Todays Genders in Society

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gabriel:
Sorry but as far as I understand the post you seem to be saying that if a man acts more like a women he is a push over but that is why equality is needed because being feminine is not being weak.
Now as far as it being a real man it all would depend on your belief of what makes a real man. As for the choice to judge right or wrong it is degreed by law and not the choice of any single person.

---

Gabe, im not sure if I have the communications skill nesecary here but Ill attempt to explain a bit...there ARE differences in men and women,, these are associated with femmininity and masculinity...we all have a bit of both these traits, but when I say a "Real MAN" Im discussing the Man who is mostly dominated by the masculine traits and less dominated by the feminie traits. MEN are by genetic design (and Im speaking in great generalizations here) physicaly and mentally the protectors/defenders/hunters/aggressors/killers of our species, it is up to the men (and masculine inclined women) to shoulder the burdens of these roles. This requires us to do things that are distateful but nesecary some times, such as killing our fellow man because like it or not, HUMANS are not beings of logic and reason, if they were we would have far fewer divorces, there would be no country on earth where little girls were forcibly maimed due to superstious or cultural moores..Humans can be vicious crazed beings and there are a lot of them. Effeminate males and femminine women have a totaly different role in our society, their traits are more toward nurtuireing, accepting and in general the softer side oh the species, they (IN GENERAL here) are not equipped to deal with nor to really understand the more violent side of things...now please Im not talking absolutes, this is all generalization, I love women, I respect women, I even willingly work for women...but I recognize our differences too. Well hopefully that explains a little...if not then I just dont have the skill.

quote:

---

Originally posted by fable:
The physical differences between men and women are pretty obvious, and pretty neat, if you don't mind my saying so. But as to mental differences, I'm afraid I haven't noticed any. I hear pop science reports from time to time, in which some model of either gender gushes on about how it is now "scientifically proven" that men and women either 1) have different ways of looking at the universe; or 2) have identical ways of looking at the universe. These seem to be a wash; and what appear to be mental distinctions look (to me) like nothing more than cultural ones, caused by environmental training.

If this is not the case, I would like to know what are the effects of mental differences between women and men. [img]smile.gif[/img]

---

Fable the mental differences in thought processes between men and women have been well known and well documented for centuries if not from before recorded history..just look at all the Mars/Venus books, and ask ANYONE who is married. Its not an absolute, some men think like women and some women think and act more like men...were talking general percentages of the population..the "Norm"

[Epona]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:



Gabe, im not sure if I have the communications skill nesecary here but Ill attempt to explain a bit...there ARE differences in men and women,, these are associated with femmininity and masculinity...we all have a bit of both these traits, but when I say a "Real MAN" Im discussing the Man who is mostly dominated by the masculine traits and less dominated by the feminie traits. MEN are by genetic design (and Im speaking in great generalizations here) physicaly and mentally the protectors/defenders/hunters/aggressors/killers of our species, it is up to the men (and masculine inclined women) to shoulder the burdens of these roles. This requires us to do things that are distateful but nesecary some times, such as killing our fellow man because like it or not, HUMANS are not beings of logic and reason, if they were we would have far fewer divorces, there would be no country on earth where little girls were forcibly maimed due to superstious or cultural moores..Humans can be vicious crazed beings and there are a lot of them. Effeminate males and femminine women have a totaly different role in our society, their traits are more toward nurtuireing, accepting and in general the softer side oh the species, they (IN GENERAL here) are not equipped to deal with nor to really understand the more violent side of things...now please Im not talking absolutes, this is all generalization, I love women, I respect women, I even willingly work for women...but I recognize our differences too. Well hopefully that explains a little...if not then I just dont have the skill.

---

Good grief, I'm sorry but I think this is completely - er - well anyway I don't agree.
There is no evidence whatsoever to back this up, in prehistoric societies the majority of food was obtained through foraging, not hunting, so your idea that man needed to be a strong 'manly' hunter to provide food is way off base. It is only when agriculture became the main method of production and with the invention of the plough that men (assuming that women carrying babies would find it more difficult to use a plough) were in a position to provide more of the resources - before that I am sure that there was more of an equal footing. Your logic is flawed.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Epona ]

GF and the other lady physician that posted, I never said a woman could not make a descision or take a stand...some times it seems like some people really go way out of their way to (was going to say pick a fight) be contrary [img]smile.gif[/img] I said it is by nature that men are the dominant and aggressive side of the species, you can't reasonably argue that point, it would mean you are ignoring and denying the reality that is around you. This is what set me off on the rant in the first place...women (and some men) who just cannot admit that they do not make as good a man as a man does *sigh* never mind, Im not going to continue trying to talk about this, the politicly correct movement will continue untill one side or the other is dead, and I dont see that happening any time soon.

quote:

---

Originally posted by /)eathKiller:
[qb]

I seriously doubt that anythign can be done. Lets all just submit to the chicks... they play golf better anyway.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: /)eathKiller ][/QB]

---

They play golf better?? how do you figure? Im just curious, you never see Pro-women competing in the Pro-Mens tournaments...I thought this was because of performance differences but no one ever really told me why it is. And why arent the women petitioning the courts to be allowed to compete with the men..I mean their prizes are way bigger....Where is the equality there?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Galadria1:
Agree with Garnet. I am a female physician, and have been on occasion condescended to, or been the unwilling recipient of sexist "jokes" or unwanted attention. But, some people are just that way, and I have usually observed these same "people" being unpleasant to males, too, just in a different way. But, I am a "girly-girl" who has been taken to task for not standing in solidarity with other women about some radical-feminist thing or other. I remember well, in college, how the "all heterosexual sex is rape" discussion came and made a big stink. All of my male friends were actually anxious about it, and when I told them that I thought that it was balderdash, one of them reported it to a rad-fem, who very publically took me to task about it. (We were in the same class, Comparative Anatomy of all things, insert your joke here). I told her simply that my sex life was my own business, and that, fortunately, I had never been raped. She then said, loudly, "You must be a virgin, then." All eyes were on me, but I just said, "Why, how nice of you to think so, but I'm all dated up, and you're not my type, anyway." Lots of laughter, she actually blushed, and left me alone from then on.

---

I know it wont mean much (coming from someone like me) but I wanted to say, that I really respect all female physicians. The kind of crap you have to go through to "prove" yourself is NOT what I have been talking about. I work for a healthcare provider and have seen first hand the overt and not so overt discrimination that goes on. I really do respect women and their ability to be the equal of men...in some areas [img]smile.gif[/img] But the strongest biggest women is still going to be smaller and weaker than the biggest strongest man. No arguing with biology...however genetic manipulation could possibly change things some day [img]smile.gif[/img]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Epona:


Good grief, I'm sorry but I think this is completely - er - well anyway I don't agree.
There is no evidence whatsoever to back this up, in prehistoric societies the majority of food was obtained through foraging, not hunting, so your idea that man needed to be a strong 'manly' hunter to provide food is way off base. It is only when agriculture became the main method of production and with the invention of the plough that men (assuming that women carrying babies would find it more difficult to use a plough) were in a position to provide more of the resources - before that I am sure that there was more of an equal footing. Your logic is flawed.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Epona ]

---

We were killers before we were farmers, the technology to farm is a much later invention than the spear. However I did specify Cro-magnon who were not soley foragers or to any great extent farmers..they were hunter killers [img]smile.gif[/img] Sorry if you disgree but I am right in this [img]smile.gif[/img] Early man dominated women at every stage, the women were kept pregnant and taken by men when and where the men wanted...sorry to say that revisionist history has caused the latest holywood movies to ignore the fact that there were almost NO women adventurers/pirates/warriors/dominators yeah there were some exceptions but they were just that...exceptions.

Im also right about the thought processes being different too.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Barry the Sprout]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:


We were killers before we were farmers, the technology to farm is a much later invention than the spear. However I did specify Cro-magnon who were not soley foragers or to any great extent farmers..they were hunter killers [img]smile.gif[/img] Sorry if you disgree but I am right in this [img]smile.gif[/img] Early man dominated women at every stage, the women were kept pregnant and taken by men when and where the men wanted...sorry to say that revisionist history has caused the latest holywood movies to ignore the fact that there were almost NO women adventurers/pirates/warriors/dominators yeah there were some exceptions but they were just that...exceptions.

Im also right about the thought processes being different too.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: MagiK ]

---

I beleive Epona said foragers not farmers. Which is very different and slightly destroys your above argument. Also what you say about natural man... I know what you mean but does that make it right? Naturally man doesn't wear clothes except to keep him warm and protected. I assume therefore that you don't follow fashions in any way. It is an example of the naturalist phallacy - it is not enough in my eyes to simply say "this is how it happened, ever more shall that be how things are done".

My view is that people can be what they want to be, whatever their ancestors were like. Just pointing to the past is an interesting exercise, but not all that relevant in my view.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Barry the Sprout ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barry the Sprout:


I beleive Epona said foragers not farmers. Which is very different and slightly destroys your above argument. Also what you say about natural man... I know what you mean but does that make it right? Naturally man doesn't wear clothes except to keep him warm and protected. I assume therefore that you don't follow fashions in any way. It is an example of the naturalist phallacy - it is not enough in my eyes to simply say "this is how it happened, ever more shall that be how things are done".

My view is that people can be what they want to be, whatever their ancestors were like. Just pointing to the past is an interesting exercise, but not all that relevant in my view.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: Barry the Sprout ]

---

Barry you didnt read my whole post. As for the rest of what you said..nice dream, keep on dreaming but it isnt real, just because 5'4" 90 pound woman wants to be a competitive Lineback in the NFL don't mean she can be one. PS. I PM'd you.


As for your comments about fashioon [img]smile.gif[/img] Actually I do not...I only follow it to the extent that society (ie my job) requires me to, for my personal attire I buy functional not fahionable, I like strong Hiking boots, I like Utilitarian Jeans and I buy Polo brand shirts because they last a hell of a lot longer than the wal-mart equivelents, or I buy outdoor related gear because it serves a function....(oh and since vendors regularly ply me with vendor-wear I wear that too..cause it was free)so again, I say no I don't follow fashion...hell if I knew it were acceptable and I wouldnt get arrested Id go nekkid as a jaybird when the weather permitted [img]smile.gif[/img] (sorry if the mental graphic of a nekkid MagiK made you shuddder)

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Epona]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MagiK:


We were killers before we were farmers, the technology to farm is a much later invention than the spear. However I did specify Cro-magnon who were not soley foragers or to any great extent farmers..they were hunter killers [img]smile.gif[/img] Sorry if you disgree but I am right in this [img]smile.gif[/img] Early man dominated women at every stage, the women were kept pregnant and taken by men when and where the men wanted...sorry to say that revisionist history has caused the latest holywood movies to ignore the fact that there were almost NO women adventurers/pirates/warriors/dominators yeah there were some exceptions but they were just that...exceptions.

Im also right about the thought processes being different too.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: MagiK ]

---

I'm finding this highly amusing - where the heck do you get your 'facts'? I am not a historical revisionist, I am an archaeologist. We are talking pre-history. Which sites do you base your interpretation on?