Why are women inferior?

jaybe, from what you say, you seem to me a contradiction unto yourself
I.e in other places i have heard you say that soldiers deserve to die for fighting a war...........Yet NOW you are congratulating te verysame stereotye of the 'real man' who is practical and ....wel real manloy. whilst 'demure women' should be happy wit her gentile essays and sewing...??

wat yo on dude?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yeah, let's just get rid of all the women. It will be a real man's world, huh, jaybee? See how long you last. And vice versa, moron.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No no, I'm a contradiction of YOUR stereotype of male attitudes, mate - and I'm glad I don't fit it. I don't let intellectual fashions or agenda-ridden mass media determine my thinking - I look at the world, analyse it, and come to my own conclusions. It's called being a free thinker.

Don't try to slot the WHOLE world into your boxes - you won't get all of us.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

i am more a feee thinker tan you...bet ya £&100....but you STILL have to make sense!

 

So….you didn’t like it?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Where did I claim depth or manliness?
Whenever the focus is turned away from the subject and onto the participants, one has to wonder about the motives.

Wasn’t I agreeing with you in this thread?

And yes, compared to you, I am both shallow and feminine.


James R

And isn’t the education system just another institution?
Women outperform because they love learning what the systems presents to them as ‘truth’, practical and essential.

But aren’t women excelling in what men teach them to be truth?

They challenge none of it and rarely question the validity or the necessity of what they are supposed to learn, so as to be integrated into the system.

Your example only proves my point...and Xev's.

Since when is information the same as intelligence?

Women excel when they simply imitate, repeat and follow instructions - as in dogma.
They do well within institutions, such as the education system.
They do well in thinking within the box because they dedicate all of their brain-power to becoming assimilated.
Women rarely question or challenge authority and so rarely invent or innovate or rebel or broaden their horizons.
They simply follow......


duendy

This is me being hurt:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And I quote:

Yea, I twisted your words.

What does different communication method have to do with the subject matter?
Do different communication methods, necessarily, alter the message communicated?

If an ape displays dominance by thrashing branches about or if a deer does it by strutting about, is not the message the same?

If I say: "Fuck you!" In Arabic and then I say it in English, does it change the message?

And I quote, again:

Yes, we completely jumped over the mammal phase and went straight to insect groupings.
Maybe we aren’t mammals? Hmmmmmmm…….

Insect societies are more stable and harmonious because the individuals making it up lack intelligence or the independence of mind to cause trouble. In most cases insect colonies are made up of mostly females, for most of the year, and produce males during mating season.

Your example only proves my point.
Females are less challenging and more easily integrated and the system relies on promoting stupidity or limited awareness to maintain harmony and stability.

The dynamics of human systems are changing from mammalian to insect like, this is true, due to this slow process of feminization - or call it domestication or institutionalization or dumbing-down.

The first step to enhancing harmony and stability is to eliminate any form of individuality and distinction. Ergo your assimilation within our current equalatarian trends is expressed through your disapproval of sexist or racist or any differentiating perspective.

"We are all the same!!!" you proclaim, wanting a peaceful, loving, paradise on Earth, and by doing so, you become an agent of the system you depend upon, and you expect to be rewarded.

So, we must all become the same and those that resist will be quarantined (physically walled in) or shamed (mentally walled in) with accusations, derived from an ideal, that are supposed to paint the other as ill or dysfunctional – in comparison to the average, docile, well-adjusted, unprejudiced, tolerant, unchallenging, indistinct, nice, moron, who represents the epitome of human progress in our time.

In the case of males, those that resist integration will not have access to reproduction.
Those that will, will exhibit the appropriate environmental prerequisites, to be considered worthy.
So, it is in the vested interest of males to believe or to pretend they believe whatever females have been taught to consider appropriate male attributes.

See how it works, moron?
It’s circular.
The system produces the individuals that serve its stability. They, in turn, become tools of this integration and perpetuate the ideals (memes) desirable to the system.
This integration is accomplished by using instinctual needs – sex being one of them.
Female sexual choice (power) then becomes harnessed to systemic control and functions as a filtering system for unwanted elements.
In natural environments ’unwanted elements’ are mostly physical deformities or inadequacies.
In human environments (Call them artificial) ‘unwanted elements’ are both physical but also psychological and intellectual.
The male must mimic the established ideal and believe, or pretend to believe, in the prevailing doctrine as it is defined by morality and belief and behavior and economic/social status.

Your “enlightened” modern maleness shows how thoroughly you’ve been indoctrinated within the system.
Funny how it is only males doing the defending here.
Women, of course, are above all this.

That is about as absurd a conclusion as you blaming all of humanity's problems on patriarchy, as if it was invented by man and does not exist in nature.

I ask again: Is male dominance, in a variety of mammalian species and not only, produced by patriarchal systems?

Did man invent maleness?
Did men invent harems and the 'alpha male'?

The goddess represented the mother, the birthing mother whom one must love and then abandon at maturity (overcome).
Nature’s feminine personification made her something to be subjugated and controlled, whereas the Christian masculine deity remains impregnable and unyielding.

The feminine/masculine symbolisms reflect natural dynamics.
We don’t respect nature, and that is why we personify her as a female.
Sometimes we don’t even appreciate her.
Also, nature is blind, she has no reason and cannot be reasoned with - a very feminine trait.

What does this have to do with feminine/masculine intellectual potentials, imbecile?

You’ve now twisted the conversation into one involving the overall quality of the feminine ideal, as it is represented in myths and cults and religions.

Nobody denied that women are necessary, and in some ways superior to men, but physically (muscle, size, speed) and intellectually (analytical, abstracting ability) they are not as capable - they lack the tools.
And we are comparing an average to an average, not the exceptional individuals that pop-up every so often to surprise us.

There are definitely females that are intellectually superior to 90% of males as there are females that are physically stronger than 90% of males.
So?

Saying, for example, that males are, on average, larger than females is a statement derived from observation.
Saying that this difference in size is diminishing, due to the obsolescence of muscle-power and due to many other environmental factors, is also a statement derived from observation.

The second does not disprove the first.

Are males becoming more obtuse?
Yes, and their obtuseness coincides with a general feminization, which suits the system and is caused by multiple environmental factors, one of which is technology.

Are differences between males and females being eradicated, just as differences between races are being eradicated through racial mixing?
Yes, but this does not disprove that these differences existed or that they do not, still, participate in individual potential, no matter how slightly.

The levelling of man is exactly that: The absence of peaks and valleys and a flat human being, just like insects indeed, dumb, unchallenging, indistinct, and similar.

Nothing to cause strife, and therefore nothing to cause competitive progress.
Nothing to challenge or inspire or distinguish.
A mass of human averageness, where everything from gender to race means nothing.

Welcome to your future.

Funny how human tribes that migrated into less inviting environments attained a higher level of inovation which lead to dominance, and those that remained in hospitable environments with relative abundance of resources, stagnated and were destroyed or enslaved, as a consequence.
You want me to grieve for the Hopi Indian or the North American Native who was slaughtered by the white menace?
Might as well weep over every species that was too weak to adapt and compete.
Shall we defend weakness, as we are doing in our modern systems, and if we do what will be the consequences?
If you domesticate an animal and protect it from the cruelty of nature, you get docile, calm, unthinking, disciplined creatures that are prone to disease and genetic deformities.

And in fact that is what has occurred with human beings.
Mankind now tries to compensate and correct the results of its meddling by inventing patches and fixes. Then the fixes cause other problems for which newer patches have to be invented, in a race against deterioration.

The best way to never grow?
Remain in your comfort zone.

Idiot!

 

You believe in God and you have the chutzpah to claim that women are unintelligent?

Errr.....

You believe in an invisible and logically contradictory father-figure up in the blue yonder because you're too much of a pussy to face reality and ah, you think you can make any judgement on the intellect and fortitude of others?

As we say on the internet:

ROFLMAO!

(If I am not getting some sort of joke, I apologize: I just woke up and am a little foggy)

Ah yes, the "I can produce bahy-beees!" defense.

What does that ability mean, really? Any healthy, mature female of any species can produce offspring. How is that definitive? How is it outstanding? What effort does it take to let your biological functions take over?

 

In all fairness, he did not directly state that he believes in god. He only implied it. Perhaps he is being facetious and you're unable to grasp this behaviour because you are a woman?

 

Xev, you're ignorant of God.

Women are not inferior. End of discussion.

 

Soon after the invention of agriculture, there was a cultural shift as warrior cultures invaded and assimilated earlier peaceful partnership cultures that were neither male or female dominated. They brought with them the values that men were superior, God was a man, conquering is good, women are only vessels for tiny humans that originate in the seed of man, ect...

This has only recently been understood as a lie.

 

You are unable to grasp that women can grasp this because you are a stupid man.

 

What are you talking about? Women can only think in simplest terms, it is part of the design.

 

Uhhhhh….yea…..that would explain male dominance in most other species, as well - particularly those we are the more closely related to.

They too are the victims of paternalistic, agricultural, warrior values.

When a dominant male chimp rapes a female and when it controls a group of females with brute strength, it’s because he’s been brainwashed by our human ideals….which of course are lies……because he says so:

End of discussion, for sure.
What a spectacle of brightness.

 

That is irrevelant to either sex. There are plenty more men who think in 'simplest terms'. I think they invented it. They have problems with ambiguity, and are much more comfortable with black and white thinking. I am not a male basher but all this is just sexism.

 

see satyr, for all your intellectual long winded rhteoric where yu try and ..eeem...clever and erudit and in-te-know. from where i a sat Xev just whupped yur sorry arse with that reply

and 'satry. where'd you get tat nam. Satyrs were attendants of the effeminate god Dionysos, son of the GODDESS. change you name immediately you imPOSTER

actually you sky-god-luving thang. you havebecome a fukin MONSTER. your worldview in truly monstrous. so much so i donna know where to begin.
you rant, and my system cannot cope

te crucial..ohhhsomuuuuch--clue to where yer coming from is your beliefe in 'God'. tat IS patriarchal...isn't it. the idea of the male god lordin it above Nature. tis is how it began. when hordes of fkers like yer self descended on peple who respected community and Earth and te had their sky-god 'marry' their Goddess. that's the beginning of it. Ward Rutherford explains ths brilliantly in his book 'Shamanism The Foundations of Magic'

your mean-arsed callous indiffernt attitude to the plight of Native Amricans sucks beyond belief.

you see theproblem i see with you---is your so upp your intellectual spseudo-educated arse. NPTHIN me or anyone would say will budge you one inch. it's true init??

listen to ese nuggets of ....crap:
'ature's feminine personification made her someting to be subjugated and controlled, wheras the Christian masculine deity remains impregnable and unyielding'

anything rigid and unyielding is dead fool. study rigor mortis why dont ya...or your own worldview mabe!

'The Goddess represented the mother, the birthing mothe, whom one must love and thn abandon at matrurity..'

well, yes, you have explaind the patriarchal rebellion. they believe in their differing ways that they CA escape 'her cycles'. your lot--the christians via escape t heaen, nd/or 'spiritualizing' Nature at some future date, and East--leaving wheel of birth and death

in myth tis attitude is defined by themoif of the 'hero' slaying the Dragon/Serpent, etc. but let me tell you. itis absurd and childish. you aint gonna get nowhere. its a dream. you cant escape you self

can i ask you a question satyr?

have you ever had psychedelic experience?

you keep saying how women never challenge, and love conformity. and i suppose you ee the masculinized 'march of progress''---to tew fukin destruction and posoning of everyfukin ting nonconformity do u?

well. listen up mr. feminism has doen more to reveal your vbullcrap mythic prison conformity more than any patriarchal male

left right left right left right staaaand to attantionnnnnnn! geeeewiICk march
12121212121212121212121212121212121STOP!

u HOrrrible little maaaaan

 

Geez page 1 is filled with loonies and people's idiotic convictions being revealed. If you want to say anything as true, I hope you are making a fool of yourself only to you, because nobody will respond to you then

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What is this thread thinking? Xevs starting post was pretty good, and the thread started to heat up with no response to the idiotic sort posts. You are asking "WHY" are women inferior? This is a topic i'm pretty good with myself. Don't ask me why. Just that there are many issues involved. The one "men are inferior cuz they don't exist without women!" is idiotic, and in need of a deadly serious blasting. There is a lot of arguement about the issue.

First, do you guys even think outside the box? Have you ever heard of a little lonely man named F. Nietzsche? Ever read any of his books? His ideas of women? Are they new to you?

What about his other ideas? I'm sure you guys understand that most that is written in this post is piles of garbage, ie, nothing. And your thoughts? "in truth", probably nothing what soever.

To get to the issue you have to raise serious questions. You have to actually raise a question that is true. I see very little of that.

We all know that this issue is the topic of so much out side of this thread, in fact, the entire woman being inferior debate. I'm sorry if this simple post says nothing at all, I should have started talking about my ideas of it all
!

But no, I don't want to. I might respond later

 

The fact that you believe men are superior to women means you are not bright yourself. Men are constantly seeking out women because their missing the other half of themselves. That is not superiority. That is equality. How the duties are delegated and assigned has little to do with it if you can't make it without women. Agriculture has traditionally been male domain because of physical strength. Warrior values are male design, therefore male created problems. Matriarchal societies do not operate on these same principles. Patriarchy is an umbrella that has its pros and cons. So does matriarchy. Just because one is in dominance does not make it more valid or superior. It just means its dominant. Domination is just one aspect of superiority. Men want things the way they naturally operate and women vice versa.

 

LOL..Your a complete idiot because you can't differentiate seriousness and a joke when you see it. IDIOT.

 

I'm tierd of reading garbage, like this one above me.

 

I don't know if or not satyr actually believes women are inferior. But there is a lot of evidence to support his side...

 

Now, it is true that male apes are typically stronger, but I've always taken that as a sign of marked inferiority. The males fight for the right to be bossed around by the females. If a female wants a mate, she just picks one, she doesn't have to prove herself first.


None of which says much about humans, but I'm not particularly interested in swapping manly stories to boost my ego. General opinion has no bearing in science.