No, you can have your opinion on things. But saying that women did little for society isn't an opinion. "I like cats" or "Family Guy is a better show than Glee", those are opinions.
"Women do little for society" is a false statement.
When I say those things, I mean it in comparrison to what males have done in the sense of what is 'needed' for society/civilization to maintain and progress, in which in comparrison to males, they have done very little.
Who builds? Males.
- Buildings
- Water systems
- Bridges
- Technology
- Roads
Who repairs? Males.
Who work for the fuels needed for society/civilization to maintain? Males.
Who has invented the majority of the things we use today? Males
Who delivers your food to the market? Males.
Who cleans society to ensure it does not turn in to a dump (litrally)? Males.
________________________________
Without males, civilization wouldn't maintain, let alone exist.
The female gender do not/ have not done as much or is needed as much for civilization/society as the male gender. That is a true statement.
Without females men wouldn't have the time to do all that. Someone needed to take care of our basic needs. In traditional families, that was the woman. I don't think you can call one task more valuable for society than the other. It's not like women sat on their asses for all those centuries.
So men can build cities, power tools, can make humanity fly, reach space, but you think that they wouldn't of been able to look after a household if they needed to...?
Yes, without females, males could do all that. Those jobs were given to women because it put females to use for something that needed done, not that females were the only ones to do it.
1. Women can build cities, power tools and all that jazz as well.
2. I never said men are incapable of taking are of a household. The only reason why women in history have less notable achievements is because men repressed them for ages. So this hardly makes men the superior sex.
Ah, ofcourse. Women can do it, they just don't want to...Great mentality. Not surprised, though. When a female has no other point, she will hide behind the "I can do it, I just don't want to" line, which is something you could expect from a school kid, not an adult.
Also, there has not been one area of civilization built by women.
Ok, so the reason 'then' was that they were repressed, so what is their excuse now? They have just as much rights as men now, and they are allowed to do all the things they were not allowed to do in the past, yet still do not do those things nearly as much as males.
So what you give me here is:
1. A childish line that does not 'prove' women can do what men have done, yet relies on just 'believing' they can without having any actual proof to suggest they can.
No, that is not a counter, that is pettyness. Men have proved they can build cities, because they have, yet you think your gender gets to be seen as great as the ones responsible for cities based on you simply saying "They can, they just don't want to", without any proof? Really? No.
Hey, I can build a nuclear weapon, I just don't want to. That is basically what you are saying and expecting em to believe.
2. You say the reason why women can't do what men do today is because they couldn't in the 'past', even though they can if the choose in the 'present'. Ok, women couldn't 'in the past', which I have never said they couldn't, so why aren't they 'now?'
Stop hiding behind the opression of women in the past, because women today do not share such inequalities.
Really, just pathetic. You say women do as much as men for civilization, and when proven wrong, your response is "women can do it aswell just as much"...Then why haven't they? Oh yes, they just don't want to, that's why...-Rolls eyes-
So no, women cannot build cities, because there is not one time in history where they have, and until they do, with their own intelligence, then I will believe they can. You need proof, not simple 'opinion'.
It is your 'opinion' women can do this, not fact, because women are yet to do such things as men.
1. If you want to rephrase my arguments, at least rephrase them correctly. I never said women don't want to contribute to society.
2. There's still discrimination against women. There's less than there was in the old days though, and that's why these days, women have more prominent roles in society. But sadly, in a lot of cases they're still not fully treated as equals on the workplace.
3. I've got better things to do than argue with an internet misogynist about women's rights. Especially since we've already had this debate. You'll just keep giving a false spin to everything I say until you declare yourself the winner of the debate and have a self-congratulatory wank.
Is it normal to hate working with all one sex?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
No, you can have your opinion on things. But saying that women did little for society isn't an opinion. "I like cats" or "Family Guy is a better show than Glee", those are opinions.
"Women do little for society" is a false statement.
--
[Old Memory]
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You are misunderstood.
When I say those things, I mean it in comparrison to what males have done in the sense of what is 'needed' for society/civilization to maintain and progress, in which in comparrison to males, they have done very little.
Who builds? Males.
- Buildings
- Water systems
- Bridges
- Technology
- Roads
Who repairs? Males.
Who work for the fuels needed for society/civilization to maintain? Males.
Who has invented the majority of the things we use today? Males
Who delivers your food to the market? Males.
Who cleans society to ensure it does not turn in to a dump (litrally)? Males.
________________________________
Without males, civilization wouldn't maintain, let alone exist.
The female gender do not/ have not done as much or is needed as much for civilization/society as the male gender. That is a true statement.
--
Corleone
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Without females men wouldn't have the time to do all that. Someone needed to take care of our basic needs. In traditional families, that was the woman. I don't think you can call one task more valuable for society than the other. It's not like women sat on their asses for all those centuries.
--
[Old Memory]
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
So men can build cities, power tools, can make humanity fly, reach space, but you think that they wouldn't of been able to look after a household if they needed to...?
Yes, without females, males could do all that. Those jobs were given to women because it put females to use for something that needed done, not that females were the only ones to do it.
--
Corleone
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Two things.
1. Women can build cities, power tools and all that jazz as well.
2. I never said men are incapable of taking are of a household. The only reason why women in history have less notable achievements is because men repressed them for ages. So this hardly makes men the superior sex.
--
[Old Memory]
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Ah, ofcourse. Women can do it, they just don't want to...Great mentality. Not surprised, though. When a female has no other point, she will hide behind the "I can do it, I just don't want to" line, which is something you could expect from a school kid, not an adult.
Also, there has not been one area of civilization built by women.
Ok, so the reason 'then' was that they were repressed, so what is their excuse now? They have just as much rights as men now, and they are allowed to do all the things they were not allowed to do in the past, yet still do not do those things nearly as much as males.
So what you give me here is:
1. A childish line that does not 'prove' women can do what men have done, yet relies on just 'believing' they can without having any actual proof to suggest they can.
No, that is not a counter, that is pettyness. Men have proved they can build cities, because they have, yet you think your gender gets to be seen as great as the ones responsible for cities based on you simply saying "They can, they just don't want to", without any proof? Really? No.
Hey, I can build a nuclear weapon, I just don't want to. That is basically what you are saying and expecting em to believe.
2. You say the reason why women can't do what men do today is because they couldn't in the 'past', even though they can if the choose in the 'present'. Ok, women couldn't 'in the past', which I have never said they couldn't, so why aren't they 'now?'
Stop hiding behind the opression of women in the past, because women today do not share such inequalities.
Really, just pathetic. You say women do as much as men for civilization, and when proven wrong, your response is "women can do it aswell just as much"...Then why haven't they? Oh yes, they just don't want to, that's why...-Rolls eyes-
So no, women cannot build cities, because there is not one time in history where they have, and until they do, with their own intelligence, then I will believe they can. You need proof, not simple 'opinion'.
It is your 'opinion' women can do this, not fact, because women are yet to do such things as men.
--
Corleone
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
See More Comments =>
1. If you want to rephrase my arguments, at least rephrase them correctly. I never said women don't want to contribute to society.
2. There's still discrimination against women. There's less than there was in the old days though, and that's why these days, women have more prominent roles in society. But sadly, in a lot of cases they're still not fully treated as equals on the workplace.
3. I've got better things to do than argue with an internet misogynist about women's rights. Especially since we've already had this debate. You'll just keep giving a false spin to everything I say until you declare yourself the winner of the debate and have a self-congratulatory wank.