Total Posts:41|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Gender Inequality is Best for Society

Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2016 12:29:38 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
The problem with society today is that it fails recognize the difference in nature between men and women. We are not the same on a psychological and emotional level. Men by nature are less sensitive and more inclined to fight. This is the difference between the genders and the basis as to why we attract to each other. It is this recognized difference that not only secures the bond between the genders but this recognition is what is best for the family and society. The realization that we are different.

The problem with society today is that this fundamental difference is being lost. However, it does recognize it in a hypocritical way. Such as the claims that men and women are equal and a woman can do what men can do. Yet we still see segregation in combative sports, such as boxing and football, etc. Where are the feminine groups saying "let's not segregate the sports and let women fight men"?. If women should be allowed to dress how they please and there is no difference in the sexual nature of attraction in men and women then let's stop having male and female public bathrooms. Let's all go to one bathroom and the same public dressing rooms.

It's a failure to recognize the difference in nature and the hypocritical approach to address it in today's society that is causing such detrimental practices like homosexuality, transgenders, feminism, women dressing in revealing clothing that flaunts their curves, and the failure to even distinguish the difference between love and lust.

Until we as a society recognize the difference in nature between males and females in human beings, then we will continue to move backwards as a society and fail to progress to a better loving and peaceful society where everyone is treated in a fair and reasonable manner.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2016 10:00:40 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
For the feminists, why are the rights you seek so hard to achieve if you claim that men and women are the same and equal? If you are fighting one that is equal with you in strength, then the fight should have been over by now. Doesn't the fact that you are still fighting proof and cannot achieve any rights without the support of some men in power proof enough that men and women are not equal?
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 1:42:12 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 10:00:40 PM, Fatihah wrote:
For the feminists, why are the rights you seek so hard to achieve if you claim that men and women are the same and equal? If you are fighting one that is equal with you in strength, then the fight should have been over by now. Doesn't the fact that you are still fighting proof and cannot achieve any rights without the support of some men in power proof enough that men and women are not equal?

Personally I fight to show that I'm a strong woman, because despite the fact that I have all the domestic skills needed to make a home comfortable, and I've maintained my attractiveness throughout my adult hood, men still lust over other women, and seldom value a good woman who is loyal enough to quit lusting.

So I've declared war, and took a job maintaining lawns, that requires physical stamina and endurance strength. The thing is, I do the job using the skills I acquired as a mom and homemaker. Skills where my endurance actually beats all the guys on the crew (even guys half my age), showing that woman may be weaker when it comes to brute strength, but we are actually stronger when it comes to endurance that requires stamina.

I advocate for women to show their strength, and not submit to men who don't value them.
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 4:49:07 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
First, gender-based behavioral differences are way too small to justify treating the genders differently.

Second, behavioral differences between the genders is not the reason for opposite-sex attraction- that has more to do with sex (decided by chromosomes) than gender (based on neurology. Further, homosexuality also exists- and it isn't a choice, if you're going to bring that up.

Third, categorizing gender actually has some harms. Harassment of transgender individuals is a perfect example. There's also homophobia rampant within society, with "traditional" definitions of marriage causing psychological harms to those who are merely attracted to people of the same sex/gender. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu...
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 4:52:08 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 10:00:40 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Doesn't the fact that you are still fighting proof and cannot achieve any rights without the support of some men in power proof enough that men and women are not equal?

This makes no sense whatsoever- the reason for feminism initially needing the support of men was that men created the system. It's the same reason that civil rights movements for African-Americans often had the support of whites. It has nothing to do with "equality," and more to do with the fact that men created the patriarchal system and were needed to defy it. That isn't the case anymore in most parts of the developed world.

The sole evidence for neurology-influenced behavioral differences between men and women lies in studies on chimpanzees, and other studies with small sample size. The research suggests that the behavioral difference is very slight- not enough to reinforce traditional gender roles.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 9:11:28 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 5/29/2016 10:00:40 PM, Fatihah wrote:
For the feminists, why are the rights you seek so hard to achieve if you claim that men and women are the same and equal? If you are fighting one that is equal with you in strength, then the fight should have been over by now. Doesn't the fact that you are still fighting proof and cannot achieve any rights without the support of some men in power proof enough that men and women are not equal?

Personally I fight to show that I'm a strong woman, because despite the fact that I have all the domestic skills needed to make a home comfortable, and I've maintained my attractiveness throughout my adult hood, men still lust over other women, and seldom value a good woman who is loyal enough to quit lusting.

So I've declared war, and took a job maintaining lawns, that requires physical stamina and endurance strength. The thing is, I do the job using the skills I acquired as a mom and homemaker. Skills where my endurance actually beats all the guys on the crew (even guys half my age), showing that woman may be weaker when it comes to brute strength, but we are actually stronger when it comes to endurance that requires stamina.

I advocate for women to show their strength, and not submit to men who don't value them.

Response: Fair enough. I accept and support women who want to show that that are strong and intelligent and do not want to be discriminated against because they are women. However, when women say they are equal in strength as men, that is something I believe is pushing the limit, as men and women are different and nor equal in strength.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 9:20:05 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 4:52:08 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/29/2016 10:00:40 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Doesn't the fact that you are still fighting proof and cannot achieve any rights without the support of some men in power proof enough that men and women are not equal?

This makes no sense whatsoever- the reason for feminism initially needing the support of men was that men created the system. It's the same reason that civil rights movements for African-Americans often had the support of whites. It has nothing to do with "equality," and more to do with the fact that men created the patriarchal system and were needed to defy it. That isn't the case anymore in most parts of the developed world.

The sole evidence for neurology-influenced behavioral differences between men and women lies in studies on chimpanzees, and other studies with small sample size. The research suggests that the behavioral difference is very slight- not enough to reinforce traditional gender roles.

Response: Not at all. African-American did not need the support of whites. The whites needed their support because blacks were uniting and becoming self-sufficient and creating nationalism. That meant in order for whites to remain in power, they needed to work with African-Americans. So blacks did not depend on whites. Whites depended on blacks.

As for science, when you begin to support boxing in which men fight women, or set up a gang of women to fight men in which the women win, then your point remains invalid and shows that women by nature are not equal in strength with men.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 9:39:45 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 4:49:07 AM, tejretics wrote:
First, gender-based behavioral differences are way too small to justify treating the genders differently.

Second, behavioral differences between the genders is not the reason for opposite-sex attraction- that has more to do with sex (decided by chromosomes) than gender (based on neurology. Further, homosexuality also exists- and it isn't a choice, if you're going to bring that up.

Third, categorizing gender actually has some harms. Harassment of transgender individuals is a perfect example. There's also homophobia rampant within society, with "traditional" definitions of marriage causing psychological harms to those who are merely attracted to people of the same sex/gender. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu...

Response: The reason behind homosexual sex is lust. Not love. So while attraction is not a choice, the act of sex is still a choice. So homosexual sex is wrong because it is based on lust. Not love. By lust, I mean the idea of showing affection with the intent to receive affection in return. Not love, which is the concept of showing affection with the intent to make the other happy.

Now if you suggest otherwise and claim that homosexual sex is not based on lust, then tell us what is the difference in nature between men and women that makes homosexuals love the same sex sexually but not the opposite sex? Your own answer will show that the difference is lust.

As for the rest, classification of gender is not harmful. People deciding to be harmful does not make the idea of classification harmful. If I call someone a woman, there is no harm in that. Last, gender-based behavior differences, whether small or large, does not change the fact that there is a difference. Therefore, men and women are not equal and should be treated based on the differences.
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 2:16:05 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 9:11:28 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 5/29/2016 10:00:40 PM, Fatihah wrote:
For the feminists, why are the rights you seek so hard to achieve if you claim that men and women are the same and equal? If you are fighting one that is equal with you in strength, then the fight should have been over by now. Doesn't the fact that you are still fighting proof and cannot achieve any rights without the support of some men in power proof enough that men and women are not equal?

Personally I fight to show that I'm a strong woman, because despite the fact that I have all the domestic skills needed to make a home comfortable, and I've maintained my attractiveness throughout my adult hood, men still lust over other women, and seldom value a good woman who is loyal enough to quit lusting.

So I've declared war, and took a job maintaining lawns, that requires physical stamina and endurance strength. The thing is, I do the job using the skills I acquired as a mom and homemaker. Skills where my endurance actually beats all the guys on the crew (even guys half my age), showing that woman may be weaker when it comes to brute strength, but we are actually stronger when it comes to endurance that requires stamina.

I advocate for women to show their strength, and not submit to men who don't value them.

Response: Fair enough. I accept and support women who want to show that that are strong and intelligent and do not want to be discriminated against because they are women. However, when women say they are equal in strength as men, that is something I believe is pushing the limit, as men and women are different and nor equal in strength.

It all depends on how you define strength, is the reason that I am pushing myself in a job dominated by males , . . .and . . .winning! Strength to lift heavy equipment on and off of the truck, I'm a little slower, but by using my brain, have figured out to use leverage and balance with gravity, to perform the tasks without injury, a little slower and more carefully than the men do that task.

I also lift and carry 50 lb bags of fertilizer to different locations on a large property so the person who is fertilizing doesn't need to walk back to the truck. I psyche myself into carrying the dead weight bags, by recalling all the times I carried my kids from the couch to their bed when they were 50 lbs and had fallen asleep watching tv.

Push mowing around trees and on hills where the Torro riders can't reach, I can mow indefinitely, and I mow all the hardest spots that the other 2 mowers avoid. My endurance strength is twice of my co workers. Let me remind you that I'm 46, 5'3', and 115 lbs, my mower weight close to my weight - lol. I simply recall all the times I kept up with my kids at the park, and up and down the sidewalks, when they were little.

I'm a single mom, and learned to be strong from doing household tasks that a man usually does. I also have all the feminine qualities and skills usually associated with my gender. As soon as I learned not to depend on a man, I was liberated from having to put up with the double standard men express.

What I mean is that when a man is needed to to household tasks, he holds it over a woman's head, that she is weaker, and uses the completion of those tasks to justify his mistreatment of her. I am liberated from having to bite my tongue to get my man to do things he should be doing out of equality for doing tasks. I am liberated from having to use sex as leverage to get my man to do some task - I have sex when I want to, which is when I'm treated right. I am liberated from having to have sex out of obligation. If he wishes to fill his mind with pornographic images, he is liberated to relieve himself, and miss out on the tenderness that I offer, when I'm the only one he desires.

What I'm trying to say is that I would have gladly used all my skills and strength to serve my family, and not try to compete to try to show him how strong that I actually am, but many guys take women like me for granted.
Cinnamon153
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 4:08:42 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 12:29:38 PM, Fatihah wrote:
The problem with society today is that it fails recognize the difference in nature between men and women. We are not the same on a psychological and emotional level. Men by nature are less sensitive and more inclined to fight. This is the difference between the genders and the basis as to why we attract to each other. It is this recognized difference that not only secures the bond between the genders but this recognition is what is best for the family and society. The realization that we are different.

The problem with society today is that this fundamental difference is being lost. However, it does recognize it in a hypocritical way. Such as the claims that men and women are equal and a woman can do what men can do. Yet we still see segregation in combative sports, such as boxing and football, etc. Where are the feminine groups saying "let's not segregate the sports and let women fight men"?. If women should be allowed to dress how they please and there is no difference in the sexual nature of attraction in men and women then let's stop having male and female public bathrooms. Let's all go to one bathroom and the same public dressing rooms.

It's a failure to recognize the difference in nature and the hypocritical approach to address it in today's society that is causing such detrimental practices like homosexuality, transgenders, feminism, women dressing in revealing clothing that flaunts their curves, and the failure to even distinguish the difference between love and lust.

Until we as a society recognize the difference in nature between males and females in human beings, then we will continue to move backwards as a society and fail to progress to a better loving and peaceful society where everyone is treated in a fair and reasonable manner.

What are you basing your statements off of? Several sociological and psychological studies have been done that refute what you say. The differences between gender are largely human delusions that we carry forward because we teach gender differences to children who then teach those delusions to their children. The only real difference between women and men are the physiological differences such as different sex organs, varying hormone levels, muscle/fat ratios, etc. From a psychological perspective, we are so similar that any differences can be attributed to the uniqueness of a personality (as opposed to being a cause of that person's gender). More and more studies are showing that men are actually more susceptible to emotional stimuli than women are, men are just taught from an early age that it is not acceptable to show what they are feeling; one hypothesis is that men are more susceptible because they actively fight against perceived negative emotions which causes an over-reaction to stimuli associated with those emotions (which causes more pent up and unresolved emotion).
The true problem with society is that there are too many people who feel they have a right to dictate how other people should live their lives. If everyone just focused on living their own life the way they choose instead of sitting in judgement over everyone else's life, we'd probably see an abundance of tolerance and compassion in society.
We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another.
Peepette
Posts: 1,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 5:02:42 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 5/29/2016 10:00:40 PM, Fatihah wrote:
For the feminists, why are the rights you seek so hard to achieve if you claim that men and women are the same and equal? If you are fighting one that is equal with you in strength, then the fight should have been over by now. Doesn't the fact that you are still fighting proof and cannot achieve any rights without the support of some men in power proof enough that men and women are not equal?

Personally I fight to show that I'm a strong woman, because despite the fact that I have all the domestic skills needed to make a home comfortable, and I've maintained my attractiveness throughout my adult hood, men still lust over other women, and seldom value a good woman who is loyal enough to quit lusting.

So I've declared war, and took a job maintaining lawns, that requires physical stamina and endurance strength. The thing is, I do the job using the skills I acquired as a mom and homemaker. Skills where my endurance actually beats all the guys on the crew (even guys half my age), showing that woman may be weaker when it comes to brute strength, but we are actually stronger when it comes to endurance that requires stamina.

I advocate for women to show their strength, and not submit to men who don't value them.

+1
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2016 6:44:47 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 2:16:05 PM, Emmarie wrote:

It all depends on how you define strength, is the reason that I am pushing myself in a job dominated by males , . . .and . . .winning! Strength to lift heavy equipment on and off of the truck, I'm a little slower, but by using my brain, have figured out to use leverage and balance with gravity, to perform the tasks without injury, a little slower and more carefully than the men do that task.

I also lift and carry 50 lb bags of fertilizer to different locations on a large property so the person who is fertilizing doesn't need to walk back to the truck. I psyche myself into carrying the dead weight bags, by recalling all the times I carried my kids from the couch to their bed when they were 50 lbs and had fallen asleep watching tv.

Push mowing around trees and on hills where the Torro riders can't reach, I can mow indefinitely, and I mow all the hardest spots that the other 2 mowers avoid. My endurance strength is twice of my co workers. Let me remind you that I'm 46, 5'3', and 115 lbs, my mower weight close to my weight - lol. I simply recall all the times I kept up with my kids at the park, and up and down the sidewalks, when they were little.

I'm a single mom, and learned to be strong from doing household tasks that a man usually does. I also have all the feminine qualities and skills usually associated with my gender. As soon as I learned not to depend on a man, I was liberated from having to put up with the double standard men express.

What I mean is that when a man is needed to to household tasks, he holds it over a woman's head, that she is weaker, and uses the completion of those tasks to justify his mistreatment of her. I am liberated from having to bite my tongue to get my man to do things he should be doing out of equality for doing tasks. I am liberated from having to use sex as leverage to get my man to do some task - I have sex when I want to, which is when I'm treated right. I am liberated from having to have sex out of obligation. If he wishes to fill his mind with pornographic images, he is liberated to relieve himself, and miss out on the tenderness that I offer, when I'm the only one he desires.

What I'm trying to say is that I would have gladly used all my skills and strength to serve my family, and not try to compete to try to show him how strong that I actually am, but many guys take women like me for granted.

Response: Well, I must say that I applaud your strength. A woman like you is seldom seen. You seem to be very self-sufficient and a true man would appreciate it.
bhakun
Posts: 231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 1:41:26 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 9:39:45 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Therefore, men and women are not equal and should be treated based on the differences.

I never understand the reasoning behind anti-feminists like you.

One day, you say that men and women are equal and so should be treated differently, and then the next day you are complaining that women get special privileges from society.
"We must rapidly begin the shift from a "thing-oriented" society to a "person-oriented" society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered." -MLK Jr
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 7:30:38 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 4:08:42 PM, Cinnamon153 wrote:

What are you basing your statements off of? Several sociological and psychological studies have been done that refute what you say. The differences between gender are largely human delusions that we carry forward because we teach gender differences to children who then teach those delusions to their children. The only real difference between women and men are the physiological differences such as different sex organs, varying hormone levels, muscle/fat ratios, etc. From a psychological perspective, we are so similar that any differences can be attributed to the uniqueness of a personality (as opposed to being a cause of that person's gender). More and more studies are showing that men are actually more susceptible to emotional stimuli than women are, men are just taught from an early age that it is not acceptable to show what they are feeling; one hypothesis is that men are more susceptible because they actively fight against perceived negative emotions which causes an over-reaction to stimuli associated with those emotions (which causes more pent up and unresolved emotion).
The true problem with society is that there are too many people who feel they have a right to dictate how other people should live their lives. If everyone just focused on living their own life the way they choose instead of sitting in judgement over everyone else's life, we'd probably see an abundance of tolerance and compassion in society.

Response: The claim or belief that there is no emotional or psychological difference between the genders is where the delusion lies. In fact, it is one of the most delusional claims a person can believe. It is not even possible to live your daily life and honestly come to a conclusion that there is no difference.

But since you insist on accepting otherwise, then you should be able to provide observable evidence yourself to back your claim. It is a fact that at no time in history has there ever been oppression of men by women. That alone is proof that men are less sensitive and more inclined to fight than women.

Now why don't you get a few average men to go into a ring and fight some well trained women of the same size and stature? Let's see who will win. Until then, your argument remains refuted.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 7:35:00 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 1:41:26 AM, bhakun wrote:

I never understand the reasoning behind anti-feminists like you.

One day, you say that men and women are equal and so should be treated differently, and then the next day you are complaining that women get special privileges from society.

Response: I never made such complaints. My position is that men and women should not be treated equally because we are clearly not equal. We are different and should be treated fairly on the basis on what is different between us.
Cinnamon153
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 4:43:36 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 7:30:38 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/30/2016 4:08:42 PM, Cinnamon153 wrote:

What are you basing your statements off of? Several sociological and psychological studies have been done that refute what you say. The differences between gender are largely human delusions that we carry forward because we teach gender differences to children who then teach those delusions to their children. The only real difference between women and men are the physiological differences such as different sex organs, varying hormone levels, muscle/fat ratios, etc. From a psychological perspective, we are so similar that any differences can be attributed to the uniqueness of a personality (as opposed to being a cause of that person's gender). More and more studies are showing that men are actually more susceptible to emotional stimuli than women are, men are just taught from an early age that it is not acceptable to show what they are feeling; one hypothesis is that men are more susceptible because they actively fight against perceived negative emotions which causes an over-reaction to stimuli associated with those emotions (which causes more pent up and unresolved emotion).
The true problem with society is that there are too many people who feel they have a right to dictate how other people should live their lives. If everyone just focused on living their own life the way they choose instead of sitting in judgement over everyone else's life, we'd probably see an abundance of tolerance and compassion in society.

Response: The claim or belief that there is no emotional or psychological difference between the genders is where the delusion lies. In fact, it is one of the most delusional claims a person can believe. It is not even possible to live your daily life and honestly come to a conclusion that there is no difference.

But since you insist on accepting otherwise, then you should be able to provide observable evidence yourself to back your claim. It is a fact that at no time in history has there ever been oppression of men by women. That alone is proof that men are less sensitive and more inclined to fight than women.

Now why don't you get a few average men to go into a ring and fight some well trained women of the same size and stature? Let's see who will win. Until then, your argument remains refuted.

I think that when you read my comment whatever I said angered you because you did not process/comprehend what I wrote. I fully accept (and freely stated) that there are definite physical differences between men and women. But, stating that these physical differences are sufficient reasoning to subjugate half of the human population is ludicrous and based on nothing substantial. It is no different than deciding that all people with brown eyes are stupid and shouldn't be considered human beings. It would be foolish to state that there isn't a physical difference between men and women because anyone with eyes can see those differences. It's absurd to think that a 110 pound woman is going to be able to best a 250 pound man in a boxing ring (although, I suppose it would be possible if she were an expert in martial arts and he had no formal fight training...). And, I'm not entirely sure that I understand how a boxing match between and man and a woman refutes my claim that there isn't sufficient psychological differences between genders....perhaps you could explain that?

You stated that 'It is a fact that at no time in history has there ever been oppression of men by women. That alone is proof that men are less sensitive and more inclined to fight than women. Really? You appear to be one of the few people who are completely naive/ignorant of recent history. The suffragettes must have been completely delusional and the men who finally agreed to change the laws must have been a bunch of idiots! Why would they change laws if women were in fact equal to men in the eyes of the law? By that logic it seem that the country must have been run by a bunch of troglodytes. Nor do I understand how your belief that the subjugation of women has never occurred is proof that men and less sensitive and more prone to violence. But, I'm not sure that it's worth arguing with you because you appear to have a very strong confirmation bias and I won't be able to convince you otherwise. You don't appear to be looking for enlightenment or conversation. Instead your posts seem to be looking for support and confirmation.

Since you requested evidence to my claim that gender, gender roles and gender stereotypes are purely societal inventions, I will provide it. I'm not sure if you have the knowledge required to read and interpret these studies nor am I sure whether you have access to academic libraries, but you should be able to find these studies via google scholar:

Feingold, A. (1994). Gender differences in personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 429-456.

Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139-155.

Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M. & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women's math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4-28.

Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P., (1995). Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 250-270.

Hyde, J. S. (2005). The Gender Similarities Hypothesis. American Psychologist, Vol. 60, No. 6.


Another really great source is a book called "Delusions of Gender", it cites many different studies that have been done throughout the years. The book is written in layman terms and can be easily understood by someone without much knowledge in the subject matter.

But, I do not have a lot of faith that you will read any of the information I have provided because as I stated earlier, you appear to be seeking confirmation of your own beliefs and I don't see any evidence in your posts that you are seeking to challenge your own biases.
We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 6:30:07 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 4:43:36 PM, Cinnamon153 wrote:
At 5/31/2016 7:30:38 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/30/2016 4:08:42 PM, Cinnamon153 wrote:

What are you basing your statements off of? Several sociological and psychological studies have been done that refute what you say. The differences between gender are largely human delusions that we carry forward because we teach gender differences to children who then teach those delusions to their children. The only real difference between women and men are the physiological differences such as different sex organs, varying hormone levels, muscle/fat ratios, etc. From a psychological perspective, we are so similar that any differences can be attributed to the uniqueness of a personality (as opposed to being a cause of that person's gender). More and more studies are showing that men are actually more susceptible to emotional stimuli than women are, men are just taught from an early age that it is not acceptable to show what they are feeling; one hypothesis is that men are more susceptible because they actively fight against perceived negative emotions which causes an over-reaction to stimuli associated with those emotions (which causes more pent up and unresolved emotion).
The true problem with society is that there are too many people who feel they have a right to dictate how other people should live their lives. If everyone just focused on living their own life the way they choose instead of sitting in judgement over everyone else's life, we'd probably see an abundance of tolerance and compassion in society.

Response: The claim or belief that there is no emotional or psychological difference between the genders is where the delusion lies. In fact, it is one of the most delusional claims a person can believe. It is not even possible to live your daily life and honestly come to a conclusion that there is no difference.

But since you insist on accepting otherwise, then you should be able to provide observable evidence yourself to back your claim. It is a fact that at no time in history has there ever been oppression of men by women. That alone is proof that men are less sensitive and more inclined to fight than women.

Now why don't you get a few average men to go into a ring and fight some well trained women of the same size and stature? Let's see who will win. Until then, your argument remains refuted.

I think that when you read my comment whatever I said angered you because you did not process/comprehend what I wrote. I fully accept (and freely stated) that there are definite physical differences between men and women. But, stating that these physical differences are sufficient reasoning to subjugate half of the human population is ludicrous and based on nothing substantial. It is no different than deciding that all people with brown eyes are stupid and shouldn't be considered human beings. It would be foolish to state that there isn't a physical difference between men and women because anyone with eyes can see those differences. It's absurd to think that a 110 pound woman is going to be able to best a 250 pound man in a boxing ring (although, I suppose it would be possible if she were an expert in martial arts and he had no formal fight training...). And, I'm not entirely sure that I understand how a boxing match between and man and a woman refutes my claim that there isn't sufficient psychological differences between genders....perhaps you could explain that?

You stated that 'It is a fact that at no time in history has there ever been oppression of men by women. That alone is proof that men are less sensitive and more inclined to fight than women. Really? You appear to be one of the few people who are completely naive/ignorant of recent history. The suffragettes must have been completely delusional and the men who finally agreed to change the laws must have been a bunch of idiots! Why would they change laws if women were in fact equal to men in the eyes of the law? By that logic it seem that the country must have been run by a bunch of troglodytes. Nor do I understand how your belief that the subjugation of women has never occurred is proof that men and less sensitive and more prone to violence. But, I'm not sure that it's worth arguing with you because you appear to have a very strong confirmation bias and I won't be able to convince you otherwise. You don't appear to be looking for enlightenment or conversation. Instead your posts seem to be looking for support and confirmation.

Since you requested evidence to my claim that gender, gender roles and gender stereotypes are purely societal inventions, I will provide it. I'm not sure if you have the knowledge required to read and interpret these studies nor am I sure whether you have access to academic libraries, but you should be able to find these studies via google scholar:

Feingold, A. (1994). Gender differences in personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 429-456.

Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139-155.

Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M. & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women's math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4-28.

Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P., (1995). Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 250-270.

Hyde, J. S. (2005). The Gender Similarities Hypothesis. American Psychologist, Vol. 60, No. 6.


Another really great source is a book called "Delusions of Gender", it cites many different studies that have been done throughout the years. The book is written in layman terms and can be easily understood by someone without much knowledge in the subject matter.

But, I do not have a lot of faith that you will read any of the information I have provided because as I stated earlier, you appear to be seeking confirmation of your own beliefs and I don't see any evidence in your posts that you are seeking to challenge your own biases.

Response: I said that if you take a group of well trained women who have the same size and strength of men and they fight an average group of men, they will get their behinds whipped. So that is not proof of physical strength because I said they are equal, and the men would still beat the mess out of them. So it also proves that men are more combative and less sensitive.

So clearly you are the one getting upset and emotional since you clearly cannot provide a social experiment that shows otherwise, thus making my point.
Cinnamon153
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 7:21:09 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 6:30:07 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: I said that if you take a group of well trained women who have the same size and strength of men and they fight an average group of men, they will get their behinds whipped. So that is not proof of physical strength because I said they are equal, and the men would still beat the mess out of them. So it also proves that men are more combative and less sensitive.

So clearly you are the one getting upset and emotional since you clearly cannot provide a social experiment that shows otherwise, thus making my point.

Oh no, I'm not upset at all. In order to be offended I would need to hold the offender in high regard and since I don't know you, that just isn't possible.

Your assertion doesn't make sense. If the hypothetical men and women you are putting in a ring to fight are physically equal, statistically the men couldn't overcome the every time, not with all things being equal. And you just writing that the men would always win doesn't make that statement true. Since you've made that assertion and stated it as fact, the burden is on you to provide evidence supporting that statement.

I can tell that you did not bother to read any of those studies. If you had, you should have seen the study that refutes what you are saying. Lightdale and Prentice (1994, which was cited in Hyde (2005)) shows that when people are deindividuated women show more aggression than men. In other words, when gender norms are removed, women show more aggression and men show less. Levels of aggression in men and women are related to the society construct and what is expected of them. In the end, the non-physical differences that are perceived in men and women are societal constructs based on nothing but tradition and they are harmful to both sexes.
We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 8:47:23 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/29/2016 12:29:38 PM, Fatihah wrote:
The problem with society today is that it fails recognize the difference in nature between men and women. We are not the same on a psychological and emotional level. Men by nature are less sensitive and more inclined to fight. This is the difference between the genders and the basis as to why we attract to each other. It is this recognized difference that not only secures the bond between the genders but this recognition is what is best for the family and society. The realization that we are different.

The problem with society today is that this fundamental difference is being lost. However, it does recognize it in a hypocritical way. Such as the claims that men and women are equal and a woman can do what men can do. Yet we still see segregation in combative sports, such as boxing and football, etc. Where are the feminine groups saying "let's not segregate the sports and let women fight men"?. If women should be allowed to dress how they please and there is no difference in the sexual nature of attraction in men and women then let's stop having male and female public bathrooms. Let's all go to one bathroom and the same public dressing rooms.

It's a failure to recognize the difference in nature and the hypocritical approach to address it in today's society that is causing such detrimental practices like homosexuality, transgenders, feminism, women dressing in revealing clothing that flaunts their curves, and the failure to even distinguish the difference between love and lust.

Until we as a society recognize the difference in nature between males and females in human beings, then we will continue to move backwards as a society and fail to progress to a better loving and peaceful society where everyone is treated in a fair and reasonable manner.

I can't help but notice your post has nothing to do with "equal protection under the law", which is sort of the point of equality. No one cares if you can't bench 500 pounds, can raise a kid better, or are more prone to fight or home-make. The point of equality is to be viewed as equal under the law, to be afforded protections and liberties available to any gender. Failing that, its nothing but a long chorus of "I can do anything better than you".
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 9:21:45 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 9:20:05 AM, Fatihah wrote:
As for science, when you begin to support boxing in which men fight women, or set up a gang of women to fight men in which the women win, then your point remains invalid and shows that women by nature are not equal in strength with men.
He's discussing behavioral - not physiological - differences.

At 5/30/2016 9:39:45 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: The reason behind homosexual sex is lust. Not love. So while attraction is not a choice, the act of sex is still a choice. So homosexual sex is wrong because it is based on lust. Not love. By lust, I mean the idea of showing affection with the intent to receive affection in return. Not love, which is the concept of showing affection with the intent to make the other happy.

Now if you suggest otherwise and claim that homosexual sex is not based on lust, then tell us what is the difference in nature between men and women that makes homosexuals love the same sex sexually but not the opposite sex? Your own answer will show that the difference is lust.
So is heterosexual sex, by the same line of reasoning. Not that it should be an issue if you consider it wrong too.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 10:29:00 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 7:21:09 PM, Cinnamon153 wrote:

Your assertion doesn't make sense. If the hypothetical men and women you are putting in a ring to fight are physically equal, statistically the men couldn't overcome the every time, not with all things being equal. And you just writing that the men would always win doesn't make that statement true. Since you've made that assertion and stated it as fact, the burden is on you to provide evidence supporting that statement.

I can tell that you did not bother to read any of those studies. If you had, you should have seen the study that refutes what you are saying. Lightdale and Prentice (1994, which was cited in Hyde (2005)) shows that when people are deindividuated women show more aggression than men. In other words, when gender norms are removed, women show more aggression and men show less. Levels of aggression in men and women are related to the society construct and what is expected of them. In the end, the non-physical differences that are perceived in men and women are societal constructs based on nothing but tradition and they are harmful to both sexes.

Response: It makes perfect sense since you have once again failed to do it. You cannot show any observable evidence of a group of women beating up a group of men who are equal in size and strength. So your own repeated failure to do so shows you have no logical basis to deny the fact that men by nature are less sensitive and more inclined to fight. So your studies remain false, as hearsay is not more credible than firsthand evidence.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 10:33:14 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 8:47:23 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:

I can't help but notice your post has nothing to do with "equal protection under the law", which is sort of the point of equality. No one cares if you can't bench 500 pounds, can raise a kid better, or are more prone to fight or home-make. The point of equality is to be viewed as equal under the law, to be afforded protections and liberties available to any gender. Failing that, its nothing but a long chorus of "I can do anything better than you".

Response: I can't help but notice that nothing you have stated refutes the fact that men by nature are different from women in that they are physically stronger, less sensitive, and more inclined to fight. So your post remains pointless, thus making my point.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 10:37:52 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 9:21:45 PM, someloser wrote:

He's discussing behavioral - not physiological - differences.

Response: I'm discussing both.

So is heterosexual sex, by the same line of reasoning. Not that it should be an issue if you consider it wrong too.

Response: Yet your inability to answer the question posed supports the contrary. Otherwise, you would be able to answer what is the difference in nature between men and women that makes homosexuals love the same sex sexually but not the opposite sex.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 12:39:12 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 10:33:14 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/31/2016 8:47:23 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:

I can't help but notice your post has nothing to do with "equal protection under the law", which is sort of the point of equality. No one cares if you can't bench 500 pounds, can raise a kid better, or are more prone to fight or home-make. The point of equality is to be viewed as equal under the law, to be afforded protections and liberties available to any gender. Failing that, its nothing but a long chorus of "I can do anything better than you".

Response: I can't help but notice that nothing you have stated refutes the fact that men by nature are different from women in that they are physically stronger, less sensitive, and more inclined to fight. So your post remains pointless, thus making my point.

Which would mean your point has no bearing on anything meaningful. Men and women are different. Gee whilikers, how profound.

If gender inequality is best, how do you propose to enact it? Best for whom? The minority? The majority? Society on the whole, including those that excel opposite their peers despite gender differences? Your position is riddle with potential exception, and no standard of implementation.

Please, get to a conclusion, profundities such as this are as you have astutely observed, pointless.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
Fatihah
Posts: 7,757
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 6:48:36 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 12:39:12 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:

Which would mean your point has no bearing on anything meaningful. Men and women are different. Gee whilikers, how profound.

If gender inequality is best, how do you propose to enact it? Best for whom? The minority? The majority? Society on the whole, including those that excel opposite their peers despite gender differences? Your position is riddle with potential exception, and no standard of implementation.

Please, get to a conclusion, profundities such as this are as you have astutely observed, pointless.

Response: If it's not meaningful and inconclusive, yet you still insist on responding, then clearly your position is the one that is nothing but a pointless ramble. A life is what I prescribe for you.
Cinnamon153
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 3:53:44 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 12:39:12 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 5/31/2016 10:33:14 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/31/2016 8:47:23 PM, FaustianJustice wrote:

I can't help but notice your post has nothing to do with "equal protection under the law", which is sort of the point of equality. No one cares if you can't bench 500 pounds, can raise a kid better, or are more prone to fight or home-make. The point of equality is to be viewed as equal under the law, to be afforded protections and liberties available to any gender. Failing that, its nothing but a long chorus of "I can do anything better than you".

Response: I can't help but notice that nothing you have stated refutes the fact that men by nature are different from women in that they are physically stronger, less sensitive, and more inclined to fight. So your post remains pointless, thus making my point.

Which would mean your point has no bearing on anything meaningful. Men and women are different. Gee whilikers, how profound.

If gender inequality is best, how do you propose to enact it? Best for whom? The minority? The majority? Society on the whole, including those that excel opposite their peers despite gender differences? Your position is riddle with potential exception, and no standard of implementation.

Please, get to a conclusion, profundities such as this are as you have astutely observed, pointless.

You won't be able to have an intellectual conversation with this person....they don't understand what meaningful evidence is and they don't have the ability to back up their points with anything other than "because I said so". I provided them with evidence that there are studies that do refute what they are saying, but it fell on deaf ears. They seem intent on proving that the majority of men can beat up the majority women and believe that it somehow backs up their point (as if that point requires confirmation and is a good thing?). They don't seem to realize that an argument for inequality based on physical traits doesn't hold a lot of water, since I could argue that elephants should be in charge since they obviously are physically stronger than us, LOL :) I mean really, you put an elephant and a man in a ring, the elephant is gonna win every time *sarcasm* :).

They are just looking for someone to agree with them, either that or they enjoy this type of antagonizing conversation. I'm sure that there are better discussions to be found on the forum with an OP who is actually interested in some level of intellectual discourse and has the capacity to make clear, concise and relevant points :).
We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another.
janesix
Posts: 3,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 8:59:36 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/30/2016 9:39:45 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/30/2016 4:49:07 AM, tejretics wrote:
First, gender-based behavioral differences are way too small to justify treating the genders differently.

Second, behavioral differences between the genders is not the reason for opposite-sex attraction- that has more to do with sex (decided by chromosomes) than gender (based on neurology. Further, homosexuality also exists- and it isn't a choice, if you're going to bring that up.

Third, categorizing gender actually has some harms. Harassment of transgender individuals is a perfect example. There's also homophobia rampant within society, with "traditional" definitions of marriage causing psychological harms to those who are merely attracted to people of the same sex/gender. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu...

Response: The reason behind homosexual sex is lust. Not love. So while attraction is not a choice, the act of sex is still a choice. So homosexual sex is wrong because it is based on lust. Not love. By lust, I mean the idea of showing affection with the intent to receive affection in return. Not love, which is the concept of showing affection with the intent to make the other happy.

Now if you suggest otherwise and claim that homosexual sex is not based on lust, then tell us what is the difference in nature between men and women that makes homosexuals love the same sex sexually but not the opposite sex? Your own answer will show that the difference is lust.

As for the rest, classification of gender is not harmful. People deciding to be harmful does not make the idea of classification harmful. If I call someone a woman, there is no harm in that. Last, gender-based behavior differences, whether small or large, does not change the fact that there is a difference. Therefore, men and women are not equal and should be treated based on the differences.

Most sex is based on lust. It's a natural human condition. It's how we propagate the species. It's how any animal propagates it's species. It's not restricted to homosexuals, or men.
janesix
Posts: 3,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 9:02:30 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 7:35:00 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/31/2016 1:41:26 AM, bhakun wrote:

I never understand the reasoning behind anti-feminists like you.

One day, you say that men and women are equal and so should be treated differently, and then the next day you are complaining that women get special privileges from society.

Response: I never made such complaints. My position is that men and women should not be treated equally because we are clearly not equal. We are different and should be treated fairly on the basis on what is different between us.

How do you think women should be treated?
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 10:05:07 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 9:02:30 PM, janesix wrote:
At 5/31/2016 7:35:00 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 5/31/2016 1:41:26 AM, bhakun wrote:

I never understand the reasoning behind anti-feminists like you.

One day, you say that men and women are equal and so should be treated differently, and then the next day you are complaining that women get special privileges from society.

Response: I never made such complaints. My position is that men and women should not be treated equally because we are clearly not equal. We are different and should be treated fairly on the basis on what is different between us.

How do you think women should be treated?

With as much respect and grace as they present upon themselves and others, i.e a whore is treated like a lowlife whore, and a strong, educated, and polite woman is treated with respect and politeness in response.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,237
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/2/2016 2:07:13 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 6:48:36 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 6/1/2016 12:39:12 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:

Which would mean your point has no bearing on anything meaningful. Men and women are different. Gee whilikers, how profound.

If gender inequality is best, how do you propose to enact it? Best for whom? The minority? The majority? Society on the whole, including those that excel opposite their peers despite gender differences? Your position is riddle with potential exception, and no standard of implementation.

Please, get to a conclusion, profundities such as this are as you have astutely observed, pointless.

Response: If it's not meaningful and inconclusive, yet you still insist on responding, then clearly your position is the one that is nothing but a pointless ramble. A life is what I prescribe for you.

So, you don't have a point.

You have been plied with questions about your position, and you have abdicated answering. Your response (well, lack of) is noted.

Thank you for the opinion.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...