Because clearly certain areas that require intelligence is far greater than others. It's like saying someone that made a chair can be compaired to someone that made a car, obviously the person that made the car holds more intelligence.
Believe me, although I do get irritated, my text betrayes the way I am actually feeling. Yes, I get irritated, but not to the extent you're implying. It's understandable that you would think I am getting big emotional outbursts about this due to it being only text which is hard to view feelings from text.
No there isn't, you just read them wrong. Einstein and Ghandi are men, therefor I said "The wisest and smartest are men" Then I go to say individual men later on, hoping you catch on I don't mean men in general. I'm pretty sure I have even explained that I don't think "men in general" are always smarter than women about three times now.
I didn't do a 180, you just didn't understand that when I was saying "men" I meant men such as Ghandi and Einstein, not just your every average joe man.
I would apologize to you if it was a case of me being at fault for not being clear, but I had explained what I meant in depth that I don't mean men as in all men about three times now, so I'm not going to apologize for that, as I don't see it as my fault for you not understanding what I meant.
I'm arguing for it because I don't like your argument of "Well they might not be the smartest, there might be a female person smarter that just hasn't been noticed". Which in all honesty, if that was the case, the female would of been brought to the light already.
I could just turn around and say "Despite of what you said, even though the smartest person was a man, and even though you say there is a woman just as smart or smarter than the smartest person that so happens to be a man, there could be another man out there smarter than the smartest man recorded and the smartest person that is a woman that hasn't been recorded. And by going by that logic, it just continues on and on to the point we would be saying there is someone that is smart enough that has figured out the creation of the universe at age six...
Females have acomplished many things, things alot, or even most men couldn't measure up to.
"The ones that have done better than most happen to be men" That is what I meant from my first comment, and is what I meant when explaining it about three times. Now do you see where I'm coming from? Why I got irritated? You say you would agree with me on it if it's what I meant, when it's exactly what I meant.
I do understand your viewpoint a bit more now, but it did require some clarification from your original posting, not because of my failure to understand what you wrote, but because you provided insufficient information to come to the conclusion that you're up in arms defending now. I'm also curious... if you believe that it was just happenstance that the people you personally feel are "smartest and wisest" are men, why is it even worth mentioning when you concede that men have no advantage over women overall? By the logic you claim to be operating under, it's the same as pointing out that some great leader stubbed his toe the day he made a world-changing decision - it just so happened to be that way. But look at your original posting, and judge for yourself if what you wrote was simply pointing out a purely circumstantial curiosity. (And if it is, why did you think that people would be upset by it, and why did you feel compelled to say anything about it at all?)
Do you like the sex you were born with?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Because clearly certain areas that require intelligence is far greater than others. It's like saying someone that made a chair can be compaired to someone that made a car, obviously the person that made the car holds more intelligence.
Believe me, although I do get irritated, my text betrayes the way I am actually feeling. Yes, I get irritated, but not to the extent you're implying. It's understandable that you would think I am getting big emotional outbursts about this due to it being only text which is hard to view feelings from text.
No there isn't, you just read them wrong. Einstein and Ghandi are men, therefor I said "The wisest and smartest are men" Then I go to say individual men later on, hoping you catch on I don't mean men in general. I'm pretty sure I have even explained that I don't think "men in general" are always smarter than women about three times now.
I didn't do a 180, you just didn't understand that when I was saying "men" I meant men such as Ghandi and Einstein, not just your every average joe man.
I would apologize to you if it was a case of me being at fault for not being clear, but I had explained what I meant in depth that I don't mean men as in all men about three times now, so I'm not going to apologize for that, as I don't see it as my fault for you not understanding what I meant.
I'm arguing for it because I don't like your argument of "Well they might not be the smartest, there might be a female person smarter that just hasn't been noticed". Which in all honesty, if that was the case, the female would of been brought to the light already.
I could just turn around and say "Despite of what you said, even though the smartest person was a man, and even though you say there is a woman just as smart or smarter than the smartest person that so happens to be a man, there could be another man out there smarter than the smartest man recorded and the smartest person that is a woman that hasn't been recorded. And by going by that logic, it just continues on and on to the point we would be saying there is someone that is smart enough that has figured out the creation of the universe at age six...
Females have acomplished many things, things alot, or even most men couldn't measure up to.
"The ones that have done better than most happen to be men" That is what I meant from my first comment, and is what I meant when explaining it about three times. Now do you see where I'm coming from? Why I got irritated? You say you would agree with me on it if it's what I meant, when it's exactly what I meant.
--
PumpkinKate
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I do understand your viewpoint a bit more now, but it did require some clarification from your original posting, not because of my failure to understand what you wrote, but because you provided insufficient information to come to the conclusion that you're up in arms defending now. I'm also curious... if you believe that it was just happenstance that the people you personally feel are "smartest and wisest" are men, why is it even worth mentioning when you concede that men have no advantage over women overall? By the logic you claim to be operating under, it's the same as pointing out that some great leader stubbed his toe the day he made a world-changing decision - it just so happened to be that way. But look at your original posting, and judge for yourself if what you wrote was simply pointing out a purely circumstantial curiosity. (And if it is, why did you think that people would be upset by it, and why did you feel compelled to say anything about it at all?)