Women "make me a sandwich"

Care to explain how this is the case?

On average, men are stronger than women hence they are more suited to lifting.

Almost no one is the average man or woman. The mean strength of men as a population is higher than the mean strength of women as a population. These means have variances and there exist population distributions of individual strength values for both genders. Picking individuals from a population is in essence a sampling event, and as such, the number of individuals you pick is a sample size. Smaller sample sizes tends to give larger sampling errors i.e. the smaller the sample size, the larger the sampling error, and the less your sample mean reflects the population mean. What this means is that if you were to pick one random man and one random woman then the chances that their individual strength values would be anywhere near the population means for their respective genders is low. What this means is that assuming any one man is stronger than any one woman based solely on gender is far from a sure bet.

To put this back in context, let's say our summer camp is run on ruthless efficiency and we don't care that everyone is capable of chopping wood or making sandwiches - only the best will do. If you've got a group of men and women at the camp and decide to make all the men chop wood in a manly way and all the women make dainty little sandwiches, you're going to end up with the strongest people chopping wood less frequently than if you were to assign tasks based on who is actually strongest regardless of gender (where you'd end up with the strongest people chopping wood every time). This is because your groups of men and women are very small samples of their populations and are very unlikely to accurately represent the real population means (and more importantly each individual in a group will almost never actually be the mean value of the population).

If you were even crazier and decided to ask people what they wanted to do in a casual social situation where pretty much everyone will be capable of doing every task rather than assuming things based on gender, you might even have the happiest people chopping wood every time.

Surely a chef would volunteer immediately for cooking? Likewise, a weightlifter for lifting.

In the absence of any of this information, it's best to assume that lifting would be most suited to those whose bodies look appropriate for it.

Meaning therefore that splitting based on gender is stupid. It should be on skill.

Posted from TSR Mobile

They weren't strong at all btw.

Who wasn't strong?

Society has come to the stage where some things are messed up.

I was in a summer camp and me and some other guys were given a list of tasks that needed doing.

One of them involved lifting heavy huge logs, naturally as a man who has done this on numerous camps I thought without thinking I should do that along with the other guys.

The other list included preparing the food like sandwiches etc.
So I asked one of the girls in the camp if they wanted to do that since the logs were pretty huge and needed cutting, she said "sure" and smiled and I reckon she was flirting because she likes the idea of muscluar guys cutting wood etc, you know what I mean about preference.

Anyway a few seconds later another girl came over and said
"how sexist of you, you pig! Just because you are a man don't think we can't do it"

I was shocked to even say anything at this point, because I wasn't expecting such a response from someone who I didn't even ask to randomly butt in and it's been the harmless accepted norm for thousands of years.

The other girl said no it's fine I want to, but then the other said "no we need to stand up against men"

At this point, I said "**** it, i'll make my own sandwich and do the logs if you have such a big problem with it, even though I didn't ask you, and it says so on the list"

What is it with some of these militant feminist girls and women who hate men so much, I didn't even do anything wrong!

How can I go about in the future making sure something like this doesn't happen again???
And don't say do everything, since that list was huge, and I did many things already.

Edit the title is that more people read it.

The girls couldn't lift the logs at all. They even struggled pulling the kayaks ffs.

Some girls are over sensitive bitches You should have asked her to do the things on your list to shut her up. That would of made her happy right?

That's what I thought. Feminist logic crash course 101 : if 1 in a million women can do something the average man can then saying women can't do it makes you misogynist and sexist. You are generalizing and discriminating if one side is one million times more capable of doing something better than the other side.

Almost no one is the average man or woman. The mean strength of men as a population is higher than the mean strength of women as a population. These means have variances and there exist population distributions of individual strength values for both genders. Picking individuals from a population is in essence a sampling event, and as such, the number of individuals you pick is a sample size. Smaller sample sizes tends to give larger sampling errors i.e. the smaller the sample size, the larger the sampling error, and the less your sample mean reflects the population mean. What this means is that if you were to pick one random man and one random woman then the chances that their individual strength values would be anywhere near the population means for their respective genders is low. What this means is that assuming any one man is stronger than any one woman based solely on gender is far from a sure bet.

To put this back in context, let's say our summer camp is run on ruthless efficiency and we don't care that everyone is capable of chopping wood or making sandwiches - only the best will do. If you've got a group of men and women at the camp and decide to make all the men chop wood in a manly way and all the women make dainty little sandwiches, you're going to end up with the strongest people chopping wood less frequently than if you were to assign tasks based on who is actually strongest regardless of gender (where you'd end up with the strongest people chopping wood every time). This is because your groups of men and women are very small samples of their populations and are very unlikely to accurately represent the real population means (and more importantly each individual in a group will almost never actually be the mean value of the population).

If you were even crazier and decided to ask people what they wanted to do in a casual social situation where pretty much everyone will be capable of doing every task rather than assuming things based on gender, you might even have the happiest people chopping wood every time.

Feel like that.


How can we stop these feminist radical crazy people?

Some of our school staff (almost 100% female) used to come during classes and ask for a few boys to volunteer when something heavy needed to be moved around the school. They never asked for girls or students in general. Would that be considered sexist by modern PC/ feminist logic? Against boys, girls or both? Never heard a girl complain about it though.

Some of our school staff (almost 100% female) used to come during classes and ask for a few boys to volunteer when something heavy needed to be moved around the school. They never asked for girls or students in general. Would that be considered sexist by modern PC/ feminist logic? Against boys, girls or both? Never heard a girl complain about it though.

Yes men are stronger than women but this does not mean women are completely incapable of lifting which many of the guys seem to be implying. It really depends how heavy the logs were, it's wrong to assume to assume just because it's a bit taxing that a woman wouldn't be able to do it. However if you knew the weight was beyond what the average woman could carry then you would have a basis for suggesting that the men do all the lifting.

That being said, the girl overreacted and to be honest if I can get off doing an easier task I wouldn't bitch about it.

React to the above statement.

The latter bolded sentence does not follow from the former bolded statement. In particular, as I'm sure you're aware, if the variances of the two distributions are small relative to the difference in means, then it does actually become a pretty 'sure bet' even with a sample size of 1 each. Allow observation of the people, thus inferring extra information about the characteristic in question, and I'd happily put money on determining whether the man or woman is stronger.

Last weekend I was sat at one of those picnic-table-benches with a male friend and 3 girls I hadn't met before. We all wanted to move the table out of the shade into the sun. From observation, none of the girls were particularly buff, so my mate and I moved the table of our own accord without asking the girls to compare their strength with us, or if they would prefer to move it instead. Funnily enough, none of them raised any objection to this.