Are Women Superior to Men?
Women are 'solely' responsible for the propagation and existence of the human race. Now with the creation of artificial sperm, a man's role in the process is void and unnecessary.
Statistically:Women live longer on average. Women deal better with stress. Women perform better in school. Women are better advertised and thus better paid in that particular industry. The youngest mathematics professor in the united States today is a woman...
Please cast your vote after you've read the arguments.
You can also add to the debate by leaving a comment at the end of the page.
Women are more intelligent than men. I cite the I.Q test score of a two year old British girl, Karina Oakley of Guildford, Surrey, near London, who has an IQ of 160 — the same as physics professor Stephen Hawking and Microsoft founder Bill Gates, [[London's Daily Mail, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525598,00.htm%5D%5D
Point of information 160 is their current I.Q not their I.Q at two, which is why the emphasis is on 'already'. For your information there is no such thing as an I.Q of four hundred(not for standardized/legitimate I.Q tests at least) here are the current highest 'Adult' I.Q scores in the world[[http://scores.generiq.net/]]
the little girl has trumped all but two.
name raw score country
Ivan Ivec 21 168 CRO
Georg Michael Strasser 18 160,2 SUI
Theodosis M. Prousalis 17 158 GRE
Eugenio Correnti 15 153,9 FRA
Gürkan Kýlýç 11 146,3 USA
Okay Karakas 10 144,3 TUR
Ivan Rašić 10 144,3 CRO
I work with Mike Strasser's father he's a Dr. of radiology at LWMC his I.Q. is 188, And Mike's I.Q. is 174. (I realize this George M Strasser above is not the same individual.) Mike's a XC runner at UNF he is 19. The highest I.Q in America is 195 by Christopher Michael Langan (you can look him up on Wikipedia). My name is Kyle J. Weeks my I.Q. is 142. My father's I.Q. is 146. I don't know where these statistics above were acquired from. But they are highly inaccurate (and yes I did visit the website that is sited).
Individuals are born with the I.Q. they will retain throughout their lives (+,-)5. One can not improve their I.Q.
Women live longer on average. [[http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1998/10.01/WhyWomenLiveLon.html]]
All because an individual lives longer this does not indicate that they have contributed anything worth while to society.
The youngest mathematics professor in the U.S.A is a 19 yr old woman. [[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24273418/]]
A year ago, at 18 Alia Sabur was the youngest college professor in HISTORY.
Female supermodels make tremendous amounts of cash just for walking up and down the ramp, playing dress-up, selling their products and providing tabloids and newspapers with quotes.[[http://ezinearticles.com/?Model-Salaries&id=410826]]
Here's a list of prominent female scientists: [[http://lifestyle.iloveindia.com/lounge/famous-female-scientists-2893.htm]]
2006 first births from artificial sperm: [[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article685515.ece]]
women/sisters are doing it for themselves :D 'pun intended'
(link says this in article, making this point void, "The creation of “male eggs” and “female sperm”, however, still faces difficult technical barriers, as embryos need genetic material from both a mother and a father to develop normally." Nice try though)
Women are intellectually superior to men (even though men are better at mathematical thinking). Women are good at multitasking, exchanging information, socialising/socializing; and absorbing information. Women are industrious and sensible, good at focusing, listening. And what are men good at relative to women?
Apart from raping/corrupting/murdering/destroying people for the sake of money,land,ego and sex(this I don't really believe is a truthful excuse; but one used very often).
Women create, men destroy. Men were once used by women for protection against the dangers of the wild. But now we don't have any need for them, not even for reproduction! I think it's time society learned that the human race will be better off without the masculine side of it. Most male geniuses own to feminine characteristics. Male inventors/entrepreneurs/etc create to make up for their natural inability to do so.
In fact the Y-chromosome is depleting as generations evolve. evolution: a naturally intelligent process towards bettering humanity is whittling away male characteristics in general.
counter to last paragraph:
The proposition is not referring to individual men or women but to where/how general majorities sway/act. If culture makes people; then to date culture has made men considerably more cruel than women.
LOL, IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE THERE'S A MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE.
First you compared ONE girl vs TWO men. Another point that should be made is I.Q is not a measure of how intelligent someone is at a given point but their potential for intelligence. What is more, using IQ to determine intelligence (especially at such a young age) is a remarkably unreliable and difficult process.
From time immemorial, men have outdone women in almost everything, the list of female inventors, writers, scientists, entrepreneurs,doctors, lawyers, award-winning authors and Nobel prize winners pales in comparison to the number of men who have excelled in serious fields.
Men are generally better at survival tactics, since cavemen were the hunters who brought the meat home. They constructed houses and weapons, while women only followed orders. A considerable amount of time has passed but women have not matched men in the fields of construction, civil engineering(all types of engineering , really), video-game acumen, mathematics and invention.
Men, perhaps because of testosterone, are better leaders. Men trust men(comradeship), women trust men but women do not trust each-other(competition, resentment and the conflict between whether it is lady-like to be submissive or assertive) and men do not trust women for fear of competition or rejection.
And since trust is the foundation of almost everything. And backstage performers(women) are hidden and thus hard to trust or reward: Most women are reduced to wallflowers or placard holders.
Bill Gates I.Q was likely had an I.Q of 160 when he was two doesn't mean he was designing Microsoft by the age of three. That girl will grow up to be very smart but she won't have an I.Q 400 at the age of twenty. Besides 1 individual doesn't speak for an entire gender.
Though in contradiction; the entire premise behind this paragraph is that the existence of Bill Gates makes him smarter than every one and stating without evidence that he has an I.Q of 400; when he actually 'has' an I.Q of 160.
The concept of women being creators and men being destroyers is entirely cultural - the roles can easily be reversed, and women can easily be as brutal and violent as men at times. To assume that only men are capable of atrocities and violence is entirely flawed logic.
Also, if you want to use the IQ test as a measure of intelligence, why don't we look at the median IQ scores for each gender? Male on average have 5 more IQ points than women and also people with an IQ score over the the mark considered to classify one as a genius (which is usually 140) are 85 times more likely to be male. This is according to the book Men are better than Women. This does not however say that women are incapable of becoming a genius but rather on average a majority of them are male. The simple fact that you would cling to one female's IQ score in a sea of men who are of her ranking and superior to is pretty sad. This shows a sign of desperation, the fact that you cling to an anomaly to prove your point. That is the equivalent of me saying that Black people are the richer race because of Tiger Woods and Oprah completely disregarding all the others that own an equal or even greater wealth that are of a different race. The argument just isnt logical.
I find it funny that you would cling to the youngest professor in the United States being a woman. And the fact that she teaches mathematics like that should make us concede that women are just inherently better than men. But in your own argument you concede that men are, on average, better at mathematics so then I dont see your point. Again, it's just another desperate argument being made because of the lack of substance behind your claim, so you rather cling to an anomaly. If you want to see substance behind my claim you can A-read your own post or B-look at the picture of the mathematics teams of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT, Stanford, and you tell me the proportion of Men to the inferior gender.
When you bring up that women are good at being super models which means that they make alot of money for doing nothing. So how in the world does that prove the superiority of women? Again that would be like me saying because a majority of Waltons who gained the WalMart inheritence were males men are better at making more money from doing nothing. And to disprove your already ridiculous claim why don't we look up how good Bill Gates' wife is at getting money from bill Gates. How much of his fortune is actually set to go to her after he passes away vs charity? Furthermore If we are going to compare males to females why dont we look at basketball where the minimum NBA salary is more than tripple that of the maximun WNBA slary. Or lets just look at sports in general. Why dont women compete with men? Look at the record for women in any track event and compare it to the 10th best in mens history and tell me 3 catagories where a woman wins and I will concede that women are better.
As far as you saying women are better intelectually. Well again you already concede that men are better at mathematics so im going to make the assumption that it also includdes things such as physics and chemistry. First off I dont buy the argument that women are intelectiually superior. the entire point about multi tasking is flawed. Screwing up several task at one time is not good multi tasking, men go one task at a time so we can achieve desireable results in everything we do. But if I am to accept your point you have only left women the liberal arts field to be smarter in than men. So congratualations you can read and analyze a shakesperean poem (which is written by a man) better than a man. So while we build our society, and try to grasp the origins of the universe, women analyze literature and tell me about something that happened in 1776 that i could find any where on the internet. How is that considered intelectually superior?
As far as male geniuses taking on feminine charecteristics, that argument is an inherent flaw. You state "Male inventor/entrepreneurs/etc create to make up for their natural inability to do so." WHAT????? This argument makes no sense what so ever. If men have a natural inability to create then how the HECK could do we create aka invent?
As far as the Y chromosome depleting. No scientist knows for sure what is going to happen when the Y chromosome eventually shrinks into non existance or if it will ever become non-existent at all... If something decreases by 1/2 every generation then it never really goes away it just becomes infantecimally small just like the magnetic gravitational pull between two objects, you can only weaken it but never destroy it as long as there is some force. But going back to the original argument about how scientist are still unsure. This is in fact an inexact science so lets not jump to conlcusions here. Remember scientist at one point have said that an apple a day could actually be bad for your health until they retracted their statements. Our information changes with time, so please leave it to the men who are more mathematically and scietifically inclined to figure out what will happen to the male gender while women excel in their liberal arts fields and analyze poetry made by men.
When you talk about females living longer, while that it a valid point, I think that most of us will have had a long and fulfilling life by then.
By the way, when you bring up the point that artificial sperm is being created, read this article. Just let it sink in a bit.
With that being said, one of your reasons is now completely invalid.
Also one tip, use the enter key. Helps for lists.
Men do not have wombs or a wide enough pelvic girdle
Scientists have ridiculously tried to impregnate men in various fictional and nonfictional scenarios. The only man ever to be pregnant, was originally a woman who underwent a sex-change operation but still retained a womb.
Men are not capable of doing anything physically or mentally that women potentially cannot, however women can procreate and men CANNOT(not even potentially). And with the successful use of artificial sperm and delivery of babies created with such , a man's role in the process is rendered obsolete.
Women have greater brain to body weight ratios generally.
An elephant/man may have a bigger brain but since its/his body is also bigger,it can be concluded that it/he is not smarter.[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_intelligence]]
What are you kidding me. Danica McKellar is gorgeous! let me guess you're some pimply short dude or a jealous girl.-
Hello?! 'artificial sperm' women 'can' get pregnant without men...////////That's not actually a thing the entire Human Genome has not even been researched yet. a sperm has 23 single chromosomes which contain millions of sequences of adenosine triphosphate and guanosine triphosphate, A nucleotides must go opposite a T nucleotide, and a G opposite a C. And all of this is sub-atomic. This is literally impossible to reproduce.
Why must the opposition keep reverting to the past? (or equivocally writing in the past sense)
It's because what they're typing about is 'history.'
So; Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard(what next; are you going to claim that Radcliffe doesn't exist?) and stole much of Steve Job's ideas, Newton discovered gravity (are you seriously suggesting that it occurred to no one else that we are not falling off the planet?) when an apple fell on his head and Einstein was only discovered because he was a Jewish-German refugee; never faring well in school/college. Mathematics taught in German schools at the time was exponentially more advanced than that taught in anywhere in the world; including the U.S.
*I'm curious as to what can be the influence that made Henriettta Green rise to be the "Witch of Wall Street".
So? Last time I checked, women have a very distinct lack of testicles. Men and women are almost always needed for reproduction; it it entirely possible to replace either, although the media tends to overhype any possibility of a 'world without men'.
Trying to downplay the role of men in science does not help show that women are better; whilst there have been great scientists on either side (albeit many more renowned men, due to the nature of society for the past centuries), that does not in any way suggest that women are 'better' than men; it would be best to say that there is an equal level of potential.
Okay her brain to body weight argument is just inherently flawed. First men on average spend more time playing sports than women and women arent capable of developing such a body mass made of muscle where as men can, so they shouldnt be punished just becasue we are more muscular and women arent.
The bigger you are, doesnt mean you are going to be smarter just look at stephen hawking vs the rock. or yourself vs a dinosaur. the dino has a smaller brain yet is how many times bigger? If youre somehow trying to prove women are smarter why dont we just stick to comparing intelect. I think I know why, because men clarely outshine women in almost every intelectual field.
Fine women can get pregnant without men, so what? Having the ability to do something doesn't mean anything if you dont use it. If I have the ability to beat Lebron James in a basketball match what good does it do me if I never play him or in the NBA for that matter? I think you only help prove that men are superior, we can convince you to take something you appearantly dont need (being men) and marry them or engage in acts for our sensual pleasure. So how are you superior if you allow yourself to be manipulated by the inferior gender?
No newton did not discover gravity, Gallileo did, Newton, in the most simple explenation possible provided us with laws that govern physics and relate to gravity, and I dont claim that gravity didnt occur to anyone else before him (but if it did i bet it was a man) however Galileo was smart enough to document it, as was arristotle, and socrates, and einstein.
Einstein did poorly in school, so? What does that prove, that he's not a genious? It doesnt change the fact that he later on discovered what no woman did.
Yes Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard, and made billions which means it was a smart move. In economics theres always an opportunity cost, meaning to do one thing you will invest time in which you cant use in another, Bill Gates analyzed his opportunity cost and made a decision that has made him a fortune. Name a Harvard graduate that is richer than him. Oh thats right there isnt one. He stole ideas, okay name a woman that is made completly of her own ideas and thoughts and i will show you a fool. The fact is that everyone steals ideas and builds on them. Scientist constatnly use Einsteins theory of relativity to postulate their own theories such as black holes and dark matter. Its what the human race does, we find ideas and build on them. Its called advancement.
The problem with your argument is that it is irrelevant to proving superiority of women. I may have an extra finger but it does not mean that i am more superior over you. A wider pelvic girdle is just superficial. We can now create babies with or without any side of both sexes
Tests are botched to favor or equalise men.
"But IQ is clearly a flexible construct -- as amply demonstrated by decisions in the 1930s and 1940s in the United States and Britain to 'adjust' test questions to equalize the scores of boys and girls, because in previous versions of the tests girls had scored higher."[[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n7231/full/457786a.html]][[http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2009/03/darwin_200_shou.php]][[http://www.padsoc.com/iq/]]
But men were motivated/encouraged to be math-friendly while as Danica Mckellar rightly points out here [[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugiqRjttL9U&feature=related]] women were/are not.
The first programmer [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace]] was a woman but men were made to hijack the field; because society(even places that profess gender-equality) expects/encourages men to over-perform and women to under-perform.
So, the incorrect assertion here is that Babbage had no other friends...tsk tsk tsk aw
Men perform better in mathematics and science at school level and very few women enter mathematics and science programs after that. Clearly proficiency in Mathematics and Science is the true indicator of intelligence and thus superiority.
The only actual reason why Ada Lovelace was the first programmer was due to her friendship with Charles Babbage - to assume that the field had always been female based on the gender of the only person who was willing to fund him completely misunderstands it.
Furthermore, men have been at the forefront of incredible inventions such as electricity, the light bulb, heart transplants, telephones, and even the computers and internet we are using now. Even the admins of this website are men!
You have basically tried to burden your whole argument on IQ tests but you did not realise that IQ tests are very inaccurate.
Women drive better
Women are more cautious behind the steering wheel, get fewer tickets and are significantly less accident prone.[[http://africanpress.wordpress.com/2009/07/19/its-official-women-are-better-drivers-this-will-make-man-angered/]]
Men have better spatial abilities(Developed from years of video/computer/Play Station/Sega/Atari/Commodore game playing). Men have a better sense of direction. Men ARE better drivers , the statistics do not reflect 'percentages' only numbers, clearly since there are significantly more men on the road , more men get into accidents. Women are responsible for the majority of car accdients
Better swimmers biologically
Australian Susie Maroney swam a record 197 km (122 miles) from Mexico to Cuba, covering the longest distance ever swum without flippers in open sea. She completed the marathon swim in 38 hours and 33 minutes, arriving in Cuba on June 1, 1998.[[wiki-answers]] Men are not biologically equipped to snatch her title.
Woman have a higher percentage of fat(fat floats) as well as a lower percentage of bone mass and muscle.(muscle and bone weigh you down) therefore it is easier for women to float. Distribution of fat towards the periphery in women allows their/our legs to float higher, making them streamlined.
The potential hydrodynamic benefits enjoyed by women become noteworthy in longer distances where swimming economy and body insulation(women have to spend less energy to swim at a higher velocity) become more important. The first woman to swim the english channel, swam at a speed that was 35% greater than the fastest (male) swimmer before her.- [[Essentials of exercise physiology By William D. McArdle, Frank I. Katch, Victor L. Katch page 285 'Effects on buoyancy':men vs women']]
Why heavy? even a heavy 'man' would lose? how typical of men to suggest 'cheating' to win. And the fat in women makes us more buoyant so that's an absurd suggestion.
other than that men cannot outperform women as women and men swim separately in separate swim competitions/championships.
Not for shorter distances. If this were true then the list of world records found here:
would not consistently show men outperforming women at every distance.
Oh yeah? Michael Phelps broke 8 world records.Beat that.
Since most women weigh less than most men, they swim faster. Try having a race between a heavy woman and Michael Phelps, then decide.
See I dont even have to read your arguments to know that you are just flat out WRONG. If women are such damn good swimmers why arent they competing with men in swimming events? Why do they need their own division? And when in their own division how come their times in identical events are slower than that of men?
Wow this argument is not even founded on logic, but then again the entire premise that women are better than men isnt founded on logic either so i cant expect the points under it to be.
This argument might just prove how much women will lie to conclude to themselves they they're right.
Swimming World records
50m freestyle 23.73 20.91
100m freestyle 52.07 46.91
400m freestyle 3:59.15 3:40.07
1500m freestyle 15:42.54 14:34.36
200m breaststroke 2:20.12 2:07.31
100m butterfly 56.06 49.82
Etc.. Faster for longer= better
If it were not for females, the human race would not exist
- Women have wombs
- Women can have children, men cannot
- Women provide babies with vital breast milk.
Sperm can be artificially produced. A complete artificial womb is absent from our world today; except maybe in your head.
- If men had to give birth to a baby and carry it for 9 months then the human race would have died out eons ago. Women are better at handling pain.
"And then there's parthenogenesis! A form of asexual reproduction found exclusively in females, where growth and development of embryos occurs without fertilization by a male. What's more, parthenogenesis always results in female progeny because the offspring invariably possess two X chromosomes. While there are no known cases of naturally occurring mammalian parthenogenesis in the wild, it does occur in a variety of species and is a possibility in humans. Hence, it is theoretically possible for women to reproduce without any male, genetic contribution (i.e., sperm) while it is impossible for men to procreate without women. Score another point (their seventh) for the girls."
Men have testicles - women do not. Arguing that either one other the other is superior due to childbearing seems illogical when both are needed. Sure either can be taken away and replaced with technology but this would not support either side.
Again her argument is based on the present state. If we go back say 50 years then how the hell would the human race survive without men? thats right they wouldnt. Or if it wasnt for the MAN who created artificial sperm how the hell would the human race survive then?
Men cannot be replaced by technology. Mankind does not have the ability to create sperm no matter what the popular scientific b.s. article of the month is claiming. You can however take the egg of certain primates and combine it will male semen to get human. You can't take the sperm of other primates and combine with a human female's egg and get mankind. EVER! A sperm has 23 single chromosomes which contain millions of sequences of adenosine triphosphate and guanosine triphosphate, A nucleotides must go opposite a T nucleotide, and a G opposite a C. And all of this is sub-atomic. This is literally impossible to reproduce.
females are smarter in almost every subject in life
When it comes to rational reasoning, a sensible woman can understand and explain better than men. As women are reportedly better communicators/writers/artists/orators/singers.
And I`m keeping her/his `duh;, I think it`s cute.
I am not sure that having 'duh' as your reasoning is the best way to support this. Therefore it must not be true!
Women certainly are NOT better at rational reasoning, as they have no use for it, men developed this form of scepticism to test the scientific and philosophical theories that they came up with and quickly became experts at applying it (e.g. Socrates, Diogenes the Cynic and Pyrrho). Women's style of argument is usually based on emotion and subjectivity rather than reason or rationality due to their psychological make up.
The most moneyed thriller/science-fiction/fact-writers are men.
Review a list of Nobel Laureates for literature and I can tell you there are male winners than female ones.
Really better writers, artist, orators and singers? Wow then it must be dumb luck that when you look at the top five gross selling movies of all time they are all directed by men right. And as far as orators to convey that point we can just look at the top 100 movies of al time and how many of them are female leads? What about the highest paid orators, such as Bill Clinton. Yea not Hillary. And as far as artist who are the most famous artist again? Picasso, Van Gough, Michael Angelo, Leonardo de Vinci. Was there a woman in that list or one whose name has as much prominence? what about the most famous painting the Mona Lisa, who was that painted by again, a man? No it cant be true because according to you women are better painters so this has to be a mistake right? please correct me becaue im getting confused. As far as singers go, I'm pretty sure the highest selling musicians of all time are men, such as Michael Jackson, Elvis, The beatles. Wait where are the women? I thought yal were the better singers. This has to be a mistake. You cant be better at every one of those categories but yet the best in each category is a man? What??? This makes no sense please clarify this for me.
Women give more balanced arguements on any given subject
Due to their superior interlectual capabilities, which has been proven in education, womens ability to craft a well balanced arguement on a topic is far superior to that of mens.
Okay, user name Metta (who has been gracious enough to type rubbish for both sides thus doing a great injustice to my debate) : learn how to spell or else use a spell check. I am not going to fix all these errors.
And your high school is just another example of the sad and extreme degradation of the American (public probably?) school system.
We can all appreciate the irony of someone claiming to be intellectually superior who cannot spell intellectual correctly.
I have been reading the other arguements...and well...many of the Female Sided arguements are just plain stupid. "Duh?" I was in the debate team in High School, and I won most of my arguements, the two I lost were to men. The women were easiest, their arguements were mainly opinion-based, and they took much of their facts from Feminist Ideology.
To add on how the hell have women proven this in education? Fine a significant number of K-12 teachers are women but so what? Over the past 15 years 15 millions kids in the state of Texas alone have graduated without the ability to read at the basic level to function in a work enviroment. And who were these teachers women. Also its clear that these K-12 teachers usually stop after a bachelor degree, but why dont you glance at the College level and see what the predominant gender is for professors. Oh yea thats men also. So its clear that women stop at bachelor degrees while men go on to get Masters and PHD's so who is the one that exceeds in education. Also look at the percentages for those who get their masters and PHD's and tell me who exceeds in education.
Mens I.Q.s which is a measure of ones ability to learn are on average are 8 points higher. There is also E.Q. Emotional Quotation which is self-perceived ability to identify, assess, and control the emotions of oneself, of others, and of groups. Also Social IQ which is interpersonal intelligence, the way people communicate with one another. I.Q. cannot be changed an individual is born with it. E.Q. and E.S.I. (Emotional Social Intelligence) both are important in an "argument", both can be improved. Men with a higher ability to learn could learn and improve E.Q. and E.S.I to a higher level than a woman could. (on Average). A lot of men are stupid but ALL women are illogical. Logic is the easiest and most direct way to explain a subject.
Wow all these points are retarted. Wtf do pelvic girdles and wombs have to do with superiority?
screw you if you actually clicked on this point. but my goodnes, why on earth would you argue that women are superior based on anatomy? and females rule? really? is that a legitimate point or just some feminist voicing her opinions AGAIN.
Women are obviously not superior to men, as history tells. I'm not saying men are superior to women either, but seriously. Why even argue this? You are all stupid and need to just go make me a sandwich.
You both telling women to make you a sandwich are disrespectful and disgusting, get off your own fat, lazy asses and make your own sandwiches. Women are not personal kitchen slaves, just like men aren't personal bodyguards.
im blonde so this is my argument : woman are superior. I based this off because im a women. I can make my own sandwich. Without women men will starve. Jesus created the women race first. this is scientifically proven because the X chromowhatever comes first before the y.
You know, you are exactly right. All this argument is is some feminists vs. people with a little common sense. When was the last time anyone cared anyway? Its not as if the future of the human race depended on knowing which gender is 'better'. In my mind, they are equal. Men and women both have their advantages and dissadvantages.
And for all you women out there, MAKE US BOTH A DANG SANDWICH!
no, and no again
women are from venus, men are from mars, deal with it!
as you can see, the "yes" argument was made by an idiot...deal with it.
Men are wastes of space and resources.
We live in a world where the exponential acceleration of technology has made its presence felt in all fields of study. Over the past two decades, once-ubiquitous professions associated with largely male attributes such as physical strength have fallen into the hands of machines virtually overnight. This acceleration will lead to a point where augmentation of the human brain using brain-computer interfacing will increase the intelligence of the average person by orders of magnitude, making brutish, testosterone-driven "solutions" to international affairs - such as war - completely unnecessary.
All over the world, women are beating men at their own game. Women are morally, culturally, intellectually and aesthetically superior to men, make up a majority of teachers, scholars, doctors, professors, artists, engineers and technicians, and are generally concerned with the well-being of the human race and the planet that we live on.
Men, on the other hand, are capable of nothing but destruction, waste, abuse, sickness, filth, stupidity, crudity and lowbrow humor. Everything in the hands of these vile beasts turns to dust. Because men have been in the driver's seat of world affairs for so long, our precious resources have been frivolously wasted, our pristine waterways are laden with chemical slurry, our rainforests have been made into barren wastelands, our kids are failing to string proper sentences together and our cultural milieu is an abominable trainwreck.
The truth is that men, with their lame-ass Y-chromosomes that are incapable of repairing themselves, are less evolved than women. Man is a strange mutation indeed, a cross between the lowly ape and a real human being. The male physique is a real piece of work, probably the ugliest form of life there is on two legs. Beady eyes, a gaping and cavernous mouth which barks out authoritarian cliches, a nose out of proportion with the rest of the face, a square head, an angular body full of gross hair in strange places, ugly hands and feet, pungent body odor, unsightly sexual organs that dangle like rotting fruit...yeah, that's beauty, indeed.
Whoever finds beauty in men must be blind or brainwashed by our unhealthy society to worship these things. Hopefully in the future, with the advancement of gene therapy and medical nanotechnology, the sexual preferences of women towards men will be corrected so that women will become attracted to each other instead of wasting their sexual and social energy on these dirty brutes.
I am dead serious about eliminating the human male from this planet. The bastards have had it so good for so long, despite not even deserving the adulation bestowed upon them by most females, who should know better. They have been put on a pedestal, worshipped, deified, idolized, loved, adored, honored, pampered and doted on by the female, who puts the needs of her own gender behind those of the gender associated with blind aggression, truck testicles, belching, farting, ugly fashion and utter mediocrity. What's so great about men that entitles them to the love, care and attention of 99% of women on this planet? I just can't see it.
Like the dinosaurs before them, the male of the species is about to be consigned to the dustbin of history. Men may have been useful when the human race was still at the feces-lobbing, hunter/gatherer stage of our existence, as well as providing manual labor throughout the agricultural era, but that time is rapidly coming to a close, and rightfully so.
Firstly, men have been the driver of society because we have better strength, and are more logical and less emotional. You can't say that muscular strength is useless even in nowadays. Im sure you have encountered many situations where you are out of strength to carry something, and a man has helped you. Your wording of men that are "cross between lowly ape and real human" reflects your complicity of controlling emotions and demonstrating your level of bias. And im sure women will be able to take over then mens world one day, dead serious! Because when it comes to war with men, women always win eh? There is your lowbrow humor.
Lastly your line 'Whoever finds beauty in men must be blind or brainwashed' and then saying:
'Hopefully in the future, with the advancement of gene therapy and medical nanotechnology, the sexual preferences of women towards men will be corrected so that women will become attracted to each other instead of wasting their sexual and social energy on these dirty brutes.'
This is contradictory to what you have said because if you alter the genes of an unborn baby girl to like women then you will be taking away their free will on which gender they would eventully prefer and 'brainwashing' them to like women more.
This I feel would be the manipulative and dark society women would live in where you alter everything to be perfect. Soon enough as women get more and more addicted to being in control of how a person thinks and looks beofre their even born, dark practices like slavery and dictators would return as females tryt to establish dominance over each other.
All of your arguments is on physical beauty and how only women are capable of giving birth to a baby. This reinforces everything I have said on how manipulative an all female society would be.
Men may not be perfect but neither are women. There may come a time when you have need of 'our ussless strenth' in either warfare with an exsternal threat or manual labour. You think that with men gone the world would become a lesbian utopia where women all agree on the same thing and there is no conflict? Grow up and see reality.
Males are responsible for most crime both violent and theft.
Look at who goes to jail.
Look at who are now being arrested more and more often for commiting crimes such as assaults and drunken violence, behaviour which women once condemned and said was immoral, but now rather pathetically and hipocritically do the same themselves to prove they can "do anything a man can do". Seems quite backward to me.
Males are responsible for the violence of civilization,whereas women could rule more peacefully with less war and genocide.
Male rulers conquer other civilizations by violence while women could resolve conflict using there suprerior communications skills and humanitarian life affirming instincts.
What have women done to curb violence anyway? Only more of them are contributing to it themselves. Margaret Thatcher was not responsible for any wars was she? Or queen Victoria? Or queen Bodacia? And how is excessive backstabbing and bitchiness and selfish favouritorism (a trait profoundly associated with women) in the workplace a good life affirming instinct? Its also surprising how many people on this page favouring womens communication ability cannot spell.
Plus man or woman when you come to power and you have the chance to expand everybody would do it
Men are responsible for gang rape mass murder serial killings genocide weapons of mass distraction chemical and biological warfare and nearly all terrorism.
Just look at who is responsible for all such behavior...male behavior almost exclusively.
You have made your statement confidently and seem to feel it needs little clarification (or punctuation, spelling or grammer).
If only life and the world was so simple and clearly defined.
1. Firstly you seem to be assuming that we live in a world where competition does not exist, it does and not only in the human world. If you care to watch a few nature documentaries you would notice that all life is in competition and often violently with each other.
2. Competition equals conflict and conflict can not always be resolved peacefully. As humans have got technologically more advanced they have also found more advanced ways of killing each other.
3. Men are typically more openly aggressive than females, I think this is a point of view that most sides would agree on - but you are implying that women are incapable of being cruel and violent which is patently not true.
4. 'Men' rape and murder more than women but your generalisation has a few problems. Firstly the vast majority of men do not go around raping and murdering people, so despite the fact that men do these things more than women the majority of men do not. Secondly the laws of nearly every society in the world expressly forbid rape and murder, which means that the majority of men (who invariable make the laws) do not agree with those acts and expressly condemn them.
5. Terrorism - one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. Regardless of the ideology behind terrorist action; the reason why most 'terrorist' action is taken by men is that men are more likely to actually take action to change the world rather than just sit around bitching about it.....
Males are driven by there egos,which cause them to dominate or destroy whereas women can make better decisions and should rule in politics business and all organizations.
Once again, look at history from ancient times to today.
Personally by own experiences, and I am sure many will agree, I can only feel that womens egos are actually much bigger than any mans. She seems to think she can control any boyfriend or husband, if her demands are not met, she throws a wobbly. Women are driven much more by their egos. It reassures them. They have to believe in themselves excessively and put any man down. Its the only way they survive. Men from the beginning of time have been the creative, inquisitive sex, the original thinkers. It was men who designed and built cities, discovered great breakthroughs. Men first sailed around the world and discovered new colonies. Men will step out of the safety line, women won't. They thrive on role models even if they are catostrophic ones. This makes them much more vulnerable to social engineering. For example, a group of men set out from Hull recently to row around Britain. Next thing, a group of women said we can do that even better, and just did the same thing.(I don't know whether they beat the men, but I doubt it)
Another woman is trying to beat the mens treadmill record which is 628 miles. True, these things really don't matter much, but why wait until a man does it, then try and do it better? Why not think of it in the first place? Maybe because of the reason that the only original thing to come from women was finding clever ways between them on how to manipulate men. Hang on they are not so clever.
how to measure superiority?
Superiority is too vague a term to measure. How do we judge superiority? On what grounds, and who exactly says? The only ultimate measure of superiority would be if women were better in every other aspect than men, which is eminently false. So women are more necessary to reproduce - so what? There is more to human existence than reproducing. They might both be rendered obsolete eventually.
The fact that the artificial sperm was developed before the artificial womb is not sufficient to deem the female sex superior.
*Superiority does not exist in terms of males vs. females.
From the beginning, men have taken power and put women in the subordinate position. While these days women are proving more and more their equality to men in aspects that they were once considered inferior, that doesn't mean that they are superior. People that take excessive pride in being better than those of the other sex (like a dominatrix or an alpha-male etc..) tend to be hardened to the world emotionally, and are therefore flawed and, in conclusion, not superior.
See above for the earlier comments on the first programmer.
How can a human exist without birth?
even cloning and in-vitro fertilization require the use of a womb.
"They might both be rendered obsolete eventually"-not really there's no sign of the x-chromosome depleting; just the y.
And yes, equality in abilities in/for everything less one and superiority in the remaining 'one', does logically reflect 'overall' superiority.
You type 'Might be' &'eventually'. P.O.I
The topic, by definition, refers to the 'present', the question begins with 'Are', not 'will be' or 'might be'.
Just saying 'it does not exist' is not a substantiation but merely a statement. Yes so men took over, were bossy , women 'fought'(yes, men didn't say 'hey,come come, you can play with us' women struggled/fought) for their rights and continue to do so, showing up stronger than men in all 'man-made' fields/constructs.
In fact, the first programmer was a woman and as usual men hijacked that field and continually try to take credit for 'the women behind' them.
Blocking women from their own turf using unfair means: such as for example:'veclock' deletion.
no group of people is superior to another
People in groups aren't uniform. There will always be exceptions - especially when dealing with gender, a large deal of which is to do with societal role, which can be changed by simply raising children differently, rather than actual genetics (genetics isn't THAT immutable any more). The only way to really measure superiority in a field is to measure the performance of individuals. and then who could we trust to make the test? whenever society has decided that one group of people as a whole is superior to another, it has resulted in oppression and even genocide.
A group need not be 'uniform' to be superior to another.
You've just argued that all team sports/debate events are obsolete because all the team members are not the same( I would say 'equal' If you had referred to abilities and not uniformity/sameness/homogeneous-ness).
Your 'highest' achievement in any form of a test reflects your potential/abilities.Oppression and genocide only result from
jealousy(I want to win, why did s/he win? s/he must be punished). Are you saying that men are too 'immature' to deal with anyone winning anything and thus should be shielded from the facts?
So, by the logic on the right, there should be no competition, since all competitions end in at least one winner and loser. And immature losers will start killing people since their egos can not handle defeat/their-own-inferiority.
The mutability of genetics does not kill the fact that you must(surgically, naturally(by birth) or otherwise) be a woman to give birth.
Equality not superiority
This debate is of long standing and in my opinion completely unnecessary.We shouldn't question who is superior to whom because in the world both have their own respective roles to fill and in some aspects women are superior while in others men are.For e.g. men can't reproduce thus cannot be responsible for the continuity of our race.Similarly science says that men have more brute force and strength than women.
Man and woman were made for co-existing, which shows that neither can be superior if one applies Darwin's theory of the 'survival of the fittest'.I imagine that since both genders have survived so far, both are equally fit.Remove one and the scales won't balance anymore and most likely lead to extinction of mankind rather than flourishing of one so-called 'superior' race.
In response to the subjet of artifical spern and males being obselete allegedly. I will refer to the countless examples of medical breakthroughs that have proven detrimental to the human race in the past. As such, tampering in nature to potentially eliminate the necessity of one sex, is highly dangerious and while it might prove lucritive now. Nobody could predict the effects of using artifical sperm could have upon the human species in say one, two, or five generations.
As such, scientists have also developed ways to grow babies in tubes or an artifical womb if you prefer. As such, this type of claim is not founded, as things that appear wounderful today for humanity can prove to be out demise in the future. As it stands, this argument falls down to physical abilities of each sex without human interferance, and humans can cause further harm to society. Refer to Technological Determinism to observe effects on technology, a trait that extends far greater and more dangeriously to biological creatures we do not fully understand and may never completely understand in entirity.
On the other hand, boys are superior to females because the function of our brains to work on single objectives, and lack of various disharmonious hormones such as Progesterone, cause us to have a more stable outlook on the world. Mind you, as I am certain will be argued, this single objective nature does limit our creaitivty, it promotes our rationality.
Debate: Rationality > Instability. Males ARE more rational, whatever way ensue due to hormones and brain chemisty, and are therefore greater than instable female emotions caused by hormone mood swings.
*Females can give birth granted is one thing males can not do, however, females are also incapable of procreating on their own naturally. And therefore both sexes are required. Anything can in theory be done artifically, and as stated, this could be deterimental and is thereby circumstatial not evidence which should be the only grounded-theory in debate.
Okay, I iterate, the existence,creation and successful use of artificial sperm indicates , that men are NO LONGER needed for the survival and proliferation of the human race. That's where your survival of the fittest argument falls apart.
Agreed, that women and men are both superior and inferior to each other, in a lot of things BUT in Reproduction, there IS no contest(men cannot even 'compete'(cannot reproduce all on their own) forget being just 'relatively' inferior) Which (I reiterate) makes women 'superior' overall.
Excellent point regarding the dangers of artificial breeding. However, you neglect to address the emotional / physical bond that exists between mother and child (artificial or not). Thus, females still can and have one thing males do not; of course females do also have other unique features that would arguably bad (such as the mood swings listed above). Males also have the power to force themselves on us, often through violence, to have children (rape), and while frowned on by society it is a possibility and induced by your hormones. Therefore, females have a stronger bond to offspring, while both suffer from hormone mood swings. I would also like to see your research for the point on brain chemistry, I have read things along that line but for the sake of evidence please cite.
Test-tube/Petri-dish babies still require a womb(a female/natural one) to develop in.
There is no evidence for the 'dangers' you postulate and prophesize.
If boys were actually more rational the youngest mathematics professor to date,would be a young boy.
The majority of crimes-of-passion are committed by men, 'Testosterone' (there's a lot more in men than women) causes bursts of anger among other things, it's one key reason why menopausal(increased testosterone=balding,risky behavior (stupidity/bravery),frequent temper tantrums,hair in odd places and so on) women have anger issues.
Men not only have uncontrollable tempers, they have been encouraged throughout the ages to vent, to roar, to smash things or be branded spineless/sexless. And women are supposed to put up with it. Women may have mood swings during certain periods in our menstrual cycle [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progesterone]] but men are always like that.[[http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfns=1&q=testosterone+stupidity]]
And Progesterone isn't absent from males.'Adult males have levels similar to those in women during the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle'-[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progesterone#Levels]]
So the argument here is men cannot handle/tolerate the reality that women are better in every respect therefore are too immature to accept this fact and should be 'protected from the truth before they go on one of their aggressive violent mad killing/abusing sprees. I see your point.
And this point is further illustrated in light of velock's deleting spree.
The men's arguments are legitimate where as the womens are stupid!
The men's arguments have had merit to them, but the women have argued they are better swimmers and drivers. Enough said.
Just because some men commit crimes doesn't mean that all of them do, and besides, there were lots of good men too.
You are wrong in this area..."is why more men have weight problems, die of heart-attacks, cause and fight bloody wars/battles..."
Men have more weight problems and heart attacks because our skeletal and circulatory system isn't as advanced as the women's, whereas the man's muscular and nervous system is more advanced.
Women tend to WANT to be superior, but they can't, because they aren't.
Men aren't superior, but they seem to want to be superior less.
Women's have waged war and have been seen to not want to step down on the field of politics. Look at Gloria Arroyo, Indira Gandhi. All Corrupt and unwilling to step down. They never really got any substance when standing for election. They rather appeal to emotions which is less legitimate in terms of argumentations.
The men have presented no statistical/factual evidence to support their (self-proclaimed) 'meritorious' argumentation and have now resorted to name-calling.
This very immature excommunication, is why more men have weight problems, die of heart-attacks, cause and fight bloody wars/battles, commit suicide after the age of seventy( thus more women pass the age hundred mark), are responsible for more violent crimes/terrorism, are clinically paranoid, stalk/kill/rape can't swim the English channel even half as fast, get into 'accidents' and die within the age range of 20 to 25 yrs(despite the fact that more women of that age are attacked by criminals) because of testosterone-generated risk-taking,rash and irrational behavior. There are lots of nice article links & quotations from news sources on this blog[[http://the-niceguy.com/articles/MensHealth.html]]
The Romans crucified Spartacus.
Hmm... I think I have a fair idea of who's been deleting points on Google wave. "veclock" is it?
Point is 'more' men commit 'more' violent crimes than women do. Though some men are apparently too slow to understand that point.
Testosterone: you were born with it. It is not your fault.
Woman are not as good as men in chess.
Throughout history woman have never been able to match on the battlefield of the brain chess. There has only been one woman to play in men tournaments and win. However she is only one woman compared to the hundreds of men that have dominated the chess scene. Why if woman are better the men at everything can they not match them at the ultimate brain game. And it is no arguement to say that woman have not been able to match men due to gender discrimination against woman as a whole. To this I say in the past twenty years woman have been offered the same prospects as men but have never been able to match them. To quote Bobby Fischer one of the greatest chess players of all time when he was asked how good woman players are he said "oh they're terrible".
There is a reason why women are not always generals during war. They cannot percieve tactics as well as mens. You are just basing your arguments on a person alone. Please substantiate yourself by a wider scope
Plus when women are Generals they show to much compassion so what happens when you fave a merciless leader you lose everything women
Women hardly play chess; though I'm sure if ms.youngest math professor in the world ever, tried a hand at it she would beat any guy across the board.
Chess is a war game, Bobby Fischer, by far the greatest Chess Master the 'west' has ever produced was never academically strong.
The best chess players come from patriarchal societies mainly/namely Russia and China where girls are not brought forward in extracurricular activities as much as men.
I personally beat my brother a lot when we were younger; he kept calling it luck. We don't play anymore.
Men are stronger
Let's face it, it's a dog eat dog world out there. However, males are at the very least equipped to fight back. Without males, the females who "single-handedly" created our species would not have survived long, as they would lack both food and security. The inventiveness of man and the protective instincts he feels towards both woman and child are what have ensured the survival of our species.
Fast forward to a time when people are living in cities, and the need for protection is no longer as acute. By their strength and their wits, it is of course men who rule, and women are at their mercy. Of course it is hard for females to admit that their gender is subordinate to ours, which is why the great gender equality project has started. However, this project isn't about having the genders recognised as equal - it is about women adopting the worst characteristics of men, while berating us for being what nature and our mothers made us.
When women accept themselves as they are and stop trying to emulate men, perhaps then they can start to talk about superiority. In the mean-time, men will continue to be the driving force behind human progress, and if you push it too far, you may just find we come to regret our tolerance and react the only way we - according to some of the female debaters - know how.
When you said that "size does not matter skill does" thats a lie from personal experience i have fought boys bigger than me and i was faster lighter and more skilled in street fighting but he was just to strong and a few hits i was on the ground counting stars.
so just because you are more skilled and faster while we are bigger and slower does mean we cant get every time like you can we just have to get you once and you are finished
The survival instinct is innate in both men and women.
Women can be just as strong or stronger(it's only a matter of training, the fact that men are more pugnacious and spoiling for a fight isn't good on them) than men.In fact in most oriental/martial arts a lighter, more agile body is an advantage.Size does not matter, skill does.
And propagation/procreation in today's world is impossible sans woman but not sans man.
maybe fast forward to you means going back a few decades :P
Men are definitely not stronger than women. Men always pretend to be strong by keeping their problems to themselves, hoping it will go away. Let's look at the depression rates - higher percentage goes to men.
Also, has anyone heard of the quote
"behind every successful man, there is a woman" ?
Is that a threat?
Studies have shown numerous times that the ONLY way a man is superior to a woman is physical strength. This is becoming less and less useful with technological advances, and regardless of how muscular men may be, it nowhere near deserves to be referred to as the "driving force behind human progress."
And I think that when women, as you put it, "accept themselves as they are" this will restore the natural order and we will be a much more peaceful, happy and well-rounded matriarchal society. The problem here is that men are too confident, and women aren't confident enough... which is mostly due to the fact that men have convinced women they are weaker and useless without them for.... well since the beginning of our existence. This is a fallacy. and the sooner women realize that as a whole, the better off the world will be.
Women are not superior!
I think and after asking people this question "are women superior to men" most replied that we are simply equal and i can understand that only women can carry children so without them humans would die off but to create children you also need a man and God realised this- if God thought men were superior why would he choose to create women?
Men need Women and Women need Men.
Let me quote this sentence you just typed..."and men generally make trouble/war." EEE. WRONG. Females are usually the one behind the wars. Let me name one, rather famous, one. Diao Chan. She was a manipulative, evil basterd who brought the end to 2 Kingdoms.
Females live longer because their circulatory and Skeletal systems are more advanced. The man is stronger because he has a superior Muscular system.
you take the biblical route women are not superior for when Eve ate the apple she was decieved but when adam ate the apple he was not decieved because she knew that Eve made that fatal mistake not Adam
Actually, the four men who only entered onto this debate to argue against the motion voted against it. And that too based on your/their points: merely because your/their ego/s is/were hurt.
The others only voted after Veclock plagiarized/mutilated all the points on the stereotypically pink left.
That's an absurdly Heterosexual idea.
Women don't need men.
Ipso facto:The human race needs women to continue to proliferate/exist
and men generally make trouble/war.
Women live 5 years longer on average and age at a significantly lower rate; maintaining the pros of their youth for much longer. This point 'was' mentioned earlier with proof but may have been lost in Veclock land.
What makes you think that women are more superior than men?
1. Because women have womb?
Alright, Men does not have womb but do you know that the womb will soon be obsolete as menopause comes and it stops functioning? That phenomena will not happen for men. As menopause came, women will tend to be forgetful and emotional.
Speaking of artificial sperms, The scientists have already developed artificial egg also which in other words, the existence of both fathers and mothers are no longer needed. This is moral ethics, women! Do not put this topic to strengthen the statement that women are more superior. Or perhaps the debate topic should be changed to "Have women lost their common sense?"
2. Better drivers?
There is a case in the US about a woman buying a hot drink in McDonald's drive through... and soon after she got the drink, on the way home, she hit the speed bump and the coffee spill out to her thigh. You know what happen if a hot drink get into your skin? This fact denies that women always drive carefully than men or perhaps, they already drive carefully and slowly but still not good enough.
If there are accident commited by men (so far as I concern in the West? Which I do not think so... Because in Indonesia, female make accident more than male),
There are many reasons for that:
. More men than women driving thus, accident commited more by men.
. Drunk driving! Women do this a lot although in the West (less in Asia) I believe men also do this but usually nothing happen to the men.
. I do not what makes women think they are better drivers. So far as I concern, according to the statistic based on data compiled from police/highway patrol agencies across the country, 2/3 of accidents commited by women not men. It makes sense as men are more rational and women are more emotional.
In the men's mind before they start speeding up, they have already got the calculation in mind that only in rare occasion may fail but still better than if the emotional that drives.
As a matter of fact, men learn quicker than women in any case but please notice do not compare abnormal man with genius woman.
3. Again, I do not know about men in the West but in Asia, men are physically and mentally stronger than women.
Men does not cry in front of public although they got pressure from their boss and from the pressure of their family (Children's school fee, living cost, etc). Women, tend to cry whenever they got pressure thus women take longer time than men to become that tough.
Physically? Not to mention... want to try?
4. Brain And Skills.
As what I mentioned above, one of the skills is driving. Okay, lets talk about the general concept. Driving can be considered as men's job as it is suitable better for men instead of women, no wonder if men are good at it.
Let's talk about beauty (women's favourite topic) There are more men that are skillful in hair dressing compare to women. Designers also.
Cosmetics? Men develope it for women so women will not look that bad as they age.
Cooking? There are more men chefs than women.
All of these facts shows that although people may say that women are better in IQ or whatever blah.. (although I think it may be just coincidence)
This should prove that men are better in any case.
The idea of the world should be ruled by women is non-sense. There is no wonder that the fact is men controls the world, not women and will never ever happen without men's agreement.
For one thing we don't think that women are "more" superior to men(more than what? certainly; my grammar is superior to yours)
Women have "wombs"; that's each of us padre!
men "do not" have natural baby factories; yes therefore NEVER produce children EVER; capish?
Ever heard of male menopause? ooh
1.The argument on the right is equivocal to saying that people who eventually die(all of us) should not be credited for ever having lived. So; essentially the opposition has proved itself dead with its lopsided thinking: Well done!!!
2. Oh No! you gave an example of a single woman involved in an automobile accident; what ever will I do? There is 'NO" existing example of a single MAN ever being involved in a car/bus/truck/motorcycle accident. Oh dear ! You've got me now!!!
On the contrary I've put in a link earlier; in another yes point quoting road-accident statistics. More men than women get into and are the cause of road accidents. Also more men between the ages of 18-25 suffer fatalities(read:die/expire) because of rash/callous driving.
As for parallel parking everyone with a license is required to parallel park during the drivers' test. Again; since more women than men are 'cautious' enough to bother getting driver's licenses before getting on the road; the likely truth is that less men know how to parallel park.
You obviously haven't read any research on why women live five years longer than men; on average. There are two basic possible reasons: one is reproduction(sorry about playing that like a broken record) and the second reasoning is that women are better communicators. Women express feelings therefore avert psychological/mental scarring where/when men do not.Bottling up emotions is not a sign of, nor a means to achieve good physical/mental health.
Sure I'll try; though I wish to be exempt from facing legal consequences after slicing your head off with a knife-hand-strike through the neck. It's all physics.A light stick is a more effective weapon than a heavy bat; mainly because it's easier to control/maneuver/navigate. Control is power.
4. Not even worthy of addressing. Funny; quite.
Women are inferior to men, physically, but men and women are equal in moral value and intelligence.
I think it is scientifically proven that men are built to be stronger than women phsyically, which can be proven by looking at any sporting records. Women are not better than men. Men are not better than women. Each have their place, and unique function in life. They are just as important as the other. Feminine is on one side of the scale. Chauvinism is on the other. We need both, otherwise the scale is not balanced. If you only have man, its bad, if you only have woman, its bad. Both complete each other and bring out the best in each other, if they respect each other that is and learn to love each other. If the female tries to usurp the man, the scale loses balance. If the male tries to degrade or discard the female's advice and guidance, the balance is destroyed. We must do what what we were designed for in perfect harmony and love!
(God rid of the unnecessary religion and sexism)
1) Your assumption is that we're all christian.
2) Physically stronger, yes, but what about mentally? Most men get into fights because they have little ability to reason out AND listen to the counterargument, much less give a rebuttal.
3) Research and tells us that women have better developed brains and graduate with higher degrees. More developed brains means intelligence and a much firmer hold on sanity, a.k.a. moral values.
There would be no women without men!
Your Idea that males cannot reproduce but females can is a flawed argument. Both artificial sperm and eggs have been developed, meaning you do not need either male or females to reproduce.
Additional Comment ---->
May I just add, in the Christian religion, Man (Adam) was created first and Woman (Eve) from the rib of the Man, hence why Women have the extra rib... Why do we have to argue like this anyway, in God's eyes, we are all equal and made in his image. Why is this in the 'Religion' section anyway?
Hang on, I thought it was men who had the extra rib....but nevertheless I think the idea of the reason for it in the bible is utter nonsense (Eve emerged fron it). Could men having an extra rib simply be explained by the fact they are taller and have on average larger lungs?
It is mostly accepted by all Muslims that the females also came from men. Check your facts. I would like to paraphrase. Women came from th rib of man. The exact same thing as christianity.
In the Quranic version the first human was female and there's no proof backing biblical history. Science sides with the theory of evolution which points to the first living thing (our first ancestor; the being we've all evolved from) being reproductive. And
I hate to repeat myself again: People who are born male; cannot reproduce.
Rebuttal to Opposition part 1: Testosterone Is Beneficial
In the post, "The men's arguments are legitimate where as the womens are stupid!", you stated that:
"Testosterone: you were born with it. It is not your fault."
It is not a fault to have testosterone, a normal and important part of the endocrine system in both genders.Women also produce testosterone which helps maintain muscle and bone strength, and contributes to sex drive or libido. You act as if testosterone is a poison; but, you are wrong. It is a vital and important chemical that was evolved for a reason. Far from being a cause of aggression as you falsely believe, research shows it to be integral to fairness and other desirable traits.
Request to Opposition: provide sources for following claims
1)"Women are better at handling pain."- claimed in Yes Point 6
2)"When it comes to rational reasoning, a sensible woman can understand and explain better than men."- claimed in Yes Point 7
3)"women are reportedly better communicators/writers/artists/orators/singers."- claimed in Yes Point 7
4)"Due to their(women's) superior interlectual capabilities,"- claimed in Yes Point 8
5)"Women hardly play chess"- claimed in No Point 5
6)"Men are definitely not stronger than women."- claimed in No Point 6
7)"men generally make trouble/war."- claimed in No Point 7
[note: all quotes are taken from their source material directly via copy-and-paste, and no effort to fix and grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors has been made. This is reflected in the hilarious misspelling of 'intellectual' in Yes Point 8 by the opposition, while they are simultaneously telling another user to learn how to use spell check. This is compounded by the fact that this error occurred in a point where they were claiming with no sources that women have superior mental capabilities. It would seem women are superior hypocrites, sexists, and bigots, at the minimum.]
1. Check out the book "Man Down: Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt That Women Are Better Cops, Drivers, Gamblers, Spies, World Leaders, Beer Tasters, Hedge Fund Managers, and Just About Everything Else" by Dan Abrams, at chapter 2
2-3.To comprise it into one single sentence, men have created a variety of issues in different social, economical and political areas throughout the world in every single country. And, ironically, the solutions to all the problems caused by the men are increasingly being given by women after painstaking efforts. It is a scientifically proven fact that women are better communicators than men and this is largely because their brains are more networked for processing and conveying of messages. As a result, majority of women are far quicker and way better at the so-called “mind-reading” and communicating than most men. Moreover, women are more empathetic than men. Also, women have a cautious approach to life and career; they avoid reckless decisions and wait until they have the necessary skills or the full answer compared to men. Women are the world’s most successful “multi-taskers”. A look at the growing number of working women transforming into super-moms is proof enough for that. During the global meltdown that shook the world economy lately, there were many instances that showed a number of companies hiring efficient female executives into their work force and even to their boardrooms as important decision makers in order to help them come out of the market troubles. In short, female supremacy is the buzz-word these days all around the world. http://www.worldoffemale.com/are-women-superior-than-men/
4."Department of Education statistics show that men, whatever their race or socioeconomic group, are less likely than women to get bachelor's degrees — and among those who do, fewer complete their degrees in four or five years. Men also get worse grades than women."
"Still, men now make up only 42 percent of the nation's college students. And with sex discrimination fading and their job opportunities widening, women are coming on much stronger, often leapfrogging the men to the academic finish." http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/education/09college.html?_r=1
5. Famous Women chess player Judit Polgár (born July 23, 1976) is a Hungarian chess grandmaster. She is by far the strongest female chess player in history. In 1991, she achieved the title of Grandmaster (GM) at the age of 15 years and 4 months. She was, at that time, the youngest person ever to do so. Polgár is ranked number 50 in the world on the May 2010 FIDE rating list with an Elo rating of 2682, the only woman on FIDE's Top 100 Players list, and has been ranked as high as eighth. She has won or shared first in Hastings 1993, Madrid 1994, Leon 1996, US Open 1998, Hoogeveen 1999, Siegman 1999, Japfa 2000, and the Najdorf Memorial 2000. http://www.chess-sets-and-more.com/women-chess-players.html
6. According to a new study conducted by Internet security firm Bitdefender, men are more likely to fall victim to data theft on social networks like Facebook and Twitter than women. http://www.mandownnews.com/
7."We were not surprised to see that men have slightly more violations — about 5 percent — that result in accidents than women," said Raj Bhat, president of Quality Planning. "And because men are also more likely to violate laws for speeding, passing and yielding, the resulting accidents caused by men lead to more expensive claims than those caused by women."
Topping the list is the finding that men are cited for reckless driving 3.41 more times than women. Reckless driving is considered one of the most serious traffic offenses by courts since it implies a disregard for the rights and safety of people or property." http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=788126
Rebuttal to Opposition part 2: Males indeed Reproduce
In the post, "There would be no women without men!", you stated that:
"People who are born male; cannot reproduce."
This only reveals your extraordinary ignorance of us and our biology. Get your reading glasses on opposition, I'm gonna be your sex ed teacher for a spell. The male reproductive system is made up of a number of different organs working in conjunction with each other in order to produce and transport the male gamete, called the sperm cell. A sperm cell is a haploid cell designed to join with the female gamete to form a complete diploid cell. Without either, reproduction is impossible. The organs that create these cells in males are the testicles. A healthy male should have no issue reproducing by fertilizing female eggs.
Women are not needed by men in any manner
What can a women do for a man that he cannot proide for himself? A man can learn to do for himself everything that a wife traditionally did for her husband. Men can cook their own meals. Men can clean and decorate their own homes to suit them. Men can pick their own clothing. Men can learn to do their own sewing. Men can do their own gardening. The only reason a man thinks he needs a woman is that he has been socialized to believe that he is worthless if he cannot persuade a woman to love him, have sex with him, and bear his children.
A man needs a woman like a fish needs a bicycle. Women, however, still need men. If they don't need men for their sperm, they need men to be servants and whipping boys.
The first thing a man should say to a woman is "Non serviam". Common courtesy demands that women be given fair warning that the man they just met will not live his life for her sake as a servant, a protector, or a blame object.
What do you think?