Fox News: "Liberals who reject that men should dominate women are anti-science."

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


Ah, finally a very good statement, and one I can not honestly give any intelligent counterpoint to.

"How would you define better"

That would be the cusp of the arguement, and one I don't believe any one human, could put a honest answer to.

I could only give my oppinion, which would be a good productive citizen of America, one in which they grow to be both emotionally equiped, and socially confidant enough, to be well adjusted, and at the same time be willing to stand alone when they feel it is the right thing to do.

But this answer would fall vastly short of what I would actually wish to express, as I am no word smith, better leave that discription to someone better at expression than I, as I know my limitations, and personal expression of complex societal idiologies.........ya I better not even venture down that road.

In short, there are many things, that only a mother can give to a child.

I wouldn't have known this, as my mother was not...awesome, or even around somtimes, even when she was there.

But having 3 children of my own, and watching the way they respond to their mother, and the way they respond to me, there are large differences.

In my own experience, this is not just confined to my children or my home, I see it everywhere, children everywhere rush to mom when they have a ouchy, even full grown men dying on the battlefield rarely cry out for their father as their last words, no it is their mother they cry out for, having been a people watcher most of my life, and having had some of the experiences I have, I would say that it is vastly different, the interactions between children and mother, and children and father.

Just think of your own experiences, I can't be the only person who has noticed these things in life.

reply to post by inverslyproportional

In my own experience, this is not just confined to my children or my home, I see it everywhere, children everywhere rush to mom when they have a ouchy, even full grown men dying on the battlefield rarely cry out for their father as their last words, no it is their mother they cry out for, having been a people watcher most of my life, and having had some of the experiences I have, I would say that it is vastly different, the interactions between children and mother, and children and father.

But are not these things simply a result of the evolution of the western families social structure? If the roles were reversed (i.e. mother working all the time, father at home all the time) would not the child who has more interaction with the father go crying to him?

My contention with the entire idea of specific social gender roles is that it is dogmatic hyperbole, it is an invention of the human mind. From what I gather the more people present in a child's life who actively participate in that child's emotional, physical and social development, the better off that child will be.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by muse7

 

Societies that choose conservative politics will by definition not move forward.

Well, I guess the U.S. is doomed then. Going by the last 4 Presidential Elections? We seem to have a pretty evenly divided nation by ideology.

Not to poke a bees nest, but in the last 6 Presidential elections, the Consrvatives only won the popular vote once. Apart from GW in 2000, the last time a conservative won the popular vote was 1988...25 years ago.

Not that conservatism is "bad"...it's not. It's that folks like Reagan would have been considered a commie liberal if he came up in todays conservative party.

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by muse7

 

In Nature the males are typically more colorful and boisterous. In many species females often scavenge for food while the Male is at the nest or den protecting the offspring.

Will he be ok with men wearing makeup and colorful outfits then? And wait...stay at home Dad's?

edit on 30-5-2013 by abeverage because: (no reason given)

Let's not take cues from the animal kingdom, soon you'll see a feminist group that wants to legalizing their husband after he's produced offspring.

Black Widow

reply to post by muse7


Amazing how this thread started out as an "I hate FOX thread.", and has now turned into a woman versus man thread.......

Something I think we all need to think about...........

However, as most of us know on ATS generalizations, and categorizing people based upon beliefs proves pretty much one thing! We ALL buy into groups, categories and teams......

I agree that MOST women have a more balanced "nurturing instinct" than men do! I am a male, divorced, and I am glad my daughters mother is nurturing and able to raise my daughter in a nurturing environment, compared to my hard assed, disciplinary attitude.

With that being said, does that necessarily make it a rule of thumb that a female is more capable and more responsible to raising a child over a male?

How about if mom is a crackhead and dad doesn't drink, do drugs, or have a different woman sleeping in his bed every night? Because nature may dictate that women are more nurturing than men, is this enough evidence to say good ole dad isn't good enough because "crackhead mom" is a female????

Sorry guys/gals! We as humans are all capable of being disasters and making poor decisions.

The NORM isn't always proof, that things are so black and white.........

The male has the "dominant role" if physical strength is your only measure.

If we use reproduction, communication, pain tolerance, empathy, physical beauty or complex thought, women have the dominant role.

The fact that so many people automatically think of physical strength as the only characteristic by which to measure dominance illustrates simple mindedness...

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by muse7

 

In Nature the males are typically more colorful and boisterous. In many species females often scavenge for food while the Male is at the nest or den protecting the offspring.

Will he be ok with men wearing makeup and colorful outfits then? And wait...stay at home Dad's?

edit on 30-5-2013 by abeverage because: (no reason given)

Let's not take cues from the animal kingdom, soon you'll see a feminist group that wants to legalizing their husband after he's produced offspring.

Black Widow

Why do you think I sleep with one eye open?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

If we use reproduction,

Meh that's arguably true, as they can actually carry another human being, although they still cannot concieve alone, they are going to need some male help

communication,

What do you mean by this exactly? If you mean the ability to negotiate, convey complex ideas, etc, I do not think males or females have an edge on this one.

pain tolerance

More women than men report pain (27.1% compared with 24.4%), although whether women actually tolerate pain better than men remains up for scientific debate.

WebMD

Not the greatest source probably but it has good info.

My mother who is a midwife has told me that the idea that women have a tolerance to pain is a misconception, she has told me that women who have given birth may tolerate pain better than others because of the birthing experience. But the same could be said of someone who has been injured in combat multiple times, or does heavy duty physical labor on a consistent basis.

empathy

Honestly there is no way to measure empathy

physical beauty

Not to sound cliche but beauty is in the eye of the beholder, women are not inherently more beautiful than men.

complex thought

Again I'm going to have to disagree, all the evidence points to both genders being equal and instances of one group outperforming the other are rare.

IQ and Gender

Neither is better than the other...end of story.

I am simply flabbergasted by the suggestion that one gender is better than the other in any way other than physical ability. It is simply staggering, no wonder radical feminists and internet neck beards are constantly attacking each other.

reply to post by neo96


"As bad as what Lou said it is nothing in comparison for 'liberals' making it a 'moral imperative' to make government the 'bread winner' in the 'family'. "

Telling blatant lies..... Making false witness as they say.

Is this thread so damaging to your world view that you would so readily say such stupid things?

Females are more important and have greater responsibility. If they all got together in a village or tribe lets say, they could together decide that they will not become impregnated by a certain type of guy, thus raising the chances of no longer having any i.e. "fox news styled reporters" as a part of the species.

reply to post by muse7


Isn't it amazing what a penis and vagina can do! Concerning women that make more money than their husbands, if they suddenly grew a penis then it would be perfectly fine. This proves that making money has nothing to do with brains and training; it's just the penis.

If the husbands of these big money makers suddenly sprouted a vagina then they'd be happy too!

We are a silly species, eh?

reply to post by abeverage


Lions seem to do fine with the females being the bread winners. Science to these guys is whatever they need to self-justify. Seems to be going around these days.

reply to post by Openeye

Originally posted by Openeye
I am simply flabbergasted by the suggestion that one gender is better than the other in any way other than physical ability.

That is not at all what I am suggesting. My point is that neither gender is "dominant". We both have strengths and weaknesses.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Well I fail to see the validity of the supposed strengths that you suggest are bestowed upon women.

Can you please perhaps quantify?

reply to post by Openeye


Davinci did not paint the Mona Larry?

reply to post by Wertdagf

Is this thread so damaging to your world view that you would so readily say such stupid things?

Apparently my comment in this thread was damaging to someone else's world view.

I could care less what a Fox Business host says, but I forget when it comes to partisan politics people sure do love to make mountains out of sinkholes.

Apparent liberal's don't reject male domination as so many put the current administration in power, and want them to take care of them, and give them money, and free education, free healthcare, and free birth control pills..

So what was that again?

For a group who loves to 'prostelytize' that those poor women just can't take care of themselves they need a 'male dominate' figure to take care of them.

reply to post by neo96

I could care less what a Fox Business host says, but I forget when it comes to partisan politics people sure do love to make mountains out of sinkholes.

Too funny. You come into a thread about a conservative host; make a political baiting comment about liberals and how they are worse; then follow it up by calling out a poster who responds for 'partisan politics'.

Just classic

reply to post by captaintyinknots


Whats classic is trying to make a poster the topic, yet posters have never been the topic on ATS.

So Carry on with the Lou Dobbs(from CNN) and Fox News bashing.

Catch the bait thread title?

Fox News: "Liberals who reject that men should dominate women are anti-science."

reply to post by Openeye


I'm not out to prove how big my body parts are. I was making a general statement about women's strengths. Sorry if it bruised your ego. If you need to think men are dominant, then you do that.

My position is that men and women both serve equally worthy purposes in society and for propagation of the species. Neither is dominant, when we take all characteristic into account.

What a very stupid thing to say... Wtf kind of reaction to this do these idiots expect? Man I wish the media and mainstream politics would disappear, it's getting dumber and dumber everyday.