You know, Wyrzen is not totally wrong. There are biological differences between the gender, that's obvious. I think that's just what he's been saying.
Of course those differences don't have to mean much, and that's where he's been unclear/unaware. Each gender can learn to be just as good as the other gender in a specific activity. Some biological things just give certain, let's say bonuses or maluses compared to the other gender. But they're not the final word regarding the individuals capacities, and they're negligible in most domains.
This is actually basically what I've been trying to articulate for the past day or so, thank you for saying it better.
It isn't necessarily wrong, but it's sexist is what the point was. And sexism is wrong.
Good, because up until now I thought it was totally okay.
Guys are better at athletics but I'm talking more about the workplace.
Ah, the workspace is another matter. There of course there should be no differentiation between genders. Athletics is maybe one of the very few examples where differences make some kind of sense.
But girl's versions of the sports are highly underrated and no one really cares about them as much as men's sports. Which sucks whenever you grow up playing sports against guys and beating their butts, but after you reach a certain age you can't play with the guys anymore. Ah well anyways.
I'll grant you that. There IS sexism in sports the way you just described. I was merely pointing out the obvious average muscle mass difference (which is why I said athletics and not sports in general, cuz big muscles are not needed for all kind of sports). Mixed sports should be allowed when it makes no sense to separate.
It isn't necessarily wrong, but it's sexist is what the point was. And sexism is wrong.
It's not wrong, but it is, is what you're saying? :P There's nothing sexist about saying men and women have slightly different physiologies. Sexism is when you discriminate without/on an unjust basis. Like when you discriminate arguing with biology even though there's no reason to.
Good, because up until now I thought it was totally okay.
I know sexism is wrong!!
Bro, bro I'm not attacking you. Read the other post, kay?
It's not wrong, but it is, is what you're saying? :P
Exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying that yes, biologically there are obvious differences in what we were built for, but I'm also trying to tell him that gender specific roles such as women make better caretakers are wrong. Or that guys are better leaders is wrong. (This refers to that KnightDeclan fellow)
There's nothing sexist about saying men and women have slightly different physiologies. Sexism is when you discriminate without/on an unjust basis. Like when you discriminate arguing with biology even though there's no reason to.
Sexism has been defined at least 4 times in this thread, I'm sure we all are quite aware of its definition.
Exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying that yes, biologically there are obvious differences in what we were built for, but I'm also trying to tell him that gender specific roles such as women make better caretakers are wrong. Or that guys are better leaders is wrong. (This refers to that KnightDeclan fellow)
Exactly what I'm saying. I'm saying that yes, biologically there are obvious differences in what we were built for, but I'm also trying to tell him that gender specific roles such as women make better caretakers are wrong. Or that guys are better leaders is wrong. (This refers to that KnightDeclan fellow)
After like, three days of miscommunication I'm glad we're now somewhat on the same page
On a side note, apparently my computer's spell check has never heard of 'miscommunication'. Go windows 8.
There needs to be variety in the world, or we wouldn't be human beings. If we are all equal, then it makes us easier to control.
You're badly mixing up things. Being equal under the law has nothing to do with resembling each other. Equality of races, genders etc. is not going to increase societal conformity. Equality simply makes sure noone, neither man nor woman, is above or below the other. That's what you want, judging by your next-to-last sentence. So I don't get your problem.
What I'm saying is that they want people to be equal in all ways.
Equal in opportunity, rights, privileges, and treatment.
Of course there are differences between people. One person can be better at something than another, or have a different approach or skill that lets them accomplish the same thing. However, this falls into everything. A woman -can- be stronger than a man, and there -are- many women who are. There are weak men. Yet you automatically assume, based on your comments, that every man is better than a woman when it comes to physical activity, and you automatically assume every woman is better than a man when it comes to home-related things.
Women are sometimes smarter than men, braver, etc. but I still think that it's bad, mentally, for a man to be under a woman. Now in the past 60 years, the media has been pushing agendas like feminism, race-mixing, equality, etc. But the thing is, poeple need to be different. There needs to be variety in the world, or we wouldn't be human beings. If we are all equal, then it makes us easier to control. Some people have to speak aloud, some have to work hard in the world, some have to protect what is theirs. Everyone has their own roles in society. Women shouldn't be treated like slaves, but they shouldn't be treated like they're higher than men. This causes jealousy, envy, and feminism, which are all bad.
Yes, but men shouldn't be higher than women either. And of course people are different, if we weren't life would be so incredibly boring, as you said. But what's wrong with some feminism, or race-mixing and equality? Everybody deserves to be equal under the law. It's not so, but they deserve it.
And what's wrong with some feminism? I'm not an advocate of extreme feminism, but there's nothing wrong with women striving to be equal.
? Man Just by posting the first two sentences i can tell your sexist.
keep on readin. he isn't. he is just pointing out that there are factual differences. not that the differences are the means for a different treatment.
under the law is one if the few places everyone actually is equal....
You're right, I spoke incorrectly. Under the law everybody is equal, but people are rarely treated as such. I believe that's what I was attempting to say.
