Posted on 08/08/2009 4:39:06 PM PDT by GOPGuide
Men and women really are different. The findings of hard science – in endocrinology, brain structure and function and genetics, for instance – have forced rational feminists to admit that, statistically speaking, men and women have different aptitudes, interests and responses, little though this is yet understood. Such generalisations never apply to an individual, of course, and although – for instance – women are underrepresented at the extremes of intelligence and statistically are less good at higher maths, chess, musical composition and physics, any one woman might be brilliant.
Similarly, while women tend in general to be less aggressive and more conciliatory, there are plenty of ferocious females and Wodehouse aunts, and plenty of men who are shrinking violets – with obvious implications for their working lives.
The point here, and it’s another centrally important fact, which feminists either don’t know or refuse to admit, is that you would not therefore necessarily expect men and women to be equally represented in any particular occupation. The fact that just two out of 25 top maths dons or bond traders or gangmasters are men, say, is not self-evidently due to discrimination against women mathematicians, bond traders or gangers (although it may be). And this underlies an obvious killer fact for the politics of equality: equality of opportunity is not the same thing as equality of outcome.
It is a dangerous mistake doggedly to pursue equality of outcome and equal numbers of men and women in everything. The entire basis of the gender equality movement, equality by numbers, stems from an unquestioned and wrong assumption, taken as fact in defiance of the actual truth.
The tragedy of feminism is that it has been dogged, or perhaps I should say bitched, by a lot of fixed ideas and unquestioned beliefs.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
LOL!!!! Talk about a stereotypically female response to an argument...</grin>
It’s the “why bother” you’re made up your mind ... and I have mine ... >grin<
“Women have:
... 45-50% less upper body strength and 25-30% less aerobic capacity, which is essential for endurance...”
True, donna, but don’t we also have much more strength in our thighs than men do? And, because of our higher percentage of body fat, can’t we endure lower temps, like cold water, a bit longer than men?
I really like being a woman. I have talents and abilities that men generally do not have, and happily, I am married to a man who respects these, and listens carefully to me when I exercise them.
Life is just the best when men and women work together as a team, using the unique talents of each to the maximum, and teaching our children to do the same.
And your point, other than braggadocio, is?
“Body size can also affect your cold tolerance. Short, small people have a large surface area-to-body mass ratio. This means that, relative to their size, they have a greater percentage of body in contact with the environment and will absorb cold or heat more quickly. Smaller can be chillier.”
By the way, there is no evidence that women have been exercising that muscle since Feminism replaced morality, LOL.
1) This article was written by a woman 2) So what. How many bar fights have you been in lately?
Speak for yourself. My FIL will thump and smack 100 watermelons to find the best one. It has to do with what you like. He loves cooking and food in general so he will do whatever it takes to find the best.
Every conservative knows that Obama is the real watermelon man:
Green on The Outside – Red on The Inside ...
I theorize that we are designed that way so we can squat to tend to the children, then pick them up, gather those berries and roots, plant the tiny seeds, and pound that grain into flour.
Unfortunately, the military hasn’t thought about creative ways to use our thigh strength.
Any woman who has ever been to the gym will notice how much more we can do with our thighs when a man comes along behind us, and has to adjust the machine to a lower level.
I’m genuinely convinced, after years of reading your posts, that you’re a really angry, misogynistic man with a female poster’s name.
Huh? I was just making a humorous comment about how (most) men like being around lots of women.
We’re on the same side...I think. I despise the misogynists, although I’d rather have them stay in their holes than come out.
Some of us, not unless we are bloody well forced to, luv.
“as men are bad at grammar.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
As women are apt to jump to the wrong conclusion. The author is a woman. Bad at grammar but a woman still.
“More better”?
“Too right!”
I know. I was also being humorous.
I despise the misogynists, although I’d rather have them stay in their holes than come out.
The misogynists are not so bad to be around.
We just want you to:
A) Stay in the kitchen - where you belong - and make cookies (Or BLTs).
B) Look good in a skirt.
C) Not talk back.
D) Wear your hair long.
Is that too much to ask?
no two people are exactly alike and both are very glad about that.
women do have better hand/eye coordination which makes them naturally better at aiming a pistol and hitting the target first try.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.