[anonymouspie227]

Imo women and men should be equal... However, they are not. Women are still mistreated in areas of the world, and not taught that they can achieve anything. In many cases women are made to feel inferior to men.
It would be nice to live in a world where nobody was thought to be superior to others, but I know that will never happen.
There will always be a divide albeit, perhaps a smaller one in generations to come.
Our biological differences contribute to the divide, unfortunately, we can not change the way were made.

[Tyles]

the argument is settled.

[blu tack]

Judging by the OP's usual posts on this subject, this thread is a fairly crappy attempt at trolling.

[aftrglw]

(Original post by ChunkyFudgeLover101)
Imo women and men should be equal... However, they are not. Women are still mistreated in areas of the world, and not taught that they can achieve anything. In many cases women are made to feel inferior to men.
It would be nice to live in a world where nobody was thought to be superior to others, but I know that will never happen.
There will always be a divide albeit, perhaps a smaller one in generations to come.
Our biological differences contribute to the divide, unfortunately, we can not change the way were made.

If you believe in human rights, then you get them simply by being human. Thus, assuming women are human, they're equal, they just aren't treated equally.

(Original post by Tyles)


the argument is settled.

Specifically in regards to the sixth statement: you know that Kevlar vest you use to protect you in war? Invented by a woman. Same with the life raft you use when someone sinks your battleship. And chocolate chip cookies? Who doesn't like chocolate chip cookies?

[Tyles]

(Original post by aftrglw)
Specifically in regards to the sixth statement: you know that Kevlar vest you use to protect you in war? Invented by a woman. Same with the life raft you use when someone sinks your battleship. And chocolate chip cookies? Who doesn't like chocolate chip cookies?

aswell as lazer printers and common windshield wipers...I'm so sorry, imagine that sixth statement wiped off the face of the thread!

[aftrglw]

(Original post by Tyles)
aswell as lazer printers and common windshield wipers...I'm so sorry, imagine that sixth statement wiped off the face of the thread!

That's all I wanted... thanks!

[fuze-mo25]

men and women are completely different.
however neither is better than than the other.

[anonymouspie227]

(Original post by aftrglw)
If you believe in human rights, then you get them simply by being human. Thus, assuming women are human, they're equal, they just aren't treated equally.

I don't understand your point ? :/

[aftrglw]

(Original post by ChunkyFudgeLover101)
I don't understand your point ? :/

I was being a bit facetious. But the point is there's a difference between not being equal (which I don't think is true of women) and not being treated equally. What you cited was evidence of the latter, not the former. However, it's not a very important point... I've just been studying theory and philosophy too much.

[najinaji]

(Original post by Tyles)


the argument is settled.

There are many, many things wrong with the statements in this picture, but the idea that women had nothing to do with computers is so staggeringly wrong it's ridiculous.

Meet the world's first computer programmer, Ada Lovelace.

[cid]

OP is a troll, this is a spill over argument from another topic




my neckbeard itches

[CoffeeStinks]

This debate is a futile as stating that oranges and apples are equal.

[mc1000]

(Original post by ChunkyFudgeLover101)
Imo women and men should be equal... However, they are not. Women are still mistreated in areas of the world, and not taught that they can achieve anything. In many cases women are made to feel inferior to men.

The one-sidedness of this argument suggests to me that you hold the typical feminist perspective of things here... promotion of equality for women whenever it suits women.

Yes, you're correct that in certain areas of the world women are treated as inferior to men - and yes, this is absolutely wrong. But you make no mention of Western society, where increasingly men are discriminated against in many aspects of society. Child custody; Race for Life; a far greater promotion of breast cancer awareness than prostate cancer (in spite of the fact that similar numbers of people are affected by each); women-only gyms; an education system that benefits girls. I could go on, yet I can think of no such social aspect, based on gender alone, which stands in favour of men. And you say you're all for equality - as do all British women I know - and yet, when the car insurance laws changed such that men and women pay equal amounts, most of the women I know complained about unfairness and discrimination.

And what about Wimbledon, for example? Women are paid the same as men for playing less tennis. The maximum women play is the absolute minimum men play; it's possible for men to play more than twice as much tennis as women, which is considerably more physically and emotionally draining. As you're a female who uses such a one-sided argument in a gender-based debate, the statistics would suggest to me that you're fine with this the way it is... when in fact, a better system - absolutely equal - would be a pre-defined price for each set - and the average number of sets played for each gender as a whole throughout the tournament (i.e. added up and divided by the total number of players in the men's and women's tournament separately) would determine the prize money for the winner - and then pre-defined percentages of the winner's prize money for each round. Either that or have women play up to 5 sets... if women can run marathons, why can't they play 5 sets of tennis?

I'm also for equality that suits women at the expense of men -as long as it's absolutely equal. And I don't believe that biological differences alone play any part in this whatsoever, when it comes to women; I don't think this is a valid point at all (I personally can't think of any way in which women are widely discriminated against for their gender alone). In a way, I guess you could argue that biological differences play a role to an extent; men don't get pregnant, for example, and so they can stay at work, gain more experience, and accordingly get paid more than a woman who takes several years' maternity leave. But (with a few unfortunate exceptions) is it not the woman's choice to have sex in the first place? Women can't complain about this; if they choose not to have children, and gain more experience accordingly, then surely they're paid as much as an equally competent male counterpart. If not, there really is something wrong.

[NB_ide]

(Original post by Snagprophet)
Why do women lack men's testosterone levels?

Social conditioning

(Original post by elkana)
in the olympics why are there men and womans races why not mixed?

Ingrained sexism

because the women would lose

uh, no. They'd both win/lose equally, because they are equal.

men are differant from woman in more ways then they are similar
this does not mean that they are better just differant

sexism

(Original post by No Man)
If they are different physically they are not equal physically.

sexism

The numbers 7 and 4 are both numbers, despite being different, but are they equal? No.

misogyny

(Original post by Gjaykay)
Why does my cat's breath smell like cat food?

sexism

(Original post by Aaron_xyz)
I guess its just a big statistical anomaly that women have on average higher body fat then men then

sexism

(Original post by manchesterunited15)
Yes they should have equal rights, and in most aspects they're equal, but quite clearly men are better physically: On average they are stronger, faster, taller, bigger.

mysogyny

(Original post by aftrglw)
If you believe in human rights, then you get them simply by being human. Thus, assuming women are human, they're equal, they just aren't treated equally.

Specifically in regards to the sixth statement: you know that Kevlar vest you use to protect you in war? Invented by a woman. Same with the life raft you use when someone sinks your battleship. And chocolate chip cookies? Who doesn't like chocolate chip cookies?

(Original post by Tyles)
aswell as lazer printers and common windshield wipers...I'm so sorry, imagine that sixth statement wiped off the face of the thread!

hell yea! Our sisters played a supporting role it at least a small handful of inventions over the ages.

(Original post by CoffeeStinks)
This debate is a futile as stating that oranges and apples are equal.

Are you suggesting they're not?

[sakanaNOme]

we never had this equality bull**** 60 years age, or even 10000 years, and both genders used to get along just fine then why destroy this natural balance?

[sakanaNOme]

(Original post by jumpingjesusholycow)
I find mind-numbingly pressing the 'equality' button a bit pointless.

Inb4 someone cries sexism, I'm not stating that women are of a lower class to men, or that they deserve fewer rights. I'm stating that understanding the differences between men and women holds the key to striking the appropriate contemporary balance between the sexes and shifting discourse away from perpetually never ending discussion of events that happened more than 60 years ago.

I will point out that despite what many believe, the media isn't helping. Instead of trying to address the horrifically imbalanced relationship that appearance places on female self-value, we have Gok Wan telling the nation that all women need to do to assert their sense of self is "ditch those frumpy dresses and cinch in the waist".

What I'd like to see more of is gender balance. It seems the only way women can assert their sense of equality with men is through their vaginas in a sex-and-the-city-esque daze. Procuring gender balance however, can't just be achieved by focusing solely on women. It needs to come from acknowledging that men who don't aspire to some misaligned Jason Statham-ish caricature aren't any less masculine, and women who choose to study computer science aren't any less feminine.

Those are my two cents anyway

clear, concise constructed answer

[overtherainbow]

(Original post by Aaron_xyz)
I guess its just a big statistical anomaly that women have on average higher body fat then men then

boobs?? rather a large contribution perhap their bodies arent designed to have the same level of body fat?

[NB_ide]

(Original post by sakanaNOme)
we never had this equality bull**** 60 years age, or even 10000 years, and both genders used to get along just fine then why destroy this natural balance?

Because women have been massively oppressed, depressed and unhappy for all of human history up until the last few decades when we've started to see a glimmer of hope that one day they can live like men and be happy

No woman can be happy living in a "traditional" feminine way.

[Cerdog]

(Original post by mc1000)
stuff

I agree with everything in this post. One interesting point is that men can also get breast cancer, but even companies who campaign for breast cancer specifically completely ignore this.

[Annoying-Mouse]

(Original post by mc1000)
The one-sidedness of this argument suggests to me that you hold the typical feminist perspective of things here... promotion of equality for women whenever it suits women.

Yes, you're correct that in certain areas of the world women are treated as inferior to men - and yes, this is absolutely wrong. But you make no mention of Western society, where increasingly men are discriminated against in many aspects of society. Child custody; Race for Life; a far greater promotion of breast cancer awareness than prostate cancer (in spite of the fact that similar numbers of people are affected by each); women-only gyms; an education system that benefits girls. I could go on, yet I can think of no such social aspect, based on gender alone, which stands in favour of men. And you say you're all for equality - as do all British women I know - and yet, when the car insurance laws changed such that men and women pay equal amounts, most of the women I know complained about unfairness and discrimination.

And what about Wimbledon, for example? Women are paid the same as men for playing less tennis. The maximum women play is the absolute minimum men play; it's possible for men to play more than twice as much tennis as women, which is considerably more physically and emotionally draining. As you're a female who uses such a one-sided argument in a gender-based debate, the statistics would suggest to me that you're fine with this the way it is... when in fact, a better system - absolutely equal - would be a pre-defined price for each set - and the average number of sets played for each gender as a whole throughout the tournament (i.e. added up and divided by the total number of players in the men's and women's tournament separately) would determine the prize money for the winner - and then pre-defined percentages of the winner's prize money for each round. Either that or have women play up to 5 sets... if women can run marathons, why can't they play 5 sets of tennis?

Where's your evidence that men are discriminated against when it comes to child custody? How can you even work out such a thing? Anecdotal examples aren't evidence. And women typically having more custody of the children aren't evidence also.

Women only gyms make sense. Women typically are more shy than men and there's Muslim women who wouldn't be able to wear shorts/no headscarves if men were there because they'd have to. In my area and some other areas nearby, there are men only times to accommodate Muslim men/men who are shy. Plus, there's muscleworks as well as parisgym which is a male only gym and I'm sure I could find more. You can't use this as a argument. It makes economic sense and it goes both ways.

And again, there was male counterparts for example there was Run for Moore
but it was discontinued probably due to the fact that it wasn't very successful. And there's man on the run which is there to raise awareness to male cancers.

How does the education system benefit girls? And just because the education system benefits girls doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong or aimed at benefiting girls.

And again, we have Movember which is a massive famous event for men's health. And look at what the American cancer society has said. "Research has not yet proven that the potential benefits of testing outweigh the harms of testing and treatment. The American Cancer Society believes that men should not be tested without learning about what we know and don’t know about the risks and possible benefits of testing and treatment. Starting at age 50, (45 if African American or brother or father suffered from condition before age 65) talk to your doctor about the pros and cons of testing so you can decide if testing is the right choice for you."

This is the problem with both men's right movement and feminism. Neither of you are willing to be empirical or rational. Both of you are just willing to attempt to get facts to fit your ideology than allow the facts to shape it. And just trying to 1-up each other in this oppression Olympics game you guys play. Lets face it, neither of you have it particularly rough in Britain and there's only minor problems with your sexes.