[Bea492]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
Have you graduated yet? No? So how on earth do you think you know more than someone who has and is merely describing what they have seen?
Every girl I know, from the lazy to the ambitious, have either ended up with prams or basic jobs. This is not an opinion, but what I have seen happen.

This may have happened to girls you know but you can't say that that will be the end game for everyone. And there will definitely be men who graduated and got 'basic jobs' and kids.
I'm not saying your point isn't valid, I'm just saying you can't generalise. I've known many women who have gone on to very good jobs and had families too, the two things aren't mutually exclusive. Just speaking from a different viewpoint.

[pellejema]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
Ah, you know when you have won an argument when the opposition resorts to insults

No, it's just people like you are so closed-minded that whatever the strength of the other argument, you'll choose to ignore it because of your own ill-informed opinion.

[Jimbo1234]

(Original post by Bea492)
This may have happened to girls you know but you can't say that that will be the end game for everyone. And there will definitely be men who graduated and got 'basic jobs' and kids.
I'm not saying your point isn't valid, I'm just saying you can't generalise. I've known many women who have gone on to very good jobs and had families too, the two things aren't mutually exclusive. Just speaking from a different viewpoint.

If you think you know more than someone who has actually been through this, then go ahead, dream what you must. I wish what I said was wrong, but 95% of the girls I know have gone and done this, and remember, I went to York so I was not friends with trashy people. For some reason girls in this country don't want to try, but then many fail at being parents which is the alarming part.

(Original post by pellejema)
No, it's just people like you are so closed-minded that whatever the strength of the other argument, you'll choose to ignore it because of your own ill-informed opinion.

Ah yes, the person who set out to find numerous sources on the topic is closed-minded and ill-informed I think you need to look in the mirror.

[pellejema]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)



Ah yes, the person who set out to find numerous sources on the topic is closed-minded and ill-informed I think you need to look in the mirror.

The trouble is you are only taking notice/giving due weight to the sources that back up your claims; that's bad science.

[Foo.mp3]

Many women are deserving of praise and encouragement, and indeed some better able to perform certain duties, in certain institutions, than other (male) candidates, on merit. All well and good.. plus if we don’t have a few women in football then who’s going to make the coffee and sammiches?

Positive discrimination, smugness and baseless senses of entitlement range from 'lol' to 'wtf' tho aye..

(Original post by natchina)
What struck me was the sense of entitlement that the females showed

Are we talking about the football industry or feminists in general now?

(Original post by natchina)
What I found the most shocking though was the timid and politically correct capitulation by the males. They seemed to beem with pride at their own dispossession -- It sort of repulsed me a bit

If this isn't an analogy for positive discrimination more generally in society, and modern (mis)conceptions of 'tolerance' re: certain other issues, then it bloody should be!

(Original post by natchina)
I suspect though that these men are just scared about losing their jobs on the BBC. They must play the game

As must we all in the era of PC > all else

(Original post by alexmagpie)
Why do so many of you believe that you're entitled because 'men invented football'?

Look at the men taking over the officiating of this event, absolutely disgusts me - talk about double standards!

(Original post by Chloe xxx)
Agreed, woman are also safer drivers than men and I always chose a female driving instructor, many men ones are known for being pervy and touchy feely when teaching a woman.

Awwh. Did one try to pop your hood and check your oils with his dip stick? Kakakak! I’d probably prefer a female too, one of mine had split personality, the other was a fairly intense ex cop!

(Original post by Chloe xxx)
I find very hard to believe given your disgusting attitude towards them and the fact most men even ones worth far more than you find it hard to attract any woman

It's a little-known fact that us 'misogynists' tend to make make the best lovers

(Original post by pellejema)
''I'd like to burn you at the stake. I consider you a traitor to your sex''

But then you'd have to ask a man for the key to the shed (where the jerry can of gasoline is kept); in fact you'd have to ask a man to go get it for you.. there are spiders in there

(Original post by Chumbaniya)
I can't stand the fact that the Prime Minister and the majority of MPs, all senior civil servants, most judges and the CEO of almost every major company are all female

Do you really want a power-hungry (doubtless rather unpleasant, pug faced) n00bette fast-tracked to those positions?

I understand, and to a certain extent concur with, the message behind the parody but lettuce be sensei-bubbles just for a sec..

We could end up with someone like Diane Abbott as PM, then where the **** would we be!?

[DannyBoy123]

I'd happily be a house husband to any rich/career driven ladies out there, applications by PM.

[Chumbaniya]

(Original post by Foo.mp3)
Do you really want a power-hungry (doubtless rather unpleasant, pug faced) n00bette fast-tracked to those positions?

I understand, and to a certain extent concur with, the message behind the parody but lettuce be sensei-bubbles just for a sec..

We could end up with someone like Diane Abbott as PM, then where the **** would we be!?

In this case I wanted more to ridicule the OP's suggestion than to make any serious point about the under-representation of women in these roles. They are underrepresented, yes, and that is a cause for some concern, but I wouldn't suggest forcing people through to top level jobs just because they happen to be female.

[interactus]

The lack of humility just isn't right...

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
If you think you know more than someone who has actually been through this, then go ahead, dream what you must. I wish what I said was wrong, but 95% of the girls I know have gone and done this, and remember, I went to York so I was not friends with trashy people. For some reason girls in this country don't want to try, but then many fail at being parents which is the alarming part.

If my guess is correct, you're about 22 or 23 years old, and haven't actually been through all that much besides having gone to university. You probably never even had a job of any sort at all, and are still living at home with your parents. The people and the girls you do or have known all most likely stem from your home town or the surrounding area which I don't imagine has a reputation for being the international playground of the world's elite. I imagine you feel frustrated by them being satisfied with the averageness of their lives and for some reason you feel you are better than that; however, you are still in the same place as them. You probably would rather sign up on the dole than 'settle' (temporarily) for a 'basic' job as you'd find that beneath you. Therefore, anybody who'd do that, you'd see it as a weakness. As for trashy people, since you've just declared that most people you know have no aspirations and are essentially wasting their lives, I would be very interested in what your classification of 'trashy' is. Had you gone to Oxford or Cambridge I could see how the society there would be superior and something to envy; however, although York is a good university, it really isn't that difficult to get in and the city itself and the people there are quite average.

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
Ah yes, the person who set out to find numerous sources on the topic is closed-minded and ill-informed I think you need to look in the mirror.

You are obviously a very intelligent young man, but you need to realise that in real life, it is not all about citing references. If you've done your research methods and stats, you will know that given the right motivation and cohort, any behavioural and social study can be manipulated in essentially any direction. Also, once you get off the internet and enter a face to face debate, you won't be able to just tell people to check out studies in the middle of a conversation.

[tehFrance]

(Original post by natchina)
Come on men, tell us what you really think? Don't be shy.

What female takeover? I come from France, the women are still in the kitchen

Although seriously, there is not a female takeover happening.

[Philbert]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
As for you inane comment about women wanting to work, well herpaderp, did you not read my source about women not wanting to work?

You read the article someone posted that stated that 70% of women would want to work at least part-time even if they didn’t have to, then turned it around and said “well, they would be bored otherwise derpderp” which can be applied equally to men. You ignored my source that said that mothers would rather work full- or part-time than not at all. There’s no point discussing this with you if you’re going to ignore the statistics and distort the facts to suit your own opinion.

The point about bitching shows that if many women are still primitive and let emotions and instincts dictate their decisions, then they could not be successful in the work place. Why am I having to spell this out ?

My point about psychopaths implies that these men will absolutely screw over women in the workplace and therefore it is impossible for women to dominate if these men are still around.
And no, psychopaths do not act through choice. Go study the topic and then come back (it is quite fascinating).

Yet if men can let their instincts dictate their decisions then that contradicts this statement you made; “women still let their primal instincts drive them like primitive animals. Any species that does such a thing can not dominate the modern world.” I can see what you’re getting at, but Christ, keep on top of your own arguments.

Actually, only 14,000 sexual assaults happened last year, and of course one person could commit multiple assaults, thus the amount of men who are "victim to their hormones" is far far less then the figure I guessed at merely to show my point. But seeing as you want to be pedantic, there are the figures

How does pointing out that a woman is not wearing much make a woman “a victim of her hormones”. Men also engage in intrasexual competition, sometimes through use of aggression so are they also “victims of their hormones”? I wonder what the result would have been if they had included male opinions in the study.

Still a significantly higher sample size than 69. Is bitching really as damaging to society, and to individuals, as rape? Again, if some men act so primitively, how are men able to have taken over society when you made the argument I have quotes above.

How much do you know about Dutch culture? Nothing. So why are you instantly dismissing anything from there? Yet again using ignorance as the basis for your opinion.

My Uncle married a Dutch woman and they live in Rotterdam; my family have stayed with them twice. So I probably know more than you, even if not much. I know that their culture is quite different from ours, and that source you quoted even mentions some of these differences. You have been shown evidence that working mothers would rather work, and it simply isn’t enough to say that these women are happy not working, therefore most women would rather not work.

Yes, many women are depressed. Again, did you not read the source? Clearly not, so here is another source. Sadly it has no colouring sections so might not hold your attention long enough.

Nice, resorting to insults rather than reading your own sources properly. That article gives a few other reasons why more women are depressed than men, and “One recent study showed the same ratio across nine other countries, regardless of ethnic background or economic status”, so even women who don’t work get depression as much as women who do?

The depression in men being linked to failure at work shows how men are intrinsically made for work and actively seek success from it.

The source also stated that there are other factors involved. Being unemployed when you’d rather be working is enough to induce depression in anyone.

No, uni is about a career in this country?
Why?
Because of the massive ****ing debt you get from it.
Can you really justify a mild interest to cost you £30k +? Of course not. Just buy some books and read about the subject at home.
Outside of biosciences, there are very few women studying scientific/maths based fields which do pay the best and have a secure career. You can lie all you want about arts students being fine, but when you graduate, just watch which of your friends actually get employed.

You could buy some books and read about engineering or physics at home. You go to university for the contact you get with the academics who can guide you with your studies, a library full of books and journals you wouldn’t have access to otherwise, active discussion with your peers. That's a lot, even when you don't factor in that STEM courses also have access to equipment for the practical work involved. People can do want they want with their money, if the government is willing to give them a loan while they increase their employment prospects (sorry to burst your bubble, but it's generally true), then there's not a great deal you can do.

You picked up on only one of my points. The others were: Men also take these courses, not as many do no, but still. There are plenty of graduate jobs that don't require a specific degree and there are more women entering STEM subjects than ever, and there is a slight majority in women entering medicine. I may not have graduated yet, but I have made friends with a lot of people older than me, in school and at university. Most of my friends did do or are doing STEM degrees, but the ones who have graduated from arts/humanities courses are all employed or in further education. Even the women. Not one of them works in a supermarket or other unskilled employment, or had to for very long

Wait until they graduate, then everything changes.
That is when they use their degree to work at Asda, or to get married, or to have a kid to their uni boyfriend of 2 years.
I really wish I was joking or being a sexist prick, but what I described is exactly what happens every time.

Now you’re just trolling.

Every time a woman graduates she goes into unskilled employment or does not work at all? And what is that based on? Anecdotal evidence? Just look at the employment figures for any degree and you will see that that is not the case. However, graduate unemployment is pretty bad ATM, and if someone needs to work at a supermarket while they look for a job or work towards a postgrad, why is that so shameful?

I could give plenty of anecdotal evidence of women I know that would prove that statement wrong. How about: A woman who is in her F2 year after graduating from Med school and a woman working for the MOD after doing a psychology BSc and masters. Two women who show that that is not “exactly what happens every time”. Do you need more? Okay, how about: a woman currently doing a PhD in theoretical physics, a woman working in an investment bank after doing a Maths degree, a woman training as a teacher after doing an English Lit degree, two women who did History degrees working for a publishing company and doing a law conversion course, respectively.

Given that, I know that some women certainly do have kids or go into unskilled work after graduation, because I don't generalise about an entire cohort of people based on my own observations

[Philbert]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
And to add, I also think for some reason that women, the sex with a maternal instinct should also raise them.
.... even though this has been going on in civilisation for millennia and along with other mammals as well.

What about the sex with the paternal instinct? You’re saying fathers should have no role in raising their own children? I’m sure a lot of fathers would have something to say about that. I thought this was quite interesting: Among the primates and the carnivores, up to 40% of genera show some form of paternal care. It’s somewhere around 35% of carnivore and Perissodactyla genera studied. This may be not be a majority, and may be no more than providing food for their young, but males clearly do play some part in the raising of their offspring. Men have evolved to care for their children too, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. You should look at the literature, it’s quite fascinating, really.

[Jimbo1234]

(Original post by interactus)
The lack of humility just isn't right...



If my guess is correct, you're about 22 or 23 years old, and haven't actually been through all that much besides having gone to university. You probably never even had a job of any sort at all, and are still living at home with your parents. The people and the girls you do or have known all most likely stem from your home town or the surrounding area which I don't imagine has a reputation for being the international playground of the world's elite. I imagine you feel frustrated by them being satisfied with the averageness of their lives and for some reason you feel you are better than that; however, you are still in the same place as them. You probably would rather sign up on the dole than 'settle' (temporarily) for a 'basic' job as you'd find that beneath you. Therefore, anybody who'd do that, you'd see it as a weakness. As for trashy people, since you've just declared that most people you know have no aspirations and are essentially wasting their lives, I would be very interested in what your classification of 'trashy' is. Had you gone to Oxford or Cambridge I could see how the society there would be superior and something to envy; however, although York is a good university, it really isn't that difficult to get in and the city itself and the people there are quite average.



You are obviously a very intelligent young man, but you need to realise that in real life, it is not all about citing references. If you've done your research methods and stats, you will know that given the right motivation and cohort, any behavioural and social study can be manipulated in essentially any direction. Also, once you get off the internet and enter a face to face debate, you won't be able to just tell people to check out studies in the middle of a conversation.

Ah, yet again someone can't argue with my substantiated argument so resorts to an ad hominem argument. What a surprise. Yet you have the audacity to ask for humility

But just to clarify, I am actually from an area which is somewhat wealthy, but with both extreme wealth and poverty only a few miles down the road. This means that the people from this area are very diverse. The girls I talk about are from all over the country because of how uni works, and again, vary from the very wealthy to the poor. Yet the result of what they do after uni seems to be the same - **** all.

The reason why I care about what they do is because of the results - inevitable depression. Seeing that I have to work with, possibly live with, and maybe even marry a woman, their mental well being is very important as it will inevitably affect my life.

As for face-to-face debate, people will always shut up once they realise that my opinion is substantiated and formed from research and theirs, like yours, is formed from ignorance and possibly denial.

(Original post by Philbert)
What about the sex with the paternal instinct? You’re saying fathers should have no role in raising their own children? I’m sure a lot of fathers would have something to say about that. I thought this was quite interesting: Among the primates and the carnivores, up to 40% of genera show some form of paternal care. It’s somewhere around 35% of carnivore and Perissodactyla genera studied. This may be not be a majority, and may be no more than providing food for their young, but males clearly do play some part in the raising of their offspring. Men have evolved to care for their children too, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. You should look at the literature, it’s quite fascinating, really.

Nice strawman.
I said women should be the main parents to raise their children, not that men should not have anything to do with their kids.

[stac4321]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)

So how did penguins end up with their socially constructed gender roles, or lions, or polar bears? Did they also sit down and the men decided to dominate Sorry, but we are also animals as nature will dictate what we do to some degree.




Yeah, it is a very hard question with no real answer.

On one hand you could argue that men are naturally more logical, thus would prefer these subjects over ones in which are more expressive and creative which women tend to study.

But the preference for women might be 10% natural, 90% society because if you go to somewhere like China, many girls (who might I add are very normal) study maths based subjects to a very advanced level (eg PhD). This shows that girls can easily do these subjects, but do they want to? Did their parents push them into a field they don't like etc?

Exactly, there is just too many social and cultural factors to take into account to really come do a conclusion. Anyway, that why I said he was being a douche for making such grand and unsubstantied statements haha

[interactus]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
Ah, yet again someone can't argue with my substantiated argument so resorts to an ad hominem argument.
What a surprise. Yet you have the audacity to ask for humility

No, you seem to choose to misunderstand when things don't go your way. I was not making an argument of any sort, I was merely trying to establish your profile to make it clear that you are in no position to feel superior to others.

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
But just to clarify, I am actually from an area which is somewhat wealthy, but with both extreme wealth and poverty only a few miles down the road.

you might come from a "somewhat wealthy" area, but I doubt you come from a somewhat wealthy household.

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
This means that the people from this area are very diverse.

Our definition of diversity must grossly differ. If you are only talking about a difference in income, I don't find that very diverse at all.

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
The girls I talk about are from all over the country because of how uni works, and again, vary from the very wealthy to the poor. Yet the result of what they do after uni seems to be the same - **** all.

again, mainly from one country and you're focusing on income as the only indication of diversity.

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
The reason why I care about what they do is because of the results - inevitable depression. Seeing that I have to work with, possibly live with, and maybe even marry a woman, their mental well being is very important as it will inevitably affect my life.

do you hear how self-centred you sound even when you're speaking about the well-being of others? again, I doubt you even have a job right now and considering you most likely live with your parents, working, living and marrying a woman is a "problem" you will not encounter in a long time.

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
As for face-to-face debate, people will always shut up once they realise that my opinion is substantiated and formed from research and theirs, like yours, is formed from ignorance and possibly denial.

I get the feeling people tend to shut up around you quite a lot, not because they're ignorant and in denial as you like to think, but because they simply don't like your company. you really ought to be more humble and open minded as sooner or later you'll realise that your "I'm the best and the smartest and everybody else is ignorant and in denial" attitude will not get you far. you could be the most talented engineer, but if your personality and attitude is off-putting, others will not want to work with you.

[Blorcyn]

(Original post by interactus)

I get the feeling people tend to shut up around you quite a lot, not because they're ignorant and in denial as you like to think, but because they simply don't like your company.

Exactly this, you can kick at the sea all day but you're never going to stop the waves. (Argumentum e silencio, logical fallacy)

I did notice that he said that one day he expects he'll marry/be in a long-term relationship.

I hope that he finds that this person is able to change his view on women. As well read as he is, I'm sure he knows that contempt for your partner is the single biggest indicator that a relationship will not last longer than 15 years from the point of observation 90-95%* (depending on length of observation. 15 minutes has a CI of 90, 1 hr 95) of the time.

*Dr. J Gottman, the mathematics of divorce.
*Blink, Malcolm gladwell.

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
x

[Jimbo1234]

(Original post by Philbert)

Spoiler:

Show

You read the article someone posted that stated that 70% of women would want to work at least part-time even if they didn’t have to, then turned it around and said “well, they would be bored otherwise derpderp” which can be applied equally to men. You ignored my source that said that mothers would rather work full- or part-time than not at all. There’s no point discussing this with you if you’re going to ignore the statistics and distort the facts to suit your own opinion.

...and you ignore the fact that men getting depressed due to work performance shows a genuine interest and care about their work. If you keep this circular logic up then I shall stop posting as it is a waste of my time.

Spoiler:

Show

Yet if men can let their instincts dictate their decisions then that contradicts this statement you made; “women still let their primal instincts drive them like primitive animals. Any species that does such a thing can not dominate the modern world.” I can see what you’re getting at, but Christ, keep on top of your own arguments.

Oh look, you clearly did no research into what I said and are spouting rubbish Stop posting and go use google, then come back.

Spoiler:

Show

How does pointing out that a woman is not wearing much make a woman “a victim of her hormones”. Men also engage in intrasexual competition, sometimes through use of aggression so are they also “victims of their hormones”? I wonder what the result would have been if they had included male opinions in the study.

Still a significantly higher sample size than 69. Is bitching really as damaging to society, and to individuals, as rape? Again, if some men act so primitively, how are men able to have taken over society when you made the argument I have quotes above.

Why are you talking about women wearing little clothing? If you are referring to the study, then it is the peoples reactions....as clearly stated in the article, and I have already been over this point a dozen times.

Bitching to that extent is more damaging to business. It most likely means women would not promote the correct person due to bitchy reasons which could be very problematic.
As I have said before, why are you going on about such a tiny minority of men? 14,000 men or less will have no impact, but 80% of women....now that is a significant number.

Spoiler:

Show

My Uncle married a Dutch woman and they live in Rotterdam; my family have stayed with them twice. So I probably know more than you, even if not much. I know that their culture is quite different from ours, and that source you quoted even mentions some of these differences. You have been shown evidence that working mothers would rather work, and it simply isn’t enough to say that these women are happy not working, therefore most women would rather not work.

Wrong, your source was about women, not mothers if you read the charts and the article.

Spoiler:

Show

Nice, resorting to insults rather than reading your own sources properly. That article gives a few other reasons why more women are depressed than men, and “One recent study showed the same ratio across nine other countries, regardless of ethnic background or economic status”, so even women who don’t work get depression as much as women who do?

The source also stated that there are other factors involved. Being unemployed when you’d rather be working is enough to induce depression in anyone.

When did "economic status" = unemployed?
Taking some massive leaps and guesses their.

Spoiler:

Show

You could buy some books and read about engineering or physics at home. You go to university for the contact you get with the academics who can guide you with your studies, a library full of books and journals you wouldn’t have access to otherwise, active discussion with your peers. That's a lot, even when you don't factor in that STEM courses also have access to equipment for the practical work involved. People can do want they want with their money, if the government is willing to give them a loan while they increase their employment prospects (sorry to burst your bubble, but it's generally true), then there's not a great deal you can do.

You picked up on only one of my points. The others were: Men also take these courses, not as many do no, but still. There are plenty of graduate jobs that don't require a specific degree and there are more women entering STEM subjects than ever, and there is a slight majority in women entering medicine. I may not have graduated yet, but I have made friends with a lot of people older than me, in school and at university. Most of my friends did do or are doing STEM degrees, but the ones who have graduated from arts/humanities courses are all employed or in further education. Even the women. Not one of them works in a supermarket or other unskilled employment, or had to for very long

I clearly said that STEM subjects are acceptable, what is with all these strawmen today? And as I said before, many girls do not study STEM subjects which is why one can not confidently claim that women want careers.

If your degree however does not need any equipment and you are doing it simply out of curiosity, then you are most likely wasting your money. You do not need many lecturers for some subjects as the written texts will give you all the opinions you need, and unlike sciences, there is not alternative method to teaching it. You either learn what happened or can't.
Sure, people can do what they want with money, but what a lousy excuse that is. Doing what you want is not a justification or a reason, and most certainly does not make it a good idea. To add, how many 17/18 yr olds are mature enough to make good decisions with such little life experience? Very few.

Yes, some guys do these dodgy subjects, but that is not the issue. The question is about women dominating the economy, and with so few having maths based degrees, that is simply impossible. True, more women do STEM subjects, but a one to three percent increase is still **** all.

Spoiler:

Show

Now you’re just trolling.

Every time a woman graduates she goes into unskilled employment or does not work at all? And what is that based on? Anecdotal evidence? Just look at the employment figures for any degree and you will see that that is not the case. However, graduate unemployment is pretty bad ATM, and if someone needs to work at a supermarket while they look for a job or work towards a postgrad, why is that so shameful?

I could give plenty of anecdotal evidence of women I know that would prove that statement wrong. How about: A woman who is in her F2 year after graduating from Med school and a woman working for the MOD after doing a psychology BSc and masters. Two women who show that that is not “exactly what happens every time”. Do you need more? Okay, how about: a woman currently doing a PhD in theoretical physics, a woman working in an investment bank after doing a Maths degree, a woman training as a teacher after doing an English Lit degree, two women who did History degrees working for a publishing company and doing a law conversion course, respectively.

Given that, I know that some women certainly do have kids or go into unskilled work after graduation, because I don't generalise about an entire cohort of people based on my own observations

Although my experience is anecdotal, it still happened thus can not be ignored.
As for working in the supermarket, many grads chose it as the easy solution. Rather than looking high and low for a good job and being willing to move, they just settle for their local Asda. Of course not every woman will end up doing this, but I know half a dozen who have, and the others sadly ended up doing a poor grad scheme with no prospects due to their degree choice. Everyone I know who did a science degree(who are also guys) has ended up in a well paid job with a strong future.
Oh and fyi (and slightly off-topic), the two people you know doing Law conversion course should drop out asap as there are no jobs in Law at the moment...and I mean none.

[Alexandra's Box]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
...

Hi, I've been following your comments and was wondering if you could give some reasons why women are the better main parent? Obviously the standard role has been female = rears children, male = hunts.
However, in today's world, when both genders can work or look after children well, why the woman? What particular methods would she use or what characteristics does she have?
Also, what do you think about the higher proportion of women entering medicine and veterinary science?

[Jimbo1234]

(Original post by Alexandra's Box)
Hi, I've been following your comments and was wondering if you could give some reasons why women are the better main parent? Obviously the standard role has been female = rears children, male = hunts.
However, in today's world, when both genders can work or look after children well, why the woman? What particular methods would she use or what characteristics does she have?
Also, what do you think about the higher proportion of women entering medicine and veterinary science?

A very good and fair question.
My answer would be that women are physically better at being mothers as it has not been society that has chosen those roles, but nature, hence why every society has followed the same pattern. Here are two sources to read on the psychological differences; 1, 2.

As for women doing medicine, well it makes perfect sense. Women are more likely to care for others due to maternal and maturing instincts and medicine is the perfect job for catering to such feelings.

(Original post by interactus)

Spoiler:

Show

No, you seem to choose to misunderstand when things don't go your way. I was not making an argument of any sort, I was merely trying to establish your profile to make it clear that you are in no position to feel superior to others.

you might come from a "somewhat wealthy" area, but I doubt you come from a somewhat wealthy household.

Our definition of diversity must grossly differ. If you are only talking about a difference in income, I don't find that very diverse at all.

again, mainly from one country and you're focusing on income as the only indication of diversity.

do you hear how self-centred you sound even when you're speaking about the well-being of others? again, I doubt you even have a job right now and considering you most likely live with your parents, working, living and marrying a woman is a "problem" you will not encounter in a long time.

I get the feeling people tend to shut up around you quite a lot, not because they're ignorant and in denial as you like to think, but because they simply don't like your company. you really ought to be more humble and open minded as sooner or later you'll realise that your "I'm the best and the smartest and everybody else is ignorant and in denial" attitude will not get you far. you could be the most talented engineer, but if your personality and attitude is off-putting, others will not want to work with you.

I love how your entire post has nothing to do with the topic at hand but is just one massive ad hominem argument.
Care to comment on how my sources, or those of others which are in agreement with myself, are wrong and why women will take over?

[Blorcyn]

(Original post by Jimbo1234)
A very good and fair question.
My answer would be that women are physically better at being mothers as it has not been society that has chosen those roles, but nature, hence why every society has followed the same pattern. Here are two sources to read on the psychological differences; 1, 2.

As for women doing medicine, well it makes perfect sense. Women are more likely to care for others due to maternal and maturing instincts and medicine is the perfect job for catering to such feelings.

But medicine is a traditionally male-dominated subject, from 20 years ago all the way back to Hippokrates. So, why's it changed?

[Jimbo1234]

(Original post by Blorcyn)
But medicine is a traditionally male-dominated subject, from 20 years ago all the way back to Hippokrates. So, why's it changed?

Oh I don't know, maybe it is that women are now allowed to read, write, go to school etc?
You have to remember that women have only very recently started to go into further education hence why this has only happened in the last 20 years.