Men and Women are aparantly not equal.

[OceanMist]

Why do you prefer them to do the job though? I would assume, it would be because you think they would be better at the job, and hence superior at that job, based solely on gender. Using that quality to judge what qualifies them in your mind is sexist reasoning.

Well, yeah it is based on gender. As I said before, I'd prefer a woman to babysit a child rather than a man.....solely based on gender.

If that makes me sexist, then fine. I guess the word sexist is very lightly used if I'm a sexist because I prefer a certain gender to do certain jobs.

 

[OceanMist]

Alright, I think I've heard about enough of the women-hating accusations. I've continuously had to hear these accusations every time anybody says something that has even the slightest hint of a woman not being a superwoman....and I'm freaking tired of it.

It's time for you white knights and feminists to give it a rest.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with anything Opaline has said in this thread. She is a woman for god's sakes, and you still call her a woman-hater just because she thinks a man should be president?

You know, this is the problem with most of the people in this SA forum. You people have this pro-female bias that extends so far that you are willing to call anyone a woman-hater that has any opinion at all about any gender. It's gotten absurd. Excuse me, but it's time for you to shut up. I'm just tired of it. I just wanted to get this word in even if it's my last.

I'm tired of everyone hating people just because they have an opinion about genders. Whether you people like it or not, genders have different roles in life. They have different strengths, and yes, even weaknesses. Both genders have these.

 

[OceanMist]

People, it comes down to this. There is often a time in a presidency, where the president is asked, do we pull the trigger? What i mean is, do we kill these people or person?

A man tends to have less emotions and more of a killer's instinct.

You know why Bin Laden is dead right now? Because Obama's got a killer instinct. He had Bin Laden in his sights and he said kill that mother f-----.

And I believe we are safer now because of that.

Can a woman pull the trigger like that without letting emotion get in the way. I'm not sure. But I know for a fact a man can.

That's why only a man should be president. Because I can be sure that he will kill the bad guy.

Forgive me if all I want is a sure thing in office.

 

[vj288]

Well, yeah it is based on gender. As I said before, I'd prefer a woman to babysit a child rather than a man.....solely based on gender.

If that makes me sexist, then fine. I guess the word sexist is very lightly used if I'm a sexist because I prefer a certain gender to do certain jobs.

Yes, that would mean you hold some sexist beliefs, I wouldn't call the use of the word "light" though. If when making a list of qualities you look for in a babysitter, if one of them is "being a women" I personally find an injustice there. If you were to make a list of qualities like "nurturing, kind, considerate" ect ect and conclude that those qualities are found more readily in women, I would maybe disagree but find more merit in your reasoning. It's not like a quality of being a women is being a good baby-sitter or a quality of being a man is being a good leader. And by basing something solely on gender, that is what you are saying.

EDIT

Can a woman pull the trigger like that without letting emotion get in the way. I'm not sure. But I know for a fact a man can.

And by the way, yes, this sentiment is also extremely sexist.

 

[Remus]

Can a woman pull the trigger like that without letting emotion get in the way. I'm not sure. But I know for a fact a man can.

Hmmm

Yep, I think she can. Grim but true.

 

[Hellhound]

Yes, that would mean you hold some sexist beliefs, I wouldn't call the use of the word "light" though. If when making a list of qualities you look for in a babysitter, if one of them is "being a women" I personally find an injustice there. If you were to make a list of qualities like "nurturing, kind, considerate" ect ect and conclude that those qualities are found more readily in women, I would maybe disagree but find more merit in your reasoning. It's not like a quality of being a women is being a good baby-sitter or a quality of being a man is being a good leader. And by basing something solely on gender, that is what you are saying.

Have you ever seen on the news the multiple cases of babysitters and kindergarden teachers beating up babies? I guess no one really pays attention to that.

 

[Arthur_Dent]

...and you still call her a woman-hater ...

I think I missed this part or some post got deleted, because so far I haven't seen anyone calling her that way.

 

[Opaline]

*glances at new posts*

*goes back to watching little hobbits frolic in the garden*

 

[vj288]

Have you ever seen on the news the multiple cases of babysitters and kindergarden teachers beating up babies? I guess no one really pays attention to that.

Yes...being a women doesn't mean you won't beat up a baby though. Nor does being a man make you want to beat up babies. It depends on the individual, not the gender.

 

[coyote]

Hmmm

Yep, I think she can. Grim but true.

Golda Meir

Catherine the Great

Elizabeth I

all great wartime leaders

 

[coyote]

Neville Chamberlain was a man, however

 

[MikeyC]

Golda Meir

Catherine the Great

Elizabeth I

all great wartime leaders

Lara Croft.

 

[BlueDays]

Chinese Child Severely Brain Damaged After Being Beaten By Teacher (VIDEO)

I've known some women who have made atrocious mothers and carers.


There are numerous incidents of women being involved in killings.
Phoolan Devi "authorised the killing of 22 upper-caste villagers in 1981. Following this, she became notorious across India as a bandit."

Phoolan Devi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Opaline]

Yes...being a women doesn't mean you won't beat up a baby though. Nor does being a man make you want to beat up babies. It depends on the individual, not the gender.

*takes break from LOTR to reply* lol

Okay, but can I ask you this - which gender most often commits violent acts? (NOT that women never do, because they do. I've seen it with my own eyes, in my home). Why do you think that is - couldn't possibly be because of testosterone (ie increased levels of aggression), could it? Or is that just a product of a society that says that men need to be more aggressive, so therefore they are? I for one highly doubt that.

 

[MikeyC]

*takes break from LOTR to reply* lol

Okay, but can I ask you this - which gender most often commits violent acts? (NOT that women never do, because they do. I've seen it with my own eyes, in my home). Why do you think that is - couldn't possibly be because of testosterone (ie increased levels of aggression), could it? Or is that just a product of a society that says that men need to be more aggressive, so therefore they are? I for one highly doubt that.

Men do commit more violent acts, no doubt. Statistics back that up.

However, I don't think casting an umbrella over everyone is entirely fair. "Most violent acts are committed by men...therefore ALL men are violent."

"One woman is not fit for American presidency...therefore ALL women are unfit."

As VJ said, it's all down to the individual, not blanketing the whole gender.

 

[vj288]

*takes break from LOTR to reply* lol

Okay, but can I ask you this - which gender most often commits violent acts? (NOT that women never do, because they do. I've seen it with my own eyes, in my home). Why do you think that is - couldn't possibly be because of testosterone (ie increased levels of aggression), could it? Or is that just a product of a society that says that men need to be more aggressive, so therefore they are? I for one highly doubt that.

I'm not going to go against science and say that testosterone has nothing to do with aggressive behavior, of course it does. It's hardly the sole factor in aggressive behavior though. Men with high levels of it aren't destined to act aggressively, nor are females with very low levels of it immune to aggressive tendencies. It could be the reason why we see more violent and aggressive behavior in men rather than women, OR it could be that women are aggressive in different ways.

In any psychology class they will tell you there are two types of aggression, physical and relational. When only considering physical aggression men are far more frequent, but when factoring in relational aggression it's basically the same. So there may be no actual difference in aggressive tenancies at all between genders, just how each expresses them.

Whatever the reasoning or pattern is though, it doesn't take away from the fact that just because someone is male or female, that they will act a certain way in a certain situation by virtue of what they were born with between their legs. You can't blanket a whole group of people as such. It's okay to keep generalizations in mind of course, but applying them to every member of a group you shouldn't, I think.

 

[BlueDays]

Men do commit more violent acts, no doubt. Statistics back that up.

However, I don't think casting an umbrella over everyone is entirely fair. "Most violent acts are committed by men...therefore ALL men are violent."

"One woman is not fit for American presidency...therefore ALL women are unfit."

As VJ said, it's all down to the individual, not blanketing the whole gender.

:thumbup:

I'm not going to go against science and say that testosterone has nothing to do with aggressive behavior, of course it does. It's hardly the sole factor in aggressive behavior though. Men with high levels of it aren't destined to act aggressively, nor are females with very low levels of it immune to aggressive tendencies. It could be the reason why we see more violent and aggressive behavior in men rather than women, OR it could be that women are aggressive in different ways.

In any psychology class they will tell you there are two types of aggression, physical and relational. When only considering physical aggression men are far more frequent, but when factoring in relational aggression it's basically the same. So there may be no actual difference in aggressive tenancies at all between genders, just how each expresses them.

Whatever the reasoning or pattern is though, it doesn't take away from the fact that just because someone is male or female, that they will act a certain way in a certain situation by virtue of what they were born with between their legs. You can't blanket a whole group of people as such. It's okay to keep generalizations in mind of course, but applying them to every member of a group you shouldn't, I think.

:thumbup:

 

[Opaline]

Hmm, okay fair enough.

 

[JackOfSpades]

It's okay to keep generalizations in mind of course, but applying them to every member of a group you shouldn't, I think.

In my opinion Oceanmist and Opaline have been doing just that, and only keeping them in mind.

Nobody has said every man or woman, as far as I know. And the fact of the matter is there are tendencies to each gender, which I think you're agreeing on. Anyone can be qualified to do a job, but never are you going to have a complete psych profile available to you of each individual person, so gender is going to be a factor, and a tie breaker at times.

 

[vj288]

In my opinion Oceanmist and Opaline have been doing just that, and only keeping them in mind.

Nobody has said every man or woman, as far as I know. And the fact of the matter is there are tendencies to each gender, which I think you're agreeing on. Anyone can be qualified to do a job, but never are you going to have a complete psych profile available to you of each individual person, so gender is going to be a factor, and a tie breaker at times.

Well, yes I concede correlation, but not that the tenancies are caused solely by their anatomic state, or possibly at all. I do agree with some of what Opaline has said, and is making valid and acceptable points. I just don't think gender(or the more accurate term I should be using is "sex") alone is an important distinction between two people. Aggressiveness, or that "killer instinct" may be an important quality to some come election time. When looking at the two candidates, deciding whether or not they have a killer instinct could take into consideration their genders tenancies, but when it comes down to it, it looking at whether or not they have the quality. Lot's of women do have it, and lot's of men don't (I don't). Saying because she's a women she doesn't have the quality, that's a bad generalization in my opinion. That's all I was trying to say, that being a man or women is not the cause of having the quality.