You are trying to justify why women are not contributing to such things as building improvements to civilization by how women 'were' treated.
That was then, this is now. Women are allowed to do these things now, yet still don't.
Women are able to contribute to the construction industry if they want to now, and it is even easier now than it was when they weren't allowed, and yet they still choose not to. Coincidence? I think not.
Women now have the chance to prove they can do what men can to see if it is incorrect that men can do what women can't, yet would rather just adopt the equal brand instead of working towards it.
Women weren't allowed then, but they are allowed now. So what is their excuse for not doing it now? The jobs back then are the same ones needing done now, just far more easier. So if women fought to be able to do what men worked as because they weren't allowed, then are are allowed, yet still are not joining such work forces, you cannot blame it that they weren't allowed, because they are now, yet won't.
Ok, so the reason why women are not doing all these things that 'need' done is because they 'can't' do it...Well does that not suggest men are superior? If women are unable to do these things that we 'need' to keep society/civilization maintained and progressing, does that not show that women are infact less than males, given that what we need to maintain what we have achieved is something women cannot do?
So your argument to suggest the genders are equal is that because women can't do the things that are required to keep civilization maintained, it is unfair, so therefor by default they are equal to those that 'can' do the things needed to maintain civilization?...What?
Let me bring you to a part in your first paragraph: "I can't think of a single civilization that valued women just as much as men. Does that mean that women are automatically weaker and lesser than men?".
Well if women cannot do the things that were required in the workplace, and were incapable of doing many things do to their lack of strength, then yes, that does make them inferior.
So because they are biologically superior and capable of more due to their biology, it is unfair to women because they did not get the same biology, and therefor are seen as equal by default?
I'm sorry, I just find it hard to go in to full depth here. You are unintentionally agreeing with everything I have said.
Ok, you are just completely contradicting yourself that is hard to bare. At first you are saying how men are far better at doing the jobs that society 'needs' done, then complain about women not being able to get those jobs...? Well if men are far superior to women in those lines of work that society needs, then it is justified, is it not? They lack the strength to do it, which is what 'you' stated.
So, hold on. You are blaming why men are in higher positions of society because women make 'choices' like having a family, then have to take responsibility for their choices?
There have been many studies that show that the reason why men get further than women is because males tend to be more professionally driven, where as women are more likely to choose less high pay jobs. Psychology has also studied and claimed this.
So now you are saying that it is her 'caregiver' stgatus that holds her back from help[ maintaining society, when before you blamed it on strength. Which one is it? I have an answer for both.
How do I explain women getting paid less? Again, women's life choices, which again has been stated by psychologists.
Not only that, males are far more likely to risk their health and safety than females are in a job, and so deserve more pay. This is easily noticed when you see how 95% of the workforce deaths are males.
Again, completely justified reasons.
There is no explanation, because that does not happen nearly as much as you think it does. Men risk more and tend to find jobs that pay higher, where as women don't and try to find jobs that are social. Again, this has been shown by psychologists.
Well actually, yes. Many women say that 'without us giving birth, they would not be able to do it, so we do just as much', in an attempt to try get seen as doing just as much.
But in the more natural statements, women will usually say "Women done all this work, they were just never noticed because men wouldn't allow them to be seen as contributers".
Well if that was the case, and nobody was able to find out and didn't find out, then how did 'you' find it out?
In which they tend to be quiet and make excuses not to answer.
Ok, so let me get this straight, it is sexist to state a 'fact'? It is a 'fact' that most criminals were raised by single mothers. That is not blind assumption, that is 'fact'. Simply because you dislike hearing it does not make it any less true or sexist. It is sexist to assume someone else is sexist simply because they state something females don't like hearing.
The next bit is just stupid, yet again.
"Being a good mother means raising your child to being a decent human being and not screwing shit up".
Yes, and making sure that the child has a respectable father figure and mother figure tends to lessen their problems. Are you implying fathers are not needed for a child to be properly raised? Again, stupidity.
"Just because someone is raised by a single mother does not mean they will be a criminal"...Where did I say it would? I said that the majority of criminals are raised by single mothers, not that the majority of children raised by single mothers are criminals. It might be true, but I have not looked in to it, so I will not say it is.
Although, a child is more likely to be a criminal if raised by a single mother. Statistics show that.
Yes, the environment does matter. A child raised with both a mother and father figure environment is more likely to not become a criminal than child raised in a single mother environment.
Again, I never said all children raised by single mothers are criminals, I said that most criminals were raised by single mothers, which implies it is more likely for single mothered children to become criminals.
Once again, psychologists have studied this.
No, she can't do that while working 24/7, so you know what she should of done? Not got pregnant to a guy that would not stick around or be an asshole.
She should have a child 'after' she found a respectable man.
Actually, I disagree. Who do you think is more likely to have a healthy child, a woman in the wilderness, or a woman that has shelter built by men, food delivered by men, water from water systems made by men, and so on.
Men have made it far more easier for women to have children than when we were primitive.
If you want to test that, if you fall pregnant, do so with no touch of male contribution, see how well you do.
A lot of mothers actually do smoke and drink while the child is inside them, so don't act as if all women don't.
Where did I ever say that men do most of the work in reproduction? I never said that. I said both are needed for it, and that men have made it far easier for women to go through pregnancy. I have never said men go through the same as women that are pregnant.
I honestly had trouble replying to this one. You mention one thing in one paragraph, then make the next paragraph that either answers or contradicts your first and second paragraph.
Is it normal to hate working with all one sex?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
You are trying to justify why women are not contributing to such things as building improvements to civilization by how women 'were' treated.
That was then, this is now. Women are allowed to do these things now, yet still don't.
Women are able to contribute to the construction industry if they want to now, and it is even easier now than it was when they weren't allowed, and yet they still choose not to. Coincidence? I think not.
Women now have the chance to prove they can do what men can to see if it is incorrect that men can do what women can't, yet would rather just adopt the equal brand instead of working towards it.
Women weren't allowed then, but they are allowed now. So what is their excuse for not doing it now? The jobs back then are the same ones needing done now, just far more easier. So if women fought to be able to do what men worked as because they weren't allowed, then are are allowed, yet still are not joining such work forces, you cannot blame it that they weren't allowed, because they are now, yet won't.
Ok, so the reason why women are not doing all these things that 'need' done is because they 'can't' do it...Well does that not suggest men are superior? If women are unable to do these things that we 'need' to keep society/civilization maintained and progressing, does that not show that women are infact less than males, given that what we need to maintain what we have achieved is something women cannot do?
So your argument to suggest the genders are equal is that because women can't do the things that are required to keep civilization maintained, it is unfair, so therefor by default they are equal to those that 'can' do the things needed to maintain civilization?...What?
Let me bring you to a part in your first paragraph: "I can't think of a single civilization that valued women just as much as men. Does that mean that women are automatically weaker and lesser than men?".
Well if women cannot do the things that were required in the workplace, and were incapable of doing many things do to their lack of strength, then yes, that does make them inferior.
So because they are biologically superior and capable of more due to their biology, it is unfair to women because they did not get the same biology, and therefor are seen as equal by default?
I'm sorry, I just find it hard to go in to full depth here. You are unintentionally agreeing with everything I have said.
Ok, you are just completely contradicting yourself that is hard to bare. At first you are saying how men are far better at doing the jobs that society 'needs' done, then complain about women not being able to get those jobs...? Well if men are far superior to women in those lines of work that society needs, then it is justified, is it not? They lack the strength to do it, which is what 'you' stated.
So, hold on. You are blaming why men are in higher positions of society because women make 'choices' like having a family, then have to take responsibility for their choices?
There have been many studies that show that the reason why men get further than women is because males tend to be more professionally driven, where as women are more likely to choose less high pay jobs. Psychology has also studied and claimed this.
--
[Old Memory]
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
So now you are saying that it is her 'caregiver' stgatus that holds her back from help[ maintaining society, when before you blamed it on strength. Which one is it? I have an answer for both.
How do I explain women getting paid less? Again, women's life choices, which again has been stated by psychologists.
Not only that, males are far more likely to risk their health and safety than females are in a job, and so deserve more pay. This is easily noticed when you see how 95% of the workforce deaths are males.
Again, completely justified reasons.
There is no explanation, because that does not happen nearly as much as you think it does. Men risk more and tend to find jobs that pay higher, where as women don't and try to find jobs that are social. Again, this has been shown by psychologists.
Well actually, yes. Many women say that 'without us giving birth, they would not be able to do it, so we do just as much', in an attempt to try get seen as doing just as much.
But in the more natural statements, women will usually say "Women done all this work, they were just never noticed because men wouldn't allow them to be seen as contributers".
Well if that was the case, and nobody was able to find out and didn't find out, then how did 'you' find it out?
In which they tend to be quiet and make excuses not to answer.
Ok, so let me get this straight, it is sexist to state a 'fact'? It is a 'fact' that most criminals were raised by single mothers. That is not blind assumption, that is 'fact'. Simply because you dislike hearing it does not make it any less true or sexist. It is sexist to assume someone else is sexist simply because they state something females don't like hearing.
The next bit is just stupid, yet again.
"Being a good mother means raising your child to being a decent human being and not screwing shit up".
Yes, and making sure that the child has a respectable father figure and mother figure tends to lessen their problems. Are you implying fathers are not needed for a child to be properly raised? Again, stupidity.
"Just because someone is raised by a single mother does not mean they will be a criminal"...Where did I say it would? I said that the majority of criminals are raised by single mothers, not that the majority of children raised by single mothers are criminals. It might be true, but I have not looked in to it, so I will not say it is.
Although, a child is more likely to be a criminal if raised by a single mother. Statistics show that.
Yes, the environment does matter. A child raised with both a mother and father figure environment is more likely to not become a criminal than child raised in a single mother environment.
Again, I never said all children raised by single mothers are criminals, I said that most criminals were raised by single mothers, which implies it is more likely for single mothered children to become criminals.
Once again, psychologists have studied this.
No, she can't do that while working 24/7, so you know what she should of done? Not got pregnant to a guy that would not stick around or be an asshole.
She should have a child 'after' she found a respectable man.
Actually, I disagree. Who do you think is more likely to have a healthy child, a woman in the wilderness, or a woman that has shelter built by men, food delivered by men, water from water systems made by men, and so on.
Men have made it far more easier for women to have children than when we were primitive.
If you want to test that, if you fall pregnant, do so with no touch of male contribution, see how well you do.
A lot of mothers actually do smoke and drink while the child is inside them, so don't act as if all women don't.
Where did I ever say that men do most of the work in reproduction? I never said that. I said both are needed for it, and that men have made it far easier for women to go through pregnancy. I have never said men go through the same as women that are pregnant.
I honestly had trouble replying to this one. You mention one thing in one paragraph, then make the next paragraph that either answers or contradicts your first and second paragraph.