Why are women inferior?

[Buddha1]

Yes men are stronger, but women are beautiful

We have seen in the thread men and masculinity that beauty is not a gender specific trait. Women may look more beautiful when decked up artificially with make up.

[Cottontop3000]

i don't think it's a good thing

I do, and here's why:

1.) As a species, we need a different perspective. From those with real power. When more women have more real power (presidents, corporate leaders, generals), maybe we will get just enough change in perspective to save us from destroying ourselves. Could be our last best hope, so to say. (I don't believe there is any real god.)

2.) Men need a new perspective. With more women moving into more predominantly male roles, I think an equilibrium will be found where more men take to predominantly female roles (home-makers, child-rearers).

3.) So, from power (presidents, prime ministers, etc.) to power (home-makers, child-rearers), we will have a perspective change that might do us some good. Who knows really, but it is worth a shot at this point, imo. We need to re-prioritize on a major scale.

[draqon]

We have seen in the thread men and masculinity that beauty is not a gender specific trait. Women may look more beautiful when decked up artificially with make up.

...sounds to me like you are gay...well you represent the least of the society in the world. I am talking here of people who really matter to the society, gay people are just an obstacle we have to slice through. (I am not an advocate of violence)

[duendy]

who invented need for make up? women or men?

some tribes its the MEN who get all dolled up wid make up and shit and the women pick THEM....saw this othe day. they are African. the men are very tall and hot and all wear make up and stand in line kind of chanting andmaking their eyes very big.....haha it is SO weird to what we is uded to

what i am saying is. doesn't the culture/tradition crreeate the way women men are

what bout women wid hairy legs. would yu dudes like that??/.."phwaaarrrrr....checkout her hairy legs!!"

[Buddha1]

...sounds to me like you are gay...well you represent the least of the society in the world. I am talking here of people who really matter to the society, gay people are just an obstacle we have to slice through. (I am not an advocate of violence)

Sounds to me you're a whining fucking wimp. The likes of you are quite rare too.

[Buddha1]

I do, and here's why:

1.) As a species, we need a different perspective. From those with real power. When more women have more real power (presidents, corporate leaders, generals), maybe we will get just enough change in perspective to save us from destroying ourselves. Could be our last best hope, so to say. (I don't believe there is any real god.)

2.) Men need a new perspective. With more women moving into more predominantly male roles, I think an equilibrium will be found where more men take to predominantly female roles (home-makers, child-rearers).

3.) So, from power (presidents, prime ministers, etc.) to power (home-makers, child-rearers), we will have a perspective change that might do us some good. Who knows really, but it is worth a shot at this point, imo. We need to re-prioritize on a major scale.

that's a pretty scary situation for men I'd say. That's not what men are naturally made for. Must we interfere with nature? alright we have science and technology, but can't it flow with nature rather than flowing against it just in order to uphold certain ideologies.

[Buddha1]

I mean not that I'm opposed to women sharing power to some extent.....but to reverse the trend.....

[Cottontop3000]

I mean not that I'm opposed to women sharing power to some extent.....but to reverse the trend.....

Your gonna have to clarify what you are saying for me. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.

[draqon]

Sounds to me you're a whining fucking wimp. The likes of you are quite rare too.

That's an echo...you said it and only you heard it, for what you said was about yourself.

[duendy]

-

Your gonna have to clarify what you are saying for me. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying.

can i just say....'tis is a maaaannnns world' james Brown
when i see women trying to fit into tis world. i see them having to fitinto a man's world. they have to become manlike. busy as fuck. no time fo kids, meopause, menstruation. wearing suity like gear. and in te case of Margrat Thatcher--remember tat bitch?--sounin like a fukin man

you can get tem as scheming and ouright anot ature as any regular male politician/business man.....so as i sees it the change has t be muuuuch more radical than simply women being allowed to take men's roles of power
the whole fukin philosophy behind all tis needs resolving

[Humanologist]

-.... busy as fuck. no time fo kids, meopause, menstruation. wearing suity like gear ....

U forgot Masturbation

[duendy]

me and my fukin typos scrwing up crucial sentences...slaps wrist...meant to say 'these career women can be as ANTi NAture and out andout shits as any business dude, male politician'

[Cottontop3000]

me and my fukin typos scrwing up crucial sentences...slaps wrist...meant to say 'these career women can be as ANTi NAture and out andout shits as any business dude, male politician'

Yes, but my hope is that once they have enough real power, broadly, and a little more time, they will be different enough to make a difference somehow. Maybe wishful thinking. I don't know.

[Varda]

i think that, since the 60s maybe, when women lost the image of being exclusively nurtures, we have had time enough to realise that it doesn't work very well when there isn't someone at home dedicated to the growth of the children.

it is a possibility that maybe it is a transitory stage and that we have not had time enough to adapt to that

but i think that it is essential that a parent is home during the first years of the children to influenciate the buiding of values, rather than let that happen through a teacher/nanny/tv/etc... and i think it's just sensible that this parent is the mother

[Cottontop3000]

i think that, since the 60s maybe, when women lost the image of being exclusively nurtures, we have had time enough to realise that it doesn't work very well when there isn't someone at home dedicated to the growth of the children.

I tend to prefer the "it takes a village" mentality to raising kids, which is almost non-existent today in Western culture.

but i think that it is essential that a parent is home during the first years of the children to influenciate the buiding of values, rather than let that happen through a teacher/nanny/tv/etc

I agree totally.

... and i think it's just sensible that this parent is the mother

Probably. I am a little too pessimistic about the state of the world, most likely. Maybe we will have more time than I think we have.

[Varda]

besides, women are just as capable of being greedy and destructive

i'm so sexist

[Cottontop3000]

I won't argue with the the fact that women can be just as greedy or destructive as men. It has taken all of us, men and women, to get to where we are today. I think we could have done a lot better though. I think we still can.

[Bells]

i think that, since the 60s maybe, when women lost the image of being exclusively nurtures, we have had time enough to realise that it doesn't work very well when there isn't someone at home dedicated to the growth of the children.

You're right. But feminists will argue that it always falls on the woman to have to stay home with the children (which you seem to agree with in the next part of your post). It is an expectation that she be the one to raise the children while the father works. And if she goes out to earn the family income while the father stays home, society judges her as being uncaring and selfish while the father is stereotyped as being weak.

but i think that it is essential that a parent is home during the first years of the children to influenciate the buiding of values, rather than let that happen through a teacher/nanny/tv/etc... and i think it's just sensible that this parent is the mother

Why not the father? He is equally the child's parent is he not?

Why is it "sensible" that the primary caregiver for the children be the mother? Isn't the father just as capable of ensuring that the child does not grow up to be a cretin?

[Varda]

i think it is more sensible because men have constant hormonal cicles while women's cicle oscilates on a monthy basis, causing them to be indisposed more often.

also, since we have to stop working for months when it's time to give birth and to take care of the baby, something that the man cant do for us.

/the following paragraph might be a little disgusting for men, i know you dont like to talk about that/

i think i am very capable and i am very good at what i do, but sometimes i have to stay home, because i feel very strong cramps, headaches, back pain, and i become so irritable that it's just better not go anywhere

it is difficult for us to pressure for equal rights, because we are not equal. i dont think we should be forced to work during a period in which we are phisiologicaly indisposed, but we can't expect that the employers wont be pissed off at that... you want to be equal? don't miss work unless somebody died

[duendy]

I tend to prefer the "it takes a village" mentality to raising kids, which is almost non-existent today in Western culture.

me)))))GREAT insight dude! tere's an olf African saying: "It takes a whole village to raise a child"
lets think of the actual right now. the ISOLATED mum in her house. no community. traffic. wory about child abusers. having to keep eyes on child/children. no communication with other adults much. imagine the single mum. how heay is THAT. so dont blame the woman for not really being so enthusiastic wit tis. kids USED to have a common where thy couod roll in th mud not get run over ...etc. rather its te house and isolation. life movin on. you knowwww. ....yet i do feel kid needs mum and prtner. ...tis is a maaaans world

I agree totally.

Probably. I am a little too pessimistic about the state of the world, most likely. Maybe we will have more time than I think we have.

these are heavy heafvy heaafy times init?