Females in the US too much like to play the center of attention and that is their own choice in life to play that role. It is an easy role and most would rather play that study the most difficult fields and get tucked away in out of the way isolated laboratories.

reply to post by MagnumOpus

This is a link, you have to click on it with that little mouse thingy you use. If you get stuck, have your great-grandchildren...oh wait...have your great nieces and nephews help you out.

www.theengineer.co.uk.../1009440.article

The reasons for this are complicated. It certainly seems that the pattern is set early and that the perception and engagement issues that industry continues to struggle with are at their most pronounced when it comes to young women. But it would also be naïve to suggest that misconceptions are the only problems and industry itself is completely free of sexism.

While the reasons for industry’s gender gap may be hard to fathom, one thing is certain: as the skills gap begins to bite, it’s vital that the UK capitalises on the skills of all of its available talent.

Failure to promote careers in engineering for women will mean that we will continue to miss out on 50 per cent of the available talent, an oversight which could have serious repercussions for society and the future strength of the economy.


Read more: www.theengineer.co.uk...

www.guardian.co.uk...

You say there's a problem getting women into technology? The real problem might be the men.

In the past few days, the tech industry – more specifically the chunk of it located over on the US west coast – has hardly covered itself in glory.

Let's understand it again: being female isn't a disadvantage in coding. If you have to ask, consider that Ada Lovelace was arguably the first programmer, and that Grace Hopper only, you know, invented the compiler, among other things.

And meanwhile ask yourself whether there's really no sexism in computing – or whether the answer to "why aren't there more women in technology" might have anything to do with the people who are already there.

voices.washingtonpost.com...

Ultimately, the study makes a convincing case that “biology is not destiny.”

www.aauw.org...

In an era when women are increasingly prominent in medicine, law and business, why are there so few women scientists and engineers? A new research report by AAUW presents compelling evidence that can help to explain this puzzle. Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics presents in-depth yet accessible profiles of eight key research findings that point to environmental and social barriers – including stereotypes, gender bias and the climate of science and engineering departments in colleges and universities – that continue to block women’s participation and progress in science, technology, engineering, and math. The report also includes up to date statistics on girls' and women's achievement and participation in these areas and offers new ideas for what each of us can do to more fully open scientific and engineering fields to girls and women.

Now this one is going to take you a while to read, try not to get stuck on the big words and be sure to wear your spectacles. If you have a great-great niece, she can probably help you through it.
www.aauw.org...

These resources show, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that YOUR VIEWS are incorrect (not to mention sexist and ...well...stupid).
Read them or shut up with your sexist crap. Either way, if you have any reading comprehension at all, this should take care of the ignorance you have been displaying.

Originally posted by smyleegrl
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

I am quite aware of the treatment of women in the Bible. It was part of my theology degree.

So you propose a literal translation of the Bible? That the writings concerning women are both canonical and God's will?

Do you consider the culture of the times? Seems to me this is a major factor in determining anything proposed by a religious text.

But let's go secular for a moment. Two hundred years ago, many white slave owners justified slavery because "the black race was inferior, barbaric, and incapable of competing with a white man's intellect. There are books from that time era that promote this viewpoint. Why the negative view? It was the culture of the times.

Do you consider African Americans inferior?

Another example, this one more modern. In the 1930s, an idea about racial purity began to circulate in the US and Germany. This idea eventually led to the Holocaust and the death of countless people. During this time period, there were books and articles written about the smaller brain of the Jews.

In both of the incidents referenced above, one group of people felt justified in subjacating another group of people. There is no difference with regards to women.

It sounds like you are starting down the typical femanist agenda of we have been a victim of the male society theme with this treatment term and others used. Which is why the African American theme trickles in. You forget to get into issues like the Atlantic Triangle Slave Trading by the British Empire's vast profits by exploitation for the Queen. Female and Prostetant thinking did much of that, plus the Jewish owned merchant fleet that used those profits to make the biggest banks of Liverpool for the Queen.

We might have to hang around a bit closer to the religion theme and females ruled over by men for their own good.

Many read the Bible in the straight literal theme with the belief that every word was written by god himself. So, there exists that mindset by a large majority of the Christians.

Me, I read the narratives with all the information available tossed into the pot of knowledge from the geographical and geology factors to the mineralogy and such. Then toss in Kabola, reading well all the metaphysical comments and I call Jesus, The Man. I look at the techtonic plate issues for this region that made the Red Sea the Dead Sea and Moses special mountain and the like region of Mohammad at Mecca.

Hitler and his folks appear to have studied up on the religion theme closely and they basically got in bed with the Catholics on the hate the Jews as Christ killers theme. The Catholics were into Jewish hate long before there was a Hitler. Hitler plugged in spies as Priests in Catholic areas.

The issue at hand for Hitler's group was Jewish isn't a race in the times of Hitler, as the original Jewish Hebrews were the only ones that kept the blood rules to marry within their group. They originated in Sumeria. Others jumped into the religion theme of the Jewish, but were not a race derived of the Jewish. The Khazars were mainly Asiatics and didn't follow the rules of the blood, so the Khazars became Jewish that were not Jewish as in a race. Hitler's folks didn't appreciate the Jewish Bankers over Versallies, so they didn't do them any favors. Most all those were Khazars.

Hitler's version of Arians was more along the lines of the Blonde hair and Blue eye group that he and others considered the most intelligent due to DNA, and it appears this even traces back to the theme of the original blood Sumerians that were blonde and blue eyes. Such is why the early Pharos were blonde. Jesus was blonde with grey eyes. For Hitler, these Asiatics Khazars were not really Jewish in the sense of race. Hitler wanted a free work force and the Jewish became the enemy of the state as they more or less declaired Jewish war on Germany. Perhaps you might find something if you check out where these Arians came from clear back to the times of Sumeria and the original blood kept Jewish race theme.

There is a reason the original Jewish kept to only marry another Jewish person to keep the DNA close to the old royal type O Rh Negative blood type. The Khazars didn't follow any of those rules and were Asiatic with A and b blood types. If anything, Hitler's Arian theme did more to support the original Jewish race genes than anyone.

I think if you study the theme of Jesus and the Mt. Carmel area that females held equal status to males. In general these were sordid times, and most females sought the protection of the strongest males societies. The reason was simple the males had the best physical power for battles and keeping up a society. Most of those allowed women good respect, but at the same time there was not much for them to do when the issues were hunting, battles for defense, etc. Women fell into domestic talents because they fit there best.

These days, it gets down to if females care to gain knowledge in special fields and there is nothing holding them back but for money issues. They have to earn their way just like everyone else in the world and that isn't a theme for being exploited or a claim that males are holding them back. These days women subjugate themselves, and they can't seem to do the old fashion theme of working to get through school.

It is much easier to play the flaunt what you got theme, get married, and stay domestic. Seems it is really difficult to break traditions that are almost built into the DNA.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


Read the links son, read the links

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

Read the links son, read the links

I did, 2 percent females won science awards.

Females chose to not be serious in the sciences.

reply to post by MagnumOpus


The sexist boundary was crossed within this decade. The females that it would pertain to are only freshmen in high school. They have to go to college first.

What line of work are you in? or do you work at all?

Originally posted by MagnumOpus

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by MagnumOpus

 

Read the links son, read the links

I did, 2 percent females won science awards.

Females chose to not be serious in the sciences.

Then you either have very poor reading comprehension skills or you are lying. Which is it?