[quote]sexism[/quote]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/Reactions/titanicgif12.gif[/img]
I havent posted this in ages.
[QUOTE=Giga King;34039438]True men could vote and learn and whatever, I dont think that means that they should therefore be thrust into situations in which their chance of leaving uninjured or even alive is incredibly low.
Men hold the door open for women because it's normally considered polite, if you have a problem with it then you should tell the people around you. As for men paying for things in my opinion this is predominantly due to the fact that he wants you to be happy, we believe it's a nice thing to do, it doesn't mean much but if it saves you some money and you get something free out of it you probably shouldn't be complaining or once again you should bring up this concern with those around you.
You state that women are naturally weaker so the standards for fitness should differ between genders but this raises issues.
Some men aren't naturally stronger, and so by reinforcing this point that men are naturally stronger is in my opinion sexist. I would consider it true that men are on an average at a higher level of fitness only for the fact that society places this expectation on men and this concept of an "ideal" level appearance, but you do see women who have comparatively similar levels of fitness, most women avoid this as it doesn't fit with their view of how they should look, most women dont want to look overly muscular.
Let me pose this question, lets say that a man and a woman at the same level of fitness were to take the test and score the same results, would it then be fair to state that the man is less physically fit than the woman?
I would say no but apparently i would be wrong.[/QUOTE]
-I didn't say it was, I said that women were much more repressed throughout history than men were.
-That does not have anything to do with what is being said. the image says chivalry is an example of women being benefited. By your argument, I can call it moot as well because it's just a facet of society.
And women want men to be happy as well, why shouldn't they pay for you? Chivalry removes a woman's independence, it's as if they can't do those things on their own.
-Obviously, we have to speak regarding the entire group, averages only. And yeah, it is sexist. Saying women can't use penises to pee is sexist, too, you aren't going to say it isn't true, though.
And no, men are genetically more propelled for physical prowess, secondary sexual traits and whatnot.
And yeah, yeah he would. I use fit here as a measurement used in the "Poor, good" categorization. If a cripple runs 200 meters in the same time as an army soldier, are they as good as one another? They both have the same physical prowess but you can't simply fix a referential like that.Like saying all humans are insanely small because stars are supremely bigger. If you wish to categorize height, you need to see the deviation regarding the norm.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;34039947]-I didn't say it was, I said that women were much more repressed throughout history than men were.
-That does not have anything to do with what is being said. the image says chivalry is an example of women being benefited. By your argument, I can call it moot as well because it's just a facet of society.
And women want men to be happy as well, why shouldn't they pay for you? Chivalry removes a woman's independence, it's as if they can't do those things on their own.
-Obviously, we have to speak regarding the entire group, averages only. And yeah, it is sexist. Saying women can't use penises to pee is sexist, too, you aren't going to say it isn't true, though.
And no, men are genetically more propelled for physical prowess, secondary sexual traits and whatnot.
And yeah, yeah he would. I use fit here as a measurement used in the "Poor, good" categorization. If a cripple runs 200 meters in the same time as an army soldier, are they as good as one another? They both have the same physical prowess but you can't simply fix a referential like that.Like saying all humans are insanely small because stars are supremely bigger. If you wish to categorize height, you need to see the deviation regarding the norm.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/forums/403[/url]
[QUOTE=Hamburgers;34039899][IMG]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lx1l3eWoX41qcbo9lo1_500.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
That's the exact reason why I ran out screaming when parents took me to Ballet school, showed guys dancing in [I]that[/I] and said [I]"You could be one of them, son."[/I].
No offense to people who like ballet / do ballet, but I personally dislike this kind of dress code.
Hi I'm that guy who posts Horrifying spider stuff.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/EASq3.jpg[/img]
heh... Kill it with fire!
[QUOTE=Hardpoint Nomad;34038913]Oh shit motherfucker it's about to get real.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oFg8LlXyp8[/media]
And the comments are funny too.[/QUOTE]
I got one of those!
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;34039947]-I didn't say it was, I said that women were much more repressed throughout history than men were.
-That does not have anything to do with what is being said. the image says chivalry is an example of women being benefited. By your argument, I can call it moot as well because it's just a facet of society.
And women want men to be happy as well, why shouldn't they pay for you? Chivalry removes a woman's independence, it's as if they can't do those things on their own.
-Obviously, we have to speak regarding the entire group, averages only. And yeah, it is sexist. Saying women can't use penises to pee is sexist, too, you aren't going to say it isn't true, though.
And no, men are genetically more propelled for physical prowess, secondary sexual traits and whatnot.
And yeah, yeah he would. I use fit here as a measurement used in the "Poor, good" categorization. If a cripple runs 200 meters in the same time as an army soldier, are they as good as one another? They both have the same physical prowess but you can't simply fix a referential like that.Like saying all humans are insanely small because stars are supremely bigger. If you wish to categorize height, you need to see the deviation regarding the norm.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/7X13Y.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Gilboron;34039440]- True, but today in countries where both men and women can vote, learn, etc., but where there is still conscription, it is often still only men who [I]have[/I] to "answer the call". This is not in all countries, but still.
- This is obviously not universal, but most girls I know really enjoy chivalry. Chivalry isn't insisting on doing something nice, it's offering to do something nice. If chivalry is annoying and demeaning, you're doing it wrong. I'm sorry, but if you think 'chivalry isn't something nice', you're just actively looking for things to blame on men.
- Women are also naturally mentally more capable, does this mean that we should have different educational standards for men? Not all men are more physically capable than women too, and at that, the biological difference between both in terms of mental or physical capabilities is not as large as is often thought; the physical "superiority" of men that is often observed has more to do with the fact that our society encourages physical activity in boys but discourages it in girls. [B]EDIT:[/B] In addition, equality isn't about treating everybody as if they are the same. It's about holding everybody to the same standards. So in fact, doesn't lowering physical standards for women diminish equality?
I agree that the picture is complete bullshit, though.[/QUOTE]
The mental gap is not nearly as huge as the physical gap, no point in adding tons of bureaucracy.
And chivalry has come a long way in History.
And if equality is truly about same standards, why are women being equal imply them having to try harder?
[QUOTE=Mysterious Mr.E;34040000]Hi I'm that guy who posts Horrifying spider stuff.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/EASq3.jpg[/img]
heh... Kill it with fire![/QUOTE]
The worrying part is that it's burst open at the top.
[QUOTE=gman003-main;34039615]While I won't argue that women are physiologically identical to men, I have heard from relatively-knowledgeable sources that women do have several edges over men, particularly in flexibility and in long-distance running. So while they may bench half as much weight as an equally-healthy man, they can do twice as many reps (or something like that).[/QUOTE]
Well, yes, you're right, I forgot about those. The point still stands, though, just in reverse for those cases. You shouldn't enforce the same standards when their potential isn't the same.
Gentlemen of Facepunch, I bring peace and good content.
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/One%20Stop%20Shop/1325636780672.jpg[/img]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/One%20Stop%20Shop/1325637241632.jpg[/img]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/One%20Stop%20Shop/1325637325738.jpg[/img]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/One%20Stop%20Shop/1325637746510.jpg[/img]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/One%20Stop%20Shop/1325638334938.jpg[/img]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/One%20Stop%20Shop/1325638974847.jpg[/img]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/One%20Stop%20Shop/1325639244107.jpg[/img]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28591597/One%20Stop%20Shop/1325641450486.jpg[/img]
Forgive the mis-spell, this happened at almost 2 in the morning yesterday (Or today..?)
[img]http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/4906/shitonthebeach.png[/img]
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;34040053]Well, yes, you're right, I forgot about those. The point still stands, though, just in reverse for those cases. You shouldn't enforce the same standards when their potential isn't the same.[/QUOTE]
My stock phrase for gender equality issues is "[b]equal but not identical[/b]".
Overall, genders should be held to the same standards. The only time they should be treated differently is when there is a scientifically-proven and innate difference.
There is no scientific evidence of any intellectual differences; both genders should be treated the same intellectually. We should both get the same level of education, and be held to the same educational standards.
While there is scientific evidence of an income imbalance, that is an artificial difference, not a natural one. There is no biological reason for men to earn more. Therefore, laws regarding pay should be gender-blind.
On the other hand, there are obvious biological differences. Women generally have different physical fitness standards, but they also have different physical capabilities [i]that are due primarily due to the actual genetic differences, not cultural or social differences[/i]. So the basic concept of applying different fitness standards is scientifically sound, although specific instances can obviously do it wrong.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;34039947]-I didn't say it was, I said that women were much more repressed throughout history than men were.
-That does not have anything to do with what is being said. the image says chivalry is an example of women being benefited. By your argument, I can call it moot as well because it's just a facet of society.
And women want men to be happy as well, why shouldn't they pay for you? Chivalry removes a woman's independence, it's as if they can't do those things on their own.
-Obviously, we have to speak regarding the entire group, averages only. And yeah, it is sexist. Saying women can't use penises to pee is sexist, too, you aren't going to say it isn't true, though.
And no, men are genetically more propelled for physical prowess, secondary sexual traits and whatnot.
And yeah, yeah he would. I use fit here as a measurement used in the "Poor, good" categorization. If a cripple runs 200 meters in the same time as an army soldier, are they as good as one another? They both have the same physical prowess but you can't simply fix a referential like that.Like saying all humans are insanely small because stars are supremely bigger. If you wish to categorize height, you need to see the deviation regarding the norm.[/QUOTE]
Honestly i don't know where to start here.
-yes women were indeed repressed, now what, what was your point? Is the argument that women had less freedome? maybe that's true, but they were never forced into a situation in which they had no choice but to fight for their country regardless of their own beliefs. I'm not saying i understand the fear and pain these soldiers went through but im damn sure it was pretty bad.
The whole reason i even mention the draft is becuase it is a case in which women did not have to endure the same lack of rights of men. No choice to refuse, no choice to run, no choice but to fight.
In some places this has not been changed so i would say its a pretty good comparison to the lack of voting power, yadayadayada, that women went through.
I'm not saying it's right for men to pay for everything and hold doors and open, i'm saying it's not wrong, the difference being that men don't do it (atleast I believe they don't) becuase they look down on women, they do it becuase It's polite. I don't see the problem.
You have every right to say that women can pay for things and open doors, and i agree, i'm not stopping you, but if a woman holds open a door and then pays for my meal i don't start complaining about how demeaning it is, I'm fucking grateful to have somebody who is willing to do this for me.
Saying women can't use penises to pee isn't sexist, it's fact, and if they really fucking wanted to they could get a sex change and almost do it anyway. Alternatively saying men can't have multiple orgasms isn't sexist.
You seem to lack an understanding of body types and assume that all men are mesomorphs, which is not true and obviously not a choice. The point I'm trying to get across is that there is this misunderstanding that men SHOULD be stronger than women, why? The expectations for men is higher than that for a woman becuase that's what we've been brought up to believe, and yes it does have some throwback to our ancestors.
In your argument you use the example of a cripple. I think thats a pretty stupid example, being a woman isn't a dissability unless you want to claim it is and through womans rights back a few years.
Lets look at things from a slightly different angle. You talk about the norm but what i'm saying is the norm is unfairly high for men, why is it that a man should be considered physically unfit when he is at the same level as a woman who is considered average?
There are genetic differences in men and woman that affect quite a huge amount of things, but the one thing i don't think it should effect as a result of that is what we expect from both genders. if you want equality start treating people equally.
How the hell is that tequilla?
[release][h2]SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT GENDER EQUALITY FOR FUCKS FUCKING SAKE WE HAVE MASS DEBATE FOR A REASON[/h2][/release]
[QUOTE=Giga King;34040322]Honestly i don't know where to start here.
-yes women were indeed repressed, now what, what was your point? Is the argument that women had less freedome? maybe that's true, but they were never forced into a situation in which they had no choice but to fight for their country regardless of their own beliefs. I'm not saying i understand the fear and pain these soldiers went through but im damn it was pretty bad.
The whole reason i even mention the draft is becuase it is a case in which women did not have to endure the same lack of rights of men. No choice to refuse, no choice to run, no choice but to fight.
In some places this has not been changed so i would say its a pretty good comparison to the lack of voting power, yadayadayada, that women went through.
I'm not saying it's right for men to pay for everything and hold doors and open, i'm saying it's not wrong, the difference being that men don't do it (atleast I believe they don't) becuase they look down on women, they do it becuase It's polite. I don't see the problem.
You have every right to say that women can pay for things and open doors, and i agree, i'm not stopping you, but if a woman holds open a door and then pays for my meal i don't start complaining about how demeaning it is, I'm fucking grateful to have somebody who is willing to do this for me.
Saying women can't use penises to pee isn't sexist, it's fact, and if they really fucking wanted to they could get a sex change and almost do it anyway. Alternatively saying men can't have multiple orgasms isn't sexist.
You seem to lack an understanding of body types and assume that all men are mesomorphs, which is not true and obviously not a choice. The point I'm trying to get across is that there is this misunderstanding that men SHOULD be stronger than women, why? The expectations for men is higher than that for a woman becuase that's what we've been brought up to believe, and yes it does have some throwback to our ancestors.
In your argument you use the example of a cripple. I think thats a pretty stupid example, being a woman isn't a dissability unless you want to claim it is and through womans rights back a few years.
Lets look at things from a slightly different angle. You talk about the norm but what i'm saying is the norm is unfairly high for men, why is it that a man should be considered physically unfit when he is at the same level as a woman who is considered average?
There are genetic differences in men and woman that affect quite a huge amount of things, but the one thing i don't think it should effect as a result of that is what we expect from both genders. if you want equality start treating people equally.[/QUOTE]
Do I really need to post this again
[img]http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t157/outlaw2000/2rejpsz.jpg[/img]
All deez wurds make my head hurt
[video=youtube;JB17m79SBdg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB17m79SBdg&feature=g-all-lik&context=G2be4360FAAAAAAAACAA[/video]
[QUOTE=PN_Redux;34039587]Nope its possible
[video=youtube;Ws6AAhTw7RA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA[/video]
here have more
[video=youtube;6lmtbLu5nxw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=6lmtbLu5nxw[/video][/QUOTE]
One step closer...
[img]http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/f-zero-gx-1.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=FreakySoup;34040363]Do I really need to post this again
[img]http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t157/outlaw2000/2rejpsz.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Yes I do because I need to show how my opinion and resolutions toward a certain issue to convince a few anonymous forum users in a funny pictures thread because that is going to [b]HELP[/b] the fucking [b]WORLD'S ISSUES SO FUCKING MUCH[/b]
[QUOTE=Mysterious Mr.E;34040000]Hi I'm that guy who posts Horrifying spider stuff.
picture
heh... Kill it with fire![/QUOTE]
What is that? An owl?
[QUOTE=iwork3daysaweek;34040427]Yes I do because I need to show how my opinion and resolutions toward a certain issue to convince a few anonymous forum users in a funny pictures thread because that is going to [b]HELP[/b] the fucking [b]WORLD'S ISSUES SO FUCKING MUCH[/b][/QUOTE]
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/44722719/Opinion.gif[/img]
[QUOTE=FreakySoup;34039784]Hey guys, remember the shitloads of content I posted in the last couple of pages?
They're all from LMAO Pics v.13. :v:[/QUOTE]I steal from LMAO Pics v.1 all the time. No one remembers anything from that thread except the first picture.
[QUOTE=Giga King;34040322]Honestly i don't know where to start here.
-yes women were indeed repressed, now what, what was your point? Is the argument that women had less freedome? maybe that's true, but they were never forced into a situation in which they had no choice but to fight for their country regardless of their own beliefs. I'm not saying i understand the fear and pain these soldiers went through but im damn sure it was pretty bad.
The whole reason i even mention the draft is becuase it is a case in which women did not have to endure the same lack of rights of men. No choice to refuse, no choice to run, no choice but to fight.
In some places this has not been changed so i would say its a pretty good comparison to the lack of voting power, yadayadayada, that women went through.
I'm not saying it's right for men to pay for everything and hold doors and open, i'm saying it's not wrong, the difference being that men don't do it (atleast I believe they don't) becuase they look down on women, they do it becuase It's polite. I don't see the problem.
You have every right to say that women can pay for things and open doors, and i agree, i'm not stopping you, but if a woman holds open a door and then pays for my meal i don't start complaining about how demeaning it is, I'm fucking grateful to have somebody who is willing to do this for me.
Saying women can't use penises to pee isn't sexist, it's fact, and if they really fucking wanted to they could get a sex change and almost do it anyway. Alternatively saying men can't have multiple orgasms isn't sexist.
You seem to lack an understanding of body types and assume that all men are mesomorphs, which is not true and obviously not a choice. The point I'm trying to get across is that there is this misunderstanding that men SHOULD be stronger than women, why? The expectations for men is higher than that for a woman becuase that's what we've been brought up to believe, and yes it does have some throwback to our ancestors.
In your argument you use the example of a cripple. I think thats a pretty stupid example, being a woman isn't a dissability unless you want to claim it is and through womans rights back a few years.
Lets look at things from a slightly different angle. You talk about the norm but what i'm saying is the norm is unfairly high for men, why is it that a man should be considered physically unfit when he is at the same level as a woman who is considered average?
There are genetic differences in men and woman that affect quite a huge amount of things, but the one thing i don't think it should effect as a result of that is what we expect from both genders. if you want equality start treating people equally.[/QUOTE]
My point is women were just as repressed if not more throughout History. Remember that my original attack was on the picture, not your argument.
In a few decades back, women wearing pants were considered impolite. The point is: politeness is what society likes, regardless of whether it's right or not. And it's not so much the action as the expectation that women should enjoy this. (Fuck, it's bad for both genders).
Yeah, it is: "Sexism, also known as gender discrimination or sex discrimination, is the application of the false belief that there are characteristics implicit to one's gender that indirectly affect one's abilities in unrelated areas. "
Women's lack of a penis affects their ability to use penises.
I know the distinction between mesomorph, ectomorph and endomorph. What i'm saying is that when you're looking at a group, you look at the characteristics of the group, not of this element, and that one and that one to the left.
Expectations for men are higher because men can do more.
In males, testosterone directly increases size and mass of muscles, vocal cords, and bones, deepening the voice, and changing the shape of the face and skeleton. Converted into DHT in the skin, it accelerates growth of androgen-responsive facial and body hair, but may slow and eventually stop the growth of head hair. Taller stature is largely a result of later puberty and slower epiphyseal fusion.
In females, breasts are a manifestation of higher levels of estrogen; estrogen also widens the pelvis and increases the amount of body fat in hips, thighs, buttocks, and breasts. Estrogen also induces growth of the uterus, proliferation of the endometrium, and menses.
Why the hell would that matter? One has shit potential, the other has great potential. One does the same as the other, the one with meager potential is fitter.
For the same damn reason you don't consider a 2-year-old that can do sums and divisions a shit-for-brains because most people can do more than him.
[editline]4th January 2012[/editline]
I must never back down from an argument lest I am put back in the lamp. it is my curse.
Hey, people discussing this, shut up and post funny things.
[i]Shut.[/i]
[i]Up.[/i]
[QUOTE=iwork3daysaweek;34040427]Yes I do because I need to show how my opinion and resolutions toward a certain issue to convince a few anonymous forum users in a funny pictures thread because that is going to [b]HELP[/b] the fucking [b]WORLD'S ISSUES SO FUCKING MUCH[/b][/QUOTE]
I understand the joke and all that, but I'd like to bring up this point; if arguing on the internet is dumb because it doesn't change anything, then isn't arguing with a friend/coworker/colleague/family member/etc. just as retarded? Even if you win, the world keeps spinning exactly how it was.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;34040514]My point is women were just as repressed if not more throughout History. Remember that my original attack was on the picture, not your argument.
In a few decades back, women wearing pants were considered impolite. The point is: politeness is what society likes, regardless of whether it's right or not. And it's not so much the action as the expectation that women should enjoy this. (Fuck, it's bad for both genders).
Yeah, it is: "Sexism, also known as gender discrimination or sex discrimination, is the application of the false belief that there are characteristics implicit to one's gender that indirectly affect one's abilities in unrelated areas. "
Women's lack of a penis affects their ability to use penises.
I know the distinction between mesomorph, ectomorph and endomorph. What i'm saying is that when you're looking at a group, you look at the characteristics of the group, not of this element, and that one and that one to the left.
Expectations for men are higher because men can do more.
In males, testosterone directly increases size and mass of muscles, vocal cords, and bones, deepening the voice, and changing the shape of the face and skeleton. Converted into DHT in the skin, it accelerates growth of androgen-responsive facial and body hair, but may slow and eventually stop the growth of head hair. Taller stature is largely a result of later puberty and slower epiphyseal fusion.
In females, breasts are a manifestation of higher levels of estrogen; estrogen also widens the pelvis and increases the amount of body fat in hips, thighs, buttocks, and breasts. Estrogen also induces growth of the uterus, proliferation of the endometrium, and menses.
Why the hell would that matter? One has shit potential, the other has great potential. One does the same as the other, the one with meager potential is fitter.
For the same damn reason you don't consider a 2-year-old that can do sums and divisions a shit-for-brains because most people can do more than him.
[editline]4th January 2012[/editline]
I must never back down from an argument lest I am put back in the lamp. it is my curse.[/QUOTE]
I do like your arguments, they are well thought out and interesting but i don't think people are appreciating this so i'm just gunna say: yes you have a point but i disagree with some of that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
