Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Are most women naturally submissive to men? Watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StevieA)
    According to feminists you're a either a virgin, a troll or a misogynist for thinking that. Probably all 3.
    You may have noticed we are no longer living in hunter gatherer groups.


    FEMINISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    There is no reason why a feminist would have to have a problem with that statement you quoted.

    The funny thing about evolution of a species is that things change, this includes how societies are structured. Women being paid less for doing the same job was hardly genetically hardwired into us was it :rolleyes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StevieA)
    According to feminists you're a either a virgin, a troll or a misogynist for thinking that. Probably all 3.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Antifazian)
    This thread is just sexism and opinion dressed up as 'biological fact'.

    Absolute rubbish.

    Biology and evolution play a role, but society is a powerful influence. It is dangerous to talk of being 'naturally' anything when we are all so socially produced.
    utter bs
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lassiel)
    I am only submissive in the bedroom, or in a kinky relationship. I'm not naturally submissive to a man because he's a man or because he's powerful. I'm a dominant women who wants a fabulous career and wouldn't mind either being the joint breadwinner, having the higher paid job, or having the lower. It's not nature for a female to be caregiver, in many culture the male are the care givers. For example, lionesses are the hunters, and in the African Aka tribe the men look after the children.


    TL;DR, not all women are submissive, nor is it solely nature, at the very least
    Many cultures? You give an example of an animal species and a tribe in Africa. And btw lionesses hunt because they are faster and more adapted for it, the males are too huge/bulky and their main purpose is to defend their cubs from being killed by other males. On top of that, it's the lionesses who take care of the cubs, the males can barely be bothered and ignore them at best. Or maybe you think the cubs suckle from the lion king?
    • Section Leader
    • Political Ambassador
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by StevieA)
    Curves in the right places and proportions are what makes women attractive, the ultimate signs of fertility. Her height and weight are not that important unless they are over the top. The fat woman love thing in some cultures is (and I hate sounding like a feminist) a social construct , it basically shows that woman certainly doesn't lack nourishment if you know what I'm saying. It's a sign of prosperity which was incredibly important in times where starvation was part of daily life, the same way pale people in Europe were adored because it basically meant aristocrats who didn't have to do outside work and weren't exposed to the sun. Again, prosperity. The same way you can pick up a girl while driving a Lambo without even saying a word. Girls don't know exactly how much it costs but they know it's a lot. Notice how they literally submit to him within seconds.
    Yeah, I agree. There's cultural influence and there's biological influence - I think it's a sure sign a person has an ideological interest if they claimed it was totally one or the other.

    I wonder how much it costs to rent a Lambo.
    • Offline

      20
      I agree with this. I'm naturally super submissive. :dontknow:
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by miser)
      Yeah, I agree. There's cultural influence and there's biological influence - I think it's a sure sign a person has an ideological interest if they claimed it was totally one or the other.

      I wonder how much it costs to rent a Lambo.
      About 700 squid/day :eek:
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by ROONEY-9-MUTD)
      not GIVEN opportunities?


      More like every single time a woman had sex in her prime she was risking being made 'disabled'. They stunted their own economic/social growth the moment they were inseminated.
      Women did not have the government who had a monopoly on force to turn to for freebies, they had to rely on their partner. The partner goes out and earns resources for himself and his dependants.

      By the time women reached menopausal age, she would have been well behind in experience/knowledge, meaning she would not be able to compete with men in the workforce.
      So if a women did not go for a strong/dominate male, then she/her children won't feel 'safe/secure'. Such characteristics are sought after today, by women who will spend a lot of their time out of the workforce nurturing her children.
      Oh, so you're saying it's a woman's fault that she is biologically programmed to have a baby but men are not and that because she had a baby she should not be allowed to work/progress? You can't blame women for biology.

      News flash sunshine, if a woman does not have a baby between the ages 20-40 the chances are she never will, and if every woman decided "OK, I won't have a baby because it will 'stunt my economic growth'" then the human race would die out.

      So no, the woman did not "stunt her own economic growth". She did what is natural by having a baby to keep the human race alive. Does not mean she should be refused opportunities!
      • PS Helper
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by StevieA)
      About 700 squid/day :eek:
      Can get it less than that, a look on my old work's intranet suggests the lessor they use (along with a load of City based companies) will do one for 2400 quid if you get it for 2 weeks. Admittedly it's a Gallardo, Aventador is 3000.

      Also, drove boss' Ferrari home once when she get ****faced after winning a panel, def got a lot more looks from guys than girls.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Le Nombre)
      Can get it less than that, a look on my old work's intranet suggests the lessor they use (along with a load of City based companies) will do one for 2400 quid if you get it for 2 weeks. Admittedly it's a Gallardo, Aventador is 3000.

      Also, drove boss' Ferrari home once when she get ****faced after winning a panel, def got a lot more looks from guys than girls.
      Dayum yo boss be 10k CEOing like a mofo, son! Did you watch the vid? Would be a great solution for guys who are too shy to speak to girls. You just have to point lol!
      • PS Helper
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by StevieA)
      Dayum yo boss be 10k CEOing like a mofo, son! Did you watch the vid? Would be a great solution for guys who are too shy to speak to girls. You just have to point lol!
      Not 10k a day, probably did make that about every week though, admittedly she is seriously good at her job.

      Yeah, not sure how you make that sort of money without having reasonable confidence though, quants and coders maybe?
      Offline

      11
      ReputationRep:
      Ask any salesman/woman about who are dominant in most relationships.
      Wether they are selling double cream or doublebeds, central heating or holidays, cars or carrots, they sell to the woman. This is because most women in relationships make or have the most influence on, the big decissions in their life.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Sazzy890)
      Oh, so you're saying it's a woman's fault that she is biologically programmed to have a baby but men are not and that because she had a baby she should not be allowed to work/progress? You can't blame women for biology.

      News flash sunshine, if a woman does not have a baby between the ages 20-40 the chances are she never will, and if every woman decided "OK, I won't have a baby because it will 'stunt my economic growth'" then the human race would die out.

      So no, the woman did not "stunt her own economic growth". She did what is natural by having a baby to keep the human race alive. Does not mean she should be refused opportunities!

      Having a child will stunt your economic growth. You won't be as productivity.
      You will still gain access to top jobs, however the males and single women don't have to nurture their dependants the way the mother does, therefore they can spend more time at work thus allowing them to grow more economically.

      Also women will often have a children even if resulted in her coming out of the workforce, this is because she would have selected a strong male who she thought was fit to take care of his dependants.

      Also my comment was geared towards post contraceptive pill era.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Le Nombre)
      Can get it less than that, a look on my old work's intranet suggests the lessor they use (along with a load of City based companies) will do one for 2400 quid if you get it for 2 weeks. Admittedly it's a Gallardo, Aventador is 3000.

      Also, drove boss' Ferrari home once when she get ****faced after winning a panel, def got a lot more looks from guys than girls.

      Driving your bosses car lol?

      Also was it an open top Ferrari and did you give her the D, I would think giving the D to your boss whilst she was not drunk would secure your job for a millennium.
      • PS Helper
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by ROONEY-9-MUTD)
      Driving your bosses car lol?

      Also was it an open top Ferrari and did you give her the D, I would think giving the D to your boss whilst she was not drunk would secure your job for a millennium.
      Pretty standard paralegal/trainee task to be honest! Drafting, form filling, bit of research, getting flowers for their wife (obvs not for my boss), getting kid's bday presents, driving the motor home when they decide to get a bit ****ed.

      Nah, it's 458 hard top in blue, given I'd only previously driven a 1.4 I never really got the pedal past 1/3 travel! Sadly not, she's pretty decent for her age (her 20 year old daughter's absolutely spectacular, top genes) however she is married and I was always going to leave in order to start my actual training elsewhere.
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by slade p)
      women are naturally submissive, it is biological and is certainly feminine to be like that. they will be submissive mainly to guys with masculine traits.
      Oh I see, women like Margaret Thatcher, Cherie Blair, Theresa May, perhaps? Or Jo Brand ?

      Perhaps Florence Nightingale? Portia in 'A Merchant of Venice'? Lady MacBeth?

      Boudicca perhaps? Emily Bronte? Shirley Williams? Jane Austen?

      No I've got it Rebecca Wade! That's who you mean. As it's biological are all these women not real women at all?
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by pickup)
      Oh I see, women like Margaret Thatcher, Cherie Blair, Theresa May, perhaps? Or Jo Brand ?

      Perhaps Florence Nightingale? Portia in 'A Merchant of Venice'? Lady MacBeth?

      Boudicca perhaps? Emily Bronte? Shirley Williams? Jane Austen?

      No I've got it Rebecca Wade! That's who you mean. As it's biological are all these women not real women at all?
      yes well their not because they are in the business of politics in which they have to show masculine qualities and get away from their biological inclination so they do not look soft and weak. Their job requires it lol.

      also just even though they are biologically disposed to be submissive, they may not be for whatever reason as time goes on. i never said all are or will be submissive. many obviously are not.
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      no
      Offline

      15
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by slade p)
      yes well their not because they are in the business of politics in which they have to show masculine qualities and get away from their biological inclination so they do not look soft and weak. Their job requires it lol.

      also just even though they are biologically disposed to be submissive, they may not be for whatever reason as time goes on. i never said all are or will be submissive. many obviously are not.
      OK, so when you said that women are biologically disposed to be submissive to men, you meant, but that they are not submissive if they are politicians, teachers, writers, actors, nurses, comedians, novelists, business women, barristers, scientists, journalists.

      Is it the doctors, dentists, architects, librarians, engineers, shopkeepers, economists, bankers, then who are the submissive ones?

      Or, are they all struggling against their real natures? Perhaps to fulfill their real, biological natures they shouldn't go in for all these jobs? Perhaps women shouldn't work really? Or perhaps they should just work in the home? with an occasional outing to church, say, or to take the children to school?

      As I was a linguist I've just thought up a catchy phrase which could encapsulate just what I'm thinking of : kinder, kuche kirche.

      I wonder no one has thought it up before.
      • Thread Starter
      Offline

      0
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by pickup)
      OK, so when you said that women are biologically disposed to be submissive to men, you meant, but that they are not submissive if they are politicians, teachers, writers, actors, nurses, comedians, novelists, business women, barristers, scientists, journalists.

      Is it the doctors, dentists, architects, librarians, engineers, shopkeepers, economists, bankers, then who are the submissive ones?
      Some women will be exceptions ( as the title says, it's ''most women''). The women of high status and income you mentioned will almost always look for men of even higher status and income. Someone said in the start of the thread that women do not submit to ''beta males'' and that is true, although it's more complicated than that. They ''submit'' to men they see as better than they are. A female doctor will almost never marry a male nurse and a business woman will almost never marry her male secretary, they will marry men that have higher status and income (while rich men marry lower status women all the time). They are looking for someone above them, not bellow. They want a leader, not a follower. See how rarely famous women marry a guy who isn't incredibly rich and/famous, even if they don't need that and have plenty of money of their own. Also the reason so many are single, ''super-alpha'' types are not exactly easy to find.

      This is why the question '' where have all the good men gone?'' is so popular these days. Since women are now able to get and education and work they can obtain status and income on their own. So it's not that good men have suddenly vanished, it's women's natural tendency to look for a ''superior'' partner or a leader that makes ''good men'' much tougher to find since their income/status has to be of far higher levels than in the past.

      Oh, and another thing. Women almost always have an older partner, many times quite a few years older. It's unreal how many girls love guys almost twice their age. I always see people say it's because they see them as more mature than younger guys or because the men are wealthy/stable at that age. While those two points are very good ones there's also another thing : older age is associated with wisdom, confidence, experience, assertiveness and other similar qualities. Again , leadership qualities. The same reason people are very reluctant to vote for younger political candidates. Most women want their partner to be their general, not their private.
     
     
     
  1. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  2. Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
  3. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  4. The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.