Originally posted by Bardock42
Why is it bad for anyone to be emotional? The point is, certain things which are not necessarily rooted in our evolution, are ascribed to as female traits, and they tend to be regarded lower as the ones we (also arbitrarily) ascribe to males.
Fact: we are different.
http://www.livescience.com/health/060419_brain_wiring.html
We should celebrate our similiarties and differences. The alternative is to pretend we are the same for the sake of appeasing feminists. I do not like the latter and the former sounds appealing. You fit somewhere in between the two, I believe.
Originally posted by Bardock42
What you are saying is what I am talking about, you are conditioned to dislike the traits on males but like them on females. Additionally a sort of submissiveness and subservience often belongs to the traits we "like" in females. Do you not see how that is sexist though, the traits we point on females, are ones that are designed to make them unable to succeed in our world without being taken care of by a "man".
That's probably because I do not find feminine males attractive because:
1. I'm not gay.
2. It's odd to pretend there is a mechanism other than my biology that makes me attracted to feminine traits.
3. I do not like submissive or subseviant females. I like intelligent, nice, and social females. (Odd that those are the same traits I like in male friends, huh?)
4. We still have unequal wages but where I work, I honestly believe the wages are in the opposite direction: females get paid more, on average, than males.
Originally posted by Bardock42
The girly girl thing is part of what I am talking about, do you think this stereotype is a natural difference between men and women, rather than the societal conditioning? Do you boys would still grow up to be the stereotypical manly man and girls the stereotypical girly girl if they were not told from the beginning that those are male traits while the others a female? If the girls weren't primed to want Barbies and the boys GI Joe?
Girly girl means this:
"soft, not very hairy, not possessing a strong BO, softer features, soft voice, curves, full lips, smooth hands, etc."
Stop with the feministic driven witch hunting. It's annoying.
And, yes, it's pretty hard to throw away your feminine or masculine traits. (Unless you have modern interventions.) That's...like...how we work n'stuff as animals. 😐
And, I will not entertain your hypotheticals. You tell me the answers.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, possessively as treasure. As something to own, but undesirable to be.
No. As a state of being. As a powerful, educated, in-charge woman that is looked up to while being sexy. 😐
Stop twisting my words.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Indeed. I do believe that is a good thing, and that we have done a huge step for women's liberation, but that there are still smaller, but also important issues to solve.
K.
Originally posted by Bardock42
No, that's not the imagery that people are referring to when they say that. What they are referring to is a nagging, annoying woman. If you don't, I applaud that very much (it's like the South Park episode, where the children didn't see that the one being lynched was a black guy).
I have never known anyone to describe it as such in backwards, redneck, sexist, country like Oklahoma. They think it refers to a grumpy female dog, as well.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Oh please, you are taking the piss, aren't you? Not "some people", almost everyone thinks of a vagina when using that, that's why it has power, not because it conjures up imagery of kittens.
What does that MEAN?
I'm not "taking the piss." Now, I've heard and even used myself, "Taking the piss out of X", meaning, giving someone a difficult time. If that's what you mean, then, no, that's not what I'm doing in the slightest. However, I feel that that's what you've been doing the entire time to me.
And, Kittens? Please. You can do better at libel than that.
"I think some people confuse calling someone a p*ssy with that of the vag version: it does not compute. I don't even understand how that can compute in their heads."
That's because I'm soooo manly and logical that I can't think of things in illogical terms. See what I did there?
Originally posted by Bardock42
I wish that were as easy as that though. But I don't see that happening anytime soon, and perhaps it would be better for people not wanting a gap in gender roles and not wanting sexism to have power, to rather not use them at all, censor themselves, and ask people to do the same (or at least think about what they say)
We need genetic homogeneity before your pipe-dreams can be realized. No genders. No race. No variance in appearances. We are all the same.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Fact: we are different.http://www.livescience.com/health/060419_brain_wiring.html
We should celebrate our similiarties and differences. The alternative is to pretend we are the same for the sake of appeasing feminists. I do not like the latter and the former sounds appealing. You fit somewhere in between the two, I believe.
I am all for the former. I do however think we should celebrate real difference, not artificial ones. And we should not use them to disadvantage individuals.
Originally posted by dadudemon
That's probably because I do not find feminine males attractive because:1. I'm not gay.
2. It's odd to pretend there is a mechanism other than my biology that makes me attracted to feminine traits.
3. I do not like submissive or subseviant females. I like intelligent, nice, and social females. (Odd that those are the same traits I like in male friends, huh?)
4. We still have unequal wages but where I work, I honestly believe the wages are in the opposite direction: females get paid more, on average, than males.
You seem to think that I am attacking you. I don't think you are sexist, and I have no problem with you having preferences to certain females. You are personalizing an issue that is about a state of society. Do you think you are like the general population? Because I believe you are smarter than most people, you are an exception, not the norm.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Girly girl means this:"soft, not very hairy, not possessing a strong BO, softer features, soft voice, curves, full lips, smooth hands, etc."
So why do you find "girly girls" or men that are like "girly girls" intolerable when working outside? Non of the traits you gave there are a good reason for that, so there must be other traits, ones not mentioned, that makes "girly girls" intolerable in these circumstances.
Originally posted by dadudemon
No. As a state of being. As a powerful, educated, in-charge woman that is looked up to while being sexy. 😐Stop twisting my words.
I am not, you are basing everything on yourself. I have no desire to discuss you. I am talking about the view and understanding most people have. Like I said, most people few females, and these feminine traits not as something to aspire to, but something to possess. And the problem is not what people like or dislike, it's that society requires (still to a certain degree) boys and girls to fit these stereotypes.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I have never known anyone to describe it as such in backwards, redneck, sexist, country like Oklahoma. They think it refers to a grumpy female dog, as well.
Okay, I don't have any stats on that, lets just say I encountered many people who do, and you haven't. Can we agree though, that what I said does exist, at least to some degree, even if you think not nearly as prevalent as I believe.
Originally posted by dadudemon
And, Kittens? Please. You can do better at libel than that.
I didn't mean to "libel" you. I am sorry if you think that was my intention. I was referring to most people not thinking about cats when they call someone a pussy.
Originally posted by dadudemon
We need genetic homogeneity before your pipe-dreams can be realized. No genders. No race. No variance in appearances. We are all the same.
I disagree, the thing I said there is actually a tiny thing that we can surely do.
I think you are misinterpreting my standpoint a bit, it seems to me like you are arguing with a straw man version of militant feminism that I don't think I supported in my posts.
Oh good god. Where do I even start on this cluster****.
The alternative is to pretend we are the same for the sake of appeasing feminists.
Um, no. No one has ever claimed to be the same. The whole point of the feminist movement is that women are equal to men, and as such deserve the same freedom of choice and rights that men enjoy without even thinking about it. Same =/= equal.
I do not like submissive or subseviant females. I like intelligent, nice, and social females.
The two are not mutually exclusive. At all.
Stop with the feministic driven witch hunting. It's annoying.
Stop acting like you know anything about feminism and sexism when you spout the crap you do. Or at least acknowledge the fact that most of what you say and believe is less biological and more due to societal pressures.
I have never known anyone to describe it as such in backwards, redneck, sexist, country like Oklahoma. They think it refers to a grumpy female dog, as well.
Uh-huh...sure. No, people rarely ever use "*****" that way. And even if they were, how do you not see the problems in using a term that refers to females as an insult?
And, Kittens? Please. You can do better at libel than that."I think some people confuse calling someone a p*ssy with that of the vag version: it does not compute. I don't even understand how that can compute in their heads."
That's because I'm soooo manly and logical that I can't think of things in illogical terms. See what I did there?
Are you joking? Really? No, people do not use that word to refer to a cat. It's used as an insult because it's a crude slang term for a part of a woman's anatomy and men being seen as anything less than completely masculine is, in this society, a horrible thing.
How many more sexist insults do you think you can defend?
We need genetic homogeneity before your pipe-dreams can be realized. No genders. No race. No variance in appearances. We are all the same.
Except no one wants this. People are not the same. Only complete idiots want something like this. No, what is wanted here is for people to recognize that despite of differences between everyone, everyone is equal and deserving of the same rights and freedoms.
Let's see how much more mansplaining we can get going on here 🙄
Thought this was funny and somewhat on point:
It falls victim, severely, to the usual process of pop-evolutionary-psychology:1. Get a little bit of data. A self-reported survey administered to fifteen undergrads (the portion of your 9AM class who returned the surveys) is more than enough.
2. Break that data down by sex. Make sure to never ever ever break it down by age, socioeconomic status, level of education, nationality, or any other way people could conceivably differ from each other.
(2b. Make sure that you treat gender as absolutely biologically fixed. Disregard the possibility of non-heterosexual subjects, or for bonus points, attempt to lump gay men in with straight women and vice versa.)3. Search for differences and discard similarities. Ways in which men and women are alike could never be significant findings! For bonus points, design your study in a way that is incapable of finding similarities--only test one sex, or test two sexes in different ways without a control.
4. This is the creative step. A less brilliant researcher would find that, say, women have a higher pain tolerance than men (as tested by heat exposure to the skin), and publish a paper entitled "Gender and pain tolerance in heat exposure." You are better than that! Because you know how to speculate wildly! Make up a completely ludicrous story that could have produced the results you found, and present it as your conclusion. Be sure that this story references "cavemen," justifies stereotypical gender roles, and act like proof of your data constitutes proof of your story. In the example given above, your paper should be entitled "Women naturally adapted to cooking; cavewomen adapted to the heat of cooking fires while making their men a nice mastodon roast when the men were away doing important things."
5. Release your findings to the popular press with an air of "This is the proclamation of Science and henceforth must be considered objective truth." Promote the story you came up with as the headline and bury the boring ol' actual data.
6. Get read by millions of grandparents, chatty neighbors, and suburban ER nurses who are spectacularly susceptible to the appeal to authority fallacy, and respond to all objections with "but that's just your opinion, Holly, and this is Science."
http://pervocracy.blogspot.com/2011/01/evolution-rape-ovulation-and-how-to-get.html
Reading through some of this I find it ironic how I can state my terms, get angry and get pissed off only to get attacked back. I find though, if I resort to crying that I am most likely to get my way. I find that pretty sad. People trying to make me remember who I am and how I should act???
And that pisses me off because I'm not a crying little person. lol
Originally posted by Deja~vu
Reading through some of this I find it ironic how I can state my terms, get angry and get pissed off only to get attacked back. I find though, if I resort to crying that I am most likely to get my way. I find that pretty sad. People trying to make me remember who I am and how I should act???And that pisses me off because I'm not a crying little person. lol
You'd have no problem turning on the eye-faucet should you get pulled over in an attempt to weasel out of a traffic-ticket.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Fact: we are different.
neuroplasticity and gendered play ftw
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
By the by, is it just me or is the title to this messed up?
very much so, I was just wondering that myself
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
I have never in my life met a man who actually thinks that about a woman, though. This isn't the 1950's.
Is an aggressive CEO entirely "girly" if she meets the physical requirements for being traditionally feminine? A boxer that just decked you? A police sergeant?
You won't find a lot of men that will say "all women should be girly" but that isn't the question here.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Is an aggressive CEO entirely "girly" if she meets the physical requirements for being traditionally feminine?You won't find a lot of men that will say "all women should be girly" but that isn't the question here.
What does any of this have to do with what I said? You stated that one of the commonly accepted traits associated with being a woman, is being mindlessly subservient to men. My point was that, based upon my own admittedly limited observations and experience, not enough men, in this day and age, actually think that, in order for it to be considered a "generally accepted" aspect of the female persona.