by Reaperfan Wed Aug 07, 2013 12:27 am- Interesting:
+26
SarahCassandra
Ahhotep1
dancash1808
Hart
KrazykevS10
Sentiel
Encore
Slarg232
reim0027
Animaaal
TheMeInTeam
bunnywink
AnCapaillMor
Forum Pirate
Reaperfan
Carphil
Tolvo
Saturday-Saint
WhatDoesThePendantDo?
nsane32
Emergence
densetsushun
PlasticandRage
FexDS
Serious_Much
skarekrow13
30 posters
Gender Issue Discussion
Reaperfan- Compulsory Poster
- Posts : 3008
Reputation : 135
Join date : 2012-01-17
Age : 33
Location : Canterlot
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
Animaaal wrote:reim0027 wrote:I very much disagree. Many of the men I know are not deserving of those stereotypes.Animaaal wrote:
Men (as a whole) have earned some double-standards and/or stereotypes.
Again MANY.
I cant tell you the difference in statements at almost every funeral home I work at when a beautiful woman is on the embalming table and working with male embalmers as opposed to when I'm working with female embalmers and there is an attractive man on the table.
Its night and day man....makes me sick to my stomach sometimes.
If you guys are really saying that men do not have more problems controlling their sex drives, then look at **** statistics.
This conversation is too politically correct to be correct imo.
***edit***
*r a p e
Ok.
But honestly, what guy isn't going to just tough it out? When a girl gets ****, she's told it's wrong. When a guy gets **** (It does happen) he's told "Doesn't Matter, had Sex".
No guy reports **** because there is something wrong with you as a man if you don't crave sex every minute of every day.
Do women get **** more? Probably. But how much closer would the statistics be if men weren't told to grow a pair and suck it up.
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
Tolvo wrote:Fex I should mention that the situation with backwards gender views in the east is related to political choices rather than religious ones, seventy years ago Muslim cultures were much better towards women, however due to political changes things have gone differently over time. It is because of their politics not their Religious views.
It should be noted that pre-crusade/jihad times, Islamic Society was reportedly less sexist and more open to various other things than America is today.
FexDS- Webmaster
- Posts : 1433
Reputation : 311
Join date : 2012-01-16
Irrelevant to modern application, my point stands
Tolvo- Town Crier
- Posts : 13287
Reputation : 542
Join date : 2012-02-01
Age : 31
Location : The Forest, Illinois
I just don't want it to be a religious thing, Islam is a beautiful religion, in fact in the middle ages as Slarg mentioned they were very gender equal. It wasn't don't kill women and children, it was don't kill civilians. Civilian men were treated the same and given similar care during warfare up until the crusades during which the loss of libraries and other important central areas for information and laws changed the middle east forever.
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
FexDS wrote:Irrelevant to modern application, my point stands
Not so; if we trace back the timeline of the Islamic faith, we would clearly be able to find a set of time in which they devolved into what we are told are over there right now (Which is only if you believe in American Sensationalist News Medias).
Can't understand the future if you don't understand the past.
PlasticandRage- Chosen Undead
- Posts : 5280
Reputation : 123
Join date : 2012-01-27
Age : 41
Location : New York
Tolvo wrote:Fex I should mention that the situation with backwards gender views in the east is related to political choices rather than religious ones, seventy years ago Muslim cultures were much better towards women, however due to political changes things have gone differently over time. It is because of their politics not their Religious views.
I read Persepolis not long ago, which incidentally is a great read if you're interested in any of these topics, on top of just being a really interesting book in general, and the author talks a lot about a certain Shah, whose name I can't remember, taking power when she was a child and enforcing a lot of those old standards, like women having to re-don the body coverings, and how most Iranian women were angry about it but did it anyway because the same political group was shooting people in the streets for disagreeing with their standards. It's my understanding the basis is political, but the political group that enforces these standards does it under the defense of their religious beliefs. So it's actually a little of both for the groups that enforce it and more fear than anything else for the people who actually have to follow it. Or at least that was the case according to this particular woman, and during that time, which would have been some time in the 80s I think.
Really good read in any case. I know you're a reader too. You'd probably like it. Really interesting use of a couple different modes of writing to convey some pretty poignant messages.
FexDS- Webmaster
- Posts : 1433
Reputation : 311
Join date : 2012-01-16
Please reread my post. Your PC attempts are just derailing topic. I never made a statement on Islam as a history. I said repressive muslim societies. You guys are making it about religion by trying to defend a point that wasn't made. My point stands
Tolvo- Town Crier
- Posts : 13287
Reputation : 542
Join date : 2012-02-01
Age : 31
Location : The Forest, Illinois
Yes they covered it with their religion but that was really just a cop out to try and get people to not question them. Again it isn't something that was done for the purpose of their religious views truly, they did it to gain political leverage.
I just don't want to make Islamic people feel unwelcome on this site, I know enough that get flak for their religion from people in the street that just see what they look like. I can't stand when people harp on Islam for the actions of extremists. You don't hear me bashing Christians because of the actions of the KKK.
Alright Fex, it can be hard to tell sometimes because of the use of the word Muslim and how exclusive it can be, without mentioning other repressive societies as well. I'm very used to people just blaming Islam saying it is a hateful religion.
I just don't want to make Islamic people feel unwelcome on this site, I know enough that get flak for their religion from people in the street that just see what they look like. I can't stand when people harp on Islam for the actions of extremists. You don't hear me bashing Christians because of the actions of the KKK.
Alright Fex, it can be hard to tell sometimes because of the use of the word Muslim and how exclusive it can be, without mentioning other repressive societies as well. I'm very used to people just blaming Islam saying it is a hateful religion.
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
Tolvo wrote:You don't hear me bashing Christians because of the actions of the KKK.
Or Westboro.
Tolvo- Town Crier
- Posts : 13287
Reputation : 542
Join date : 2012-02-01
Age : 31
Location : The Forest, Illinois
But yeah the repressive societies over there are atrocious as they are anywhere else. Not being allowed to drive because of your gender is a pretty insane thing.
FexDS- Webmaster
- Posts : 1433
Reputation : 311
Join date : 2012-01-16
This thread is not about religion and your can't stand people bashing x or y is not relevant to this topic. You have derailed the discussion by not reading my post properly. I said repressive muslim society where = any non represive muslim society is not included. How is that hard to see? Now please get back to topic
PlasticandRage- Chosen Undead
- Posts : 5280
Reputation : 123
Join date : 2012-01-27
Age : 41
Location : New York
I wasn't responding to you at all Fex. Just responding/recommending a book to Tolvo. And whoever else wants to read a great book I guess!
Tolvo- Town Crier
- Posts : 13287
Reputation : 542
Join date : 2012-02-01
Age : 31
Location : The Forest, Illinois
I already did and I said I already understand at the bottom of two posts ago.
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
I hate to be that guy, but I have to ask;
Why is it there is no "Female Mother Gene" in Humans, but in Birds, most Fish, Most Mammals, and quite a few reptile species, the mother is the caretaker?
Is that a social construct of those animal species?
What about Lions and Black Widows, where the Mother(s) wear the "Daddy Pants"?
Why is it there is no "Female Mother Gene" in Humans, but in Birds, most Fish, Most Mammals, and quite a few reptile species, the mother is the caretaker?
Is that a social construct of those animal species?
What about Lions and Black Widows, where the Mother(s) wear the "Daddy Pants"?
Tolvo- Town Crier
- Posts : 13287
Reputation : 542
Join date : 2012-02-01
Age : 31
Location : The Forest, Illinois
Not all species are the same, Sea Horses are often carried by males and the "Motherly" role is carried out by the father. We have certain genes related to children, but to my knowledge both genders carry them which prompts humans to care deeply for their children. Some people it isn't as effective, but it is there for most humans to my knowledge.
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
Tolvo wrote:Not all species are the same, Sea Horses are often carried by males and the "Motherly" role is carried out by the father. We have certain genes related to children, but to my knowledge both genders carry them which prompts humans to care deeply for their children. Some people it isn't as effective, but it is there for most humans to my knowledge.
Ok, but why do Sea Horses have "Paternal Mothers" instead of "Maternal Mothers".
Do other Sea Horses tell the Fathers to take care of the children? Or are they programmed that way?
Not as Trolly as it may seem; Do Sea Horses (Or other animals in general) have a social hierarchy, or are they just dumb animals? Do they name their kids?
Tolvo- Town Crier
- Posts : 13287
Reputation : 542
Join date : 2012-02-01
Age : 31
Location : The Forest, Illinois
Their men have pouches for the eggs to be placed in while the females do not, that is pretty much the deciding factor. And I don't believe it is across all sea horse species. It's just an evolutionary trait. If men had basically flesh backpacks for carrying children men could then be seen as more of caretakers, but we don't. God would that be disturbing looking.
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
Tolvo wrote:Their men have pouches for the eggs to be placed in while the females do not, that is pretty much the deciding factor. And I don't believe it is across all sea horse species. It's just an evolutionary trait. If men had basically flesh backpacks for carrying children men could then be seen as more of caretakers, but we don't. God would that be disturbing looking.
Would make a badass Metal album cover though.
Just to play the Devil's Advocate, though; wouldn't you be able to consider women having wider hips (Easier to carry children around on), breasts for feeding (Among other things
), and on average (On Average!) higher patience levels when it comes to children evolutionary traits?
Tolvo- Town Crier
- Posts : 13287
Reputation : 542
Join date : 2012-02-01
Age : 31
Location : The Forest, Illinois
Yes, but we also don't have to stick to our nature if it forces people to take on roles because of their birth. We are rejecting our "Nature" in ways through scientific advancements, though it could be considered natural to adapt which we are doing. In the future we are going to live longer, just a thing we're on our way to doing it and in likely 30 years humans born will be capable of lasting longer before succumbing to age.
Not to mention physical traits do not need to effect us mentally. Maybe in a scenario where our survival is in a dire point, but we don't live in small tribes with animals killing us left and right. We have a booming population and frankly a lot of over population problems. We aren't short on humans, so there is no need to go into peak survival mode.
Not to mention physical traits do not need to effect us mentally. Maybe in a scenario where our survival is in a dire point, but we don't live in small tribes with animals killing us left and right. We have a booming population and frankly a lot of over population problems. We aren't short on humans, so there is no need to go into peak survival mode.
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
Tolvo wrote:Yes, but we also don't have to stick to our nature if it forces people to take on roles because of their birth. We are rejecting our "Nature" in ways through scientific advancements, though it could be considered natural to adapt which we are doing. In the future we are going to live longer, just a thing we're on our way to doing it and in likely 30 years humans born will be capable of lasting longer before succumbing to age.
Not to mention physical traits do not need to effect us mentally. Maybe in a scenario where our survival is in a dire point, but we don't live in small tribes with animals killing us left and right. We have a booming population and frankly a lot of over population problems. We aren't short on humans, so there is no need to go into peak survival mode.
Fully agreed, but again;
Devils Advocate: Just because we can choose to ignore them, does that make the fact that women are plain old better equipped to handle child rearing not mean exactly that; women are better equipped to handle child rearing?
FexDS- Webmaster
- Posts : 1433
Reputation : 311
Join date : 2012-01-16
Because the initial capacity for immidiate care does not equal a genetic code to be a caregiver. Many animals kill their offspring off or don't see them to maturity, kill their mates, or share equal responsibilities - trying to equate very varied animal dynamics to humans and trying to deduct genetic predispositions from there is a strawman, as human beings have many differences with animals in very basic aspects.
Reproductive and feeding traits are simple biology, but again do not extend to being a better caregiver for what our society dictates is the caring period of a child. I do believe mothers are needed by their children at the initial months of life for feeding, however I do not believe that a 5 year old is better looked after by his mother than his father. There isn't any more patience, just the societal instruction that it's your job so you should have more patience, and societal support for that role result sin more support from peers in that role etc. It's not biological and stating that it is genetic is simply outlandish - not withsdaning the very relevant fact that regardless of genetic predisposition people act behave and react in different ways depending on the processing of their brains.
Lastly, adding conjecture as "devils advocate"" isn't really bringing anything into the cconversation but the introduction of unfounded ideas
Reproductive and feeding traits are simple biology, but again do not extend to being a better caregiver for what our society dictates is the caring period of a child. I do believe mothers are needed by their children at the initial months of life for feeding, however I do not believe that a 5 year old is better looked after by his mother than his father. There isn't any more patience, just the societal instruction that it's your job so you should have more patience, and societal support for that role result sin more support from peers in that role etc. It's not biological and stating that it is genetic is simply outlandish - not withsdaning the very relevant fact that regardless of genetic predisposition people act behave and react in different ways depending on the processing of their brains.
Lastly, adding conjecture as "devils advocate"" isn't really bringing anything into the cconversation but the introduction of unfounded ideas
Last edited by FexDS on Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:18 am; edited 1 time in total
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
FexDS wrote:Because the initial capacity for immidiate care does not equal a genetic code to be a caregiver. Many animals kill their offspring off or don't see them to maturity, kill their mates, or share equal responsibilities - trying to equate very varied animal dynamics to humans and trying to deduct genetic predispositions from there is a strawman, as human beings have many differences with animals in very basic aspects.
Reproductive and feeding traits are simple biology, but again do not extend to being a better caregiver for what our society dictates is the caring period of a child. I do believe mothers are needed by their children at the initial months of life for feeding, however I do not believe that a 5 year old is better looked after by his mother than his father. There isn't any more patience, just the societal instruction that it's your job so you should have more patience, and societal support for that role result sin more support from peers in that role etc. It's not biological and stating that it is genetic is simply outlandish - not withsdaning the very relevant fact that regardless of genetic predisposition people act behave and react in different ways depending on the processing of their brains.
So if not genetics, where do women get their wider hips/breasts?
FexDS- Webmaster
- Posts : 1433
Reputation : 311
Join date : 2012-01-16
Um... did you not read my post? I have no idea how you reached that conclusion. What I said is that wider hips - to enable the growth of the baby and breasts for immediate feeding do not equate to better long term caregiving as was implied earlier by Animaal.
Slarg232- Insomniac
- Posts : 1351
Reputation : 51
Join date : 2012-08-07
Age : 32
FexDS wrote:Um... did you not read my post? I have no idea how you reached that conclusion. What I said is that wider hips - to enable the growth of the baby and breasts for immediate feeding do not equate to better long term caregiving as was implied earlier by Animaal.
How do they not?
In and of themselves, they do not, it's true.
But taking care of a child in the earlier stages brings familiarity with the child, a close bond, and other such nonsense. Therefore, you could technically link the woman's wider hips to better care giving later on; if only because being better right off the bat means you already have the experience later on.
I just want to restate I'm playing Devil's advocate; I work at a gas station, and some of the mothers that pass through are just terrible.
|
|
|
