Why are women inferior?

Status
Not open for further replies.
X

Xev

Registered Senior Member
Seriously.

Why do women, 51 percent of the population, make up 5 percent (at most) of the individuals who actually create anything?

Don't tell me about the exceptions: I know about them, and don't say it was because women are an oppressed class: this might be true, but it begs the question. Why did women let themselves become "an oppressed class" if they did not in some way deserve to be one? The feminists of the 1900s met with much more resistance from women than they ever did from men: I don't deny that they were themselves exceptional, but the fact remains that the women of their time were hostile to the movement, which can only mean that the average woman of the 1900s knew that she was an inferior type of human and did not want her status to change.

This is simply because women are uncreative, afraid of conflict and skeptical of change. Obviously they would not have suffered such low status throughout the centuries if they had not deserved to.

So the question is why? Is it genetic? Is it learned? Is it metaphysical?
 
Thats quite easy to answer. If women are inferior its because men are. Men come from women. Therefore they are inferior. HAHAHA

i'M SO CLEVER..IT AMAZES ME :p
 
Xev said:
Seriously.

Why do women, 51 percent of the population, make up 5 percent (at most) of the individuals who actually create anything?

Don't tell me about the exceptions: I know about them, and don't say it was because women are an oppressed class: this might be true, but it begs the question. Why did women let themselves become "an oppressed class" if they did not in some way deserve to be one? The feminists of the 1900s met with much more resistance from women than they ever did from men: I don't deny that they were themselves exceptional, but the fact remains that the women of their time were hostile to the movement, which can only mean that the average woman of the 1900s knew that she was an inferior type of human and did not want her status to change.

This is simply because women are uncreative, afraid of conflict and skeptical of change. Obviously they would not have suffered such low status throughout the centuries if they had not deserved to.

So the question is why? Is it genetic? Is it learned? Is it metaphysical?
Click to expand...
There are several flaws in your logic. The first being your version of inferior. Why do you think that's measured in terms of creativity? And secondly, how do you define create "anything?"

It's pretty obvious there are differences - big ones - between men and women. As a general rule, men are much more aggressive, possess greater body strength which, by the way, contributes to causing women to not be as aggressive towards men AND allows them less authority.

Hormone levels are quite different also which has a lot of bearing on some of what I just mentioned. In addition, men tend to be conquest-driven while it's natural for women to be more concerned with nurturing. After all, they are the ones who give birth and have the primary responsibility for child-rearing.

In short, I think you're just confused. There's no superiority or inferiority overall - just differences.
 
men and women developed to become better in different activities because women have to give birth

i imagine that a pregnancy, an after labour contition and breastfeeding would pose difficulties for a woman who is a part of a hunting team; and if she has to stay in a place for that time she might as well occupy herself with an activity less phisicaly consuming, like growing vegetables and manufacturing home utencils... i think it just went on from there
 
Varda said:
men and women developed to become better in different activities because women have to give birth

i imagine that a pregnancy, an after labour contition and breastfeeding would pose difficulties for a woman who is a part of a hunting team; and if she has to stay in a place for that time she might as well occupy herself with an activity less phisicaly consuming, like growing vegetables and manufacturing home utencils... i think it just went on from there
Click to expand...

Historically, I agree with this. Women are increasingly able to demonstrate themselves with as great a level as men are today. However, there is still work to be done.
 
Many women opposed early feminism because by following it, they were risking to lose their husband and home.

A man could divorce a woman if she didn't have sex with him whenever he wanted. To many women, to have sex with the man on his terms was a smaller sacrifice than to face living in poverty and in disgrace.

Feminism was taking one thing for granted: that the husband respects his wife and will continue to do so however she decided. Women knew that this was not the case, and that respect had to be earned by pleasing the man. Otherwise, single women were left to live in poverty working for minimum wages, or as prostitutes, or, if they were so fortunate, with relatives or on an inheritance.
 
I wouldn't say that women were 'inferior' (unless I was deliberately trying to piss people off), but I think another reason you might have thought that was due to the self-absorbtion of many women.

Men have typically been in the position where they must woo women by providing shelter, wealth, food, status, and everything else. This is because women want to ensure that any offspring are going to have good genes and resources to prosper.

All that women need to do to mate is really be capable of bearing healthy children, which usually means she's going to be healthy herself. These traits in women are what guys generally consider 'hot', so if a woman wanted to attract guys with better genes and physical wealth, they would make themselves appear hotter by using makeup (etc.). This accounts for self-absorbtion, especially with appearance.

It also explains why you might say guys are 'superior', because wooing a chick has traditionally meant that you needed to have something they need (which requires work), while a lot of girls are usually born healthy or fugly.

In a nutshell :rolleyes:
 
Alternatively you might say that women are inferior because men were created in the image of god, and women are made from a lousy stolen rib.
 
Azael said:
Alternatively you might say that women are inferior because men were created in the image of god, and women are made from a lousy stolen rib.
Click to expand...

You've got it all wrong. Women are superior. Period. End of story. Men don't exist without women. If women seem inferior its because men have been such a lousy burden on them. Okay...half-kidding

Women are different than men. You are comparing apples and oranges. Just be grateful you don't have to carry the burden of both. Just mind your own business and marvel at the other half.
 
Women are inferior to men in patriarchal societies. Because in a patriarchal society, a woman has to live by a more relativistic morality than a man, if she wishes to survive. Relativism is inherently decadent.
 
I'm kind of sick of feminism. Okay, I take that back. I'm very tired of feminism. I find it ironic how some women seem to think that it is okay to get angry about any male saying anything disrespectful towards her, because she deserves special treatment because she is a female, then turns around and talks about 'equal' rights. I'm not really the one to be pointing fingers, because I usually go by the old fashioned "respect females" ideals. It just angers me when they try to act superior. Don't get me wrong, males acting superior is worse. But either is worse.

People in general trying to make themselves out to be superior is disgusting.

I'm disgusted in people in general.
 
iam said:
You've got it all wrong. Women are superior. Period. End of story. Men don't exist without women. If women seem inferior its because men have been such a lousy burden on them. Okay...half-kidding

Women are different than men. You are comparing apples and oranges. Just be grateful you don't have to carry the burden of both. Just mind your own business and marvel at the other half.
Click to expand...
If this is in response to me, did you read my post before this? I thought it was obvious that I was joking :bugeye:
 
To compare women with men is like comparing apples with oranges.

They are just different.

I think the cause for your concern about women not being upto men arises from the false heterosexual notion of equality which is taken to mean 'sameness'. When women and men are brought togther to share the same social space --- then women will automatically become a secondary being, becuase she is not physically as powerful as the man.

Also, when in the modern world, women are not really involved in procreating and child rearing that much, something which is naturally her domain --- then she is forced to apply her in the fields that men are naturally designed for. She tries her best, and the heterosexual society really props her, but she can only achieve this much and not more.

Perhaps we could return to doing things we were best at. naturally.
 
Also most women did not support feminism (perhaps most still don't) because they did not find the medieval society all that repressive. Afterall, it gave her and her children security --- and in the final analysis that is what a woman naturally cares for the most. The rest are secondary. Especially sexuality is not as important to her. I think that today's liberated woman is much more unhappy than she ever was. Children, motherhood and nurturing hardly form a major part of her life today.

Sure the medieval society took outer power from the women. But does she really care for outer power? It becomes important only when she is forced to compete with the man, as if she were a man.

Of course the heterosexual society has its own compulsions to force 'sameness' on men and women. Their bonding is not possible without it.
 
Last edited:
Azael said:
If this is in response to me, did you read my post before this? I thought it was obvious that I was joking :bugeye:
Click to expand...

Did my post seem serious? I don't think so
 
huh...well the very question of this thread aleady makes out women ARE inferior so crries on this myth

btw Buddha1, you argument that wome will ALWAYS be infeior cause the are physically smaller......dontagree wit that at all
what about small MEN. what aboutwomen tat are larger than men...? an/or physically strongr than say a tall think man, etc etc. it is ridiculous that argument. and it remindsme of the nazi ideology of the ubermensch...that only strong blonde blue-eyed men are superior tofukin EVEYone

what keeps women 'inferior' is......the PATRIARCHY!:
this ptriarchy doesn't only effect wmen, but men also
"patriarchy perpetuates is own decetion through myth.........The truth of the matter is..that intra ecclesia non salus est. There is no possibility of redemption witin or for a system which is founded upon the degradation of te human sepcies and its environment. Thrugh denial, tokenim, obfuscation and reversal, patriarchy hides this fact. Achief organ in its propaganda campaign is a religion which posits that God is male (and hence male must be God) and that only through suffering in this life may one find true happiness in the world beynd.
This is the myth patriarchy projects onto the foreground of reality. It is the myth which is internalized and is therefore self-perpetuating.
Patriarchy traps its victims in the semantic web of lies which constitutes the reality of the Foreground. and obscures ultimate reality, which is the ackground."
Boston Collaborative Encyclopedia of Western Theology: Mary Daly http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/mwt/dictionary/mwt_themes_905_daly.htm

patriarchal propaganda of inferior-ization INTERIORIZERS in te indoctrinated. THA iswhy women would have fought aginst feminist liberation initially. just like some Muslim women defend their OWn oppression--haveing to wear a rag that covers them from head to feet in searing heat! etc etc...
 
It seems to me as though women have much deeper and more complex personalities, thus being able to form better relationships with each other. It's something I find that many girls I meet agree with. Ok, one was a lesbian and biased, but even as a male myself I do feel that us XYs have shallower personalities by average.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top