Men are superior to women
Recently their have been statements that women are superior to men. For the following reasons, I am just not convinced. First and foremost, their are countries that exist where women have little to no rights. The fact that women in America and in similar cases elsewhere are already claiming superiority to men tickles me. Women have only just gained equal rights in the past century and their over emotional egos are already going to their heads. Points like life expectancy, driving records, IQ's, ingenuity, testosterone, and even the ability to reproduce and bare children have been brought up and weighed against men. All of these points in my opinion mean little to nothing when weighed against this hard fact. The advancement of the human race would have never occurred without the great courage, minds, and competitive ambition of men. Men bought civilization to where it is now only using women as a reproductive tool and can still do the same until the end of time. This cold hard fact outweighs any statistic that can be bought to the table. Bare in mind that statistic is one of the great maths that are used to skew facts. Though stats can be reliable, stats can be just as unreliable in the wrong hands when interpreted without the right information or the right sample. Therefore, details such as driving records, IQ'S, and many other variables can just as easily be discredited. In short, men are superior to women and any detail that can be bought to the table can be matched by an even better counter argument.
You can also add to the debate by leaving a comment at the end of the page.
Men have bought civilization to where it is now using women as nothing but a reproductive tool.
Up to now, men have made all the major breakthroughs in science and has brought man kind to where we sit now. Men have not needed women for nothing but a reproductive tool to populate the earth. Men have not needed women in the past and in all cases the past is always used to predict the future. Basing my findings on the premise of this, had men not allowed women more rights, men would do all the same now and in the future.
Joan of Arc (1412 – 1431) Led the French In The defeat the English.
Harriet Beecher Stowe (1811 – 1896) Author of "Uncle Tom’s Cabin," which brought attention to the horrors of slavery.
Florence Nightingale (1820 – 1910) An English nurse, considered a pioneering in modern nursing.
Clara Barton (1821 – 1912) The most famous civil war nurse, Clara Barton later founded the American Red Cross.
Marie Curie (1867 – 1934) famous scientist, won two Nobel prizes, famous for her work with her husband on radioactivity, discovered radium and polonium
Mother Teresa (1910 – 1997) Indian Nun, received the Nobel Peace Prize for her work in Calcutta, India with the Missionaries of Charity
Rosa Parks (1913 -2005) Rosa Parks was an American civil rights leader. She is best known for refusing to give up her seat on a bus to a white man in Montgomery, Alabama
Jane Goodall (1934 – ) famous for her study of chimpanzees
Also, a reason for that men have been a ( more or less ) active source for political, scientific, religious, and other educational categories is because that women were not allowed to be educated and only used as " property, and reproduction. "
Your argument does not disprove my argument
All women noted hardly have made a dint in human society. Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote a book about slavery; however, Abraham Lincoln lead the way on freeing slaves. Joan of Arc is one example of a women who exemplified in war when however there are far more better examples of men doing the same, but, better. Florence Nightingale and Clara Burton pioneered in nursing while men were making even better breakthroughs. If you click on the link bellow i will see your 5 great women against my 343 men listed on this page for their great breakthrough in medicine, physics, and any other science. Rosa Parks stole a seat on a bus while Martin Luther King had the dream, lead the civil rights movement, and gave his life for it. Men have made far more sacrifices to lead the human race to where we are. When war broke out more than majority of women trembled and hid behind there husbands while there husbands gave their life to protect them. Its a shame that women want to claim superiority to men after all the work men have done to get the human race where we are. Men have shed blood and gave their lives to protect their families and increase the quality of life for their people. Women measure up to men in no way because women could have never taken on the feats that men have taken on. To cap off this argument, your claims about men oppressing women being the reason why women didn't have such a big impact in the past is false. Women were needed at home with their kids and understood they were needed at home. You have to understand that taking care of a home was far more work up to the 1900's than it is now. Without a wife a family was very difficult to keep up. If anything i can honestly say you left out the biggest contribution that women have made in history and its sad that you have failed to mention it. Men could not have made the strives that they have had without their wives supporting them at home with the kids. In essence, Women were needed at home and yes women were not able to get out and work but this in no way prevented them from greatness. In fact i don't see why this would not have created more time for women to pursue their studies while men were away at work. It is obvious that the few women you named off were able to.
The premise of the topic is misguided for a few reasons.
Firstly, the scientific breakthroughs of the past era are completely eclipsed by the modern era. During this era there have been massive improvements with regards to the contribution that women make to the economy, and it is this effort that contributes to the economy and thus innovation.
Secondly, even in the past era it is generally accepted that among educated couples (ie, the elite in the past), women acted as advisers behind the "throne" (whether this is in the household, or in the literal sense). In this way they had a significant affect on society and decision making. There is no scientific way to measure women's true contribution.
Thirdly, the primarily driver of scientific development was a demand of some sort. These demands are met by individuals who innovate - not groups (at least not in the past pre 18th century). As such, to cite that "men" have contributed more to science than "women" is deeply flawed since 99.9% of men made no such contribution. Why should the entire gender gain credit for the efforts that a small handful of individuals achieved? The answer is simply that they should not.
Fourthly, it is not for any individual to decide which gender is superior. The productive capabilities of each gender for each role in society will be eventually be discovered by the free market.
As a concluding note, Feminists hold that most of the accomplishments of women in the distant past have been uncredited - such that the husbands would take credit or it was written under pseudonyms. Assuming this to be true, it means that it would be much more difficult to measure women's intellectual contributions. For sure there would be no easy way to do it.
What do you think?