Men are better at Science

Precisely

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

200 years? Can you sensibly talk about a 200 year old feminist movement?
given all that has gone on in the last 200 years, can you explain how you will prove that the claimed 200 years of feminism have been a step in the wrong direction?
(I am of course assuming that you dont have a really heavy sense of humour here.)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Some men are superior to some women.

Some men are inferior to some women.

No matter what standard you use. (ability to do well in science, size, strength, football playing abilities, intelligence, creativity, gun-slinging, being ugly, being attractive, even being hirsute.)

Unless you want to say that because you have a penis, and some people with penises are superior to some who don't have them, you are superior.

Ha ha ha ha ha ad infinitum, i.e., I'm still laughing at this idea.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And you used the single letter "u" where you should write the word "you"... m.y. s.pe.l.l.i.n.g. i.s.n'.t. a.l.w.a.y.s. p.e.r.f.e.c.t. b.u.t. I. a.m. n.o.t. a. d.u.m.b. b.l.o.n.d.e!

 

Quite right

I saw a WW1 film once were a woman says "we dont need to seek eqality with men - we are ALREADY superior!"

I think in ancient Crete at least, men were the 2nd class citizens.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Ancient Crete became 'ancient' for a very good reason; it allowed women to do more than cook or make coffee.

Cole - MOST men are superior to MOST women, therefore, group vs group, men are superior.

Guthrie - the pendulum should have been stopped in the 50's. Women are now venerated far beyond their actual abilities. However, capitalism remains a deciding force in all of this; the best companies consist primarily of men. They are the ones who survive recessions. Capitalism also consigns women to the lower paid work their brains can handle.

KS

 

Last I read it was because the springs of water ran dry because of geological changes, in part due to Thera exploding nearby. Perhaps you can provide some evidence?

OK, women reading this thread - do you feel venerated?

So, what your saying, is that all that matters is capitalism, and men are natrually better than women at working in a company? I presume you havnt read about the large numbers of women pouring into the work place in th past 50 years, during which time we have advanced even further in terms of technology and living standards? Or you havnt read about the studies showing that in developing countries, when you educate the women well, living standards improve because they can better bring up their families and avoid disease and so on.

And capitalism assigns women to whatever work they are willing to take. Its capitalism that has led to the large influx of women into the wrokplace, the same women that presumably you feel threatened by, since you seem to dislike them so much.

 

That's what you get for leaving a hormonal cunt in charge of determining the risk of natural disaster. I believe the Sri Lankan government has a progressive attitude to recruitment in some of its departments nowadays, do please look it up...

They won't stop feeling oppressed until the last homo sapien penis is on display in the Women's New World Order Museum for Biological Posterity.

Wrong and evidently, respectively.

Wrong again. Economic growth after WW2 exacerbated existing shortages of human resources, and these were most easily filled by women who were already working due to the emergency shortage of male factory/agricultural workers. The sudden emergency caused by the war turned the decent and fair exclusion of women joining the workplace into a luxury that an embattled society simply couldn't afford. The war ended in '45, but the need for every pair of available hands didn't. Society had to be rebuilt, and thus the female stayed on in the factory/office.

Trouble is, by the time the reconstruction had ended, a large number of women were still not resigning their posts. Ironically, Adolf Hitler should be quite a hero to - and have his portrait mounted in the lobby of - the Womens Institute for Global emasculation.

All worthwhile advances in tech or in quality of life have been the result of male effort, with little to no input from women, with the possible exception of the Product Development sections at the Hoover and Tampax corporations.

I agree that most women around the world would benefit from training to become better mothers, carers, wives, girlfriends and one-night stands (you mentioned avoiding diseases).

Yeah, most women who want to be runway models and high-powered lawyers/doctors get assigned those roles. Sure.

I love women; I just choose not to let society lie to me about their real position in it. Nor do I feel threatened by them; they don't compete at my level for contracts because they are simply not cut out to handle the intricate aspects of my work.


Jaybee.

 

How do you feel when a woman has advanced far beyond your position in the world of science, if you are simply not cut out to handle the intricate aspects of their work? Not threatened?
How do you feel when you realize you don't compete at the level of many women in the business world, because you are not cut out to handle the intricate aspects of their work?
Or is it that they had different opportunities than you did? If you won't offer your ego and personal accomplishments up to be disparaged by women's accomplishments, you should just be quiet.
You would get more of an ego boost by showing someone who doesn't know anything about sales contracting how to become more accomplished, than you will ever get from holding up other men's accomplishments as if they were your own.

 

You make it sound like an everyday occurrence, as opposed to the near 'Blue Moon' event that would truly be. In any case, I'm not in the scientific field, hence the 'blue moon' effect.

I'm not able to knit a jumper, make a souffle', or distinguish violet from mauve. No, I don't feel threated.

I can't conceive of anything a woman can do in the workplace that I couldn't, given a few weeks of training, aside from perhaps getting uppity with a client because of the time of the month. Moreover, I don't begrudge women who sleep their way to the top; you use every weapon you have in the business world, and after all, the best method for a woman to obtain a promotion is not through word of mouth, although the method is definitely oral...

Ermmm...no. There are too many pussified men out there already, without me not waving the giant, erect phallus that is the symbol of our good and great gender in defiance of the current situation.

What other mans achievements have I stolen credit for here?

Jaybee.

 

THIS IS GETTING BEYOND A JOKE, JAYBEE.

If youd been flaming blacks or indians or whatever, you'd probably be banned by now.

Mister moderator...!

 

I thought men were better in everything, except cooking ironing and cleaning, and i can't leave out giving birth.

 

You've just reinforced some of my own points beautifully. You give a simplistic reply (in a thread consisting mostly of multi-point posts) shouting your dissatisfaction in capital letters about my breaking with the established social order, and making delusional comparisons of gender with race.

Best of all, you then refer to the moderator as 'Mister'. Well, this is a science forum...therefore, of course he's a man!

A woman asks for me to be silenced, yet she inadvertantly makes my case for me. That's the most beautiful irony I can think of.

Jaybee.

 

Almost all the top chefs - like every other profession - are male.

Nice example on giving birth, genius, wish I'd thought of that. But on a closely related subject, ever noticed that the vast majority of Gynaecologists are male?


Jaybee.

 

This is precisely the problem. Because you are not exposed to the many, many women who would laugh you out of the room if you started talking about science, you can keep your false ideals, and your fragile ego.

You take credit for another man's achievements when you say, "men are better at science."

Sorry, but the better you make your case for men as a group being better than women at science, the more you look like a loser, because there are many thousands of women who are better at science than you are.
The smarter men, as a group, are in your mind, the worse you look as an example of a man. When many, many thousands of women do better in school, have higher I.Q. scores, and are just on a higher level intellectually than you are, you are shown to be an even worse example of being a man, to someone who holds this ideal of men being better than women.
The only man that can make this statement safely is someone who is at the highest levels of accomplishment in science, and even then he would have to have data that was more than circumstantial to back it up. You don't have a chance.

 

The basic idea that men are superior to women is totally absurd, there are many women whos I.Q surpass those of many men.
Has any body taken in to consideration that maby one of the main reasons that there are not many women in the science field is because there not that interested?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

DO you See many men dancing ballet?? or designing houses?? Id like to hear a better reason why men are better then woman in science other then the claim that there smarter ( which scientifically has been proven wrong)/

 

You kind of say that men are better at science because women are not interested in science.

 

Let's get cause and effect clear; one of the reasons that men generally outperform women in scientific endeavours is that, like you said, they are more interested in them than women.

This is what I said a few pages back. Women gravitate towards the talky-feely lines of work because their brains are geared to talk about feelings. Yet, the highest paid PR Consultants (or ANYTHING ELSE except models) are males, because Testosterone improves competitivity, and Oestrogen diminishes it.

Men are rare in Ballet because it is not particularly well paid, except at the uppermost levels. They have to pay for a mortgage, feed themselves and their kids, and contend with the financial burden of a wife who'll invariably have a credit card to spend her husbands money on lunches with her houswife friends, tattling about the weather, "She said, she said", and whose husband bought them the hottest little 4x4/Blahniks. No, men have to get on with the serious business of earning money, not prancing around a stage in tights for 5 years hoping to get noticed by some queen casting director.

Cole - that was all utter rubbish, if you were simply misguided as most men are about the position of women then my job would be easier.
That last post of yours tells me that the male-female relationship isn't the only aspect of life you need to be educated about. You are clearly a lot more misled than average on more than one front.

You may feel I'm saying this out of spite; please believe me, I am not. You are clearly able to string your words together, which denotes raw intelligence, but again, after reading your last post, I'm horrified by how deeply you've been indoctrinated/shielded.

I'm saying it out of shock by your ignorance, and conversely to shock YOU into doing something about it. Speak to your father's generation, not ours, about women, garner their opinions. Your path will not be easy, but I wish you well down it.

 

I see that almost all your posts in sciforums have been on this thread, Jaybee - if you can write only bout 1 subject, that makes YOU SIMPLISTIC.

social order is establishd for good reasons - if yu want to live in the past thats not anyone else's fault, and the rest of the world should ignore you

Race + gender are very similar matters when it comes to law, to eqality at work, to the great struggles for human rights which have - in the 1st world - mostly been won. Id say my comparisons have a LOT of suport.. if they are delusional, then Im proud to be mad in a mad world.

If women are so silly + do stupid things on catwalks, like you said in you rlast post, why do so many men, even straight ones, dress up like women? Mybe theyr enot happy with the man sterotype youre ranting about...

tell that to single mothers!! To kids whove been abandoned by their fathers!

Yes, we care about feelings. that makes us better at holding families, or even comunities together, than men. women politicians willl be more important in the next few decades. Any historian knows that most wars + other violences have always been startd by men.

That enough points in 1 post for you? ?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Hahahhaahhahahahahah.
Now I've stopped laughing, perhaps you'll show me evidence for the determining of risk of natural disaster present in the Minoan Civilisation.

Only in your head is there is new world order museum for biological posterity. SO I think that proves your point is moot.

Hey, at least I agree with you that capitalism isnt all that matters. Mind you, since you seem to have ignored the massive influx of women into companies, their clambering up the careers ladder, and the studies showing that women are good in workplaces because many of them seem to bring a more team spirited approach to things, I'll just have to file you under "ranting idiot".

ERmmm, no, your forgetting one thing- that women have always been in the workplace. Society was effectively rebuilt by the late 50's, and women stayed in the office. In fact the proportion of women in work has increased hugely in the past 50 years. If women were doing such a bad job in the work place, they woudl have been pushed out decades ago, remember the logic of free market capitalism?
Besides, your "decent and fair exclusion of women" forgets about the vast numbers who were working before the Victorian ideals took over. Hundreds of thousands worked in Mills all across the UK, millions more were everything from milkmaids to pub owners. It took a woman to get the first aid and nursing care side of the British army set up and working properly during the Crimean war.

And yet nobody forced them out? Perhaps they were doing as good a job as the men? I mean come on, economic and technological growth have been huge the past 50 years, during the period of freeing women from their adverse social restraints.
(Hey, is there a reason your speaking from your cast? Is it because some woman broke your leg?)

No, not correct at all. Lets see, without much of the efforts of women in sciences, there would be no DNA for example. Or how about the midwives who help women give birth better? Surely that doesnt count asbeing an improvement in quality of life? Or how about campaigners for birth control?

It looks like you need training yourself, on how to be a man.

D'uh. Do you not get it yet? Have you not seen the increasing numbers of women doing these jobs?

HHmmm. I could mention my female 2nd cousin who is doing Phd in Astrophysics at a reputable university. Or how about my girlfriend who is doing physics and maths at university just now? (Let alone she also ran a convenience store for a year or two. Or the many female postmistresses in the UK who have managed to run an intricate and complex business for decades.)
Anyway, I know which position you occupy in society. And believe me, it aint pretty.