Turn on thread page Beta

If men were wiped out post-1800s, where would women be now? watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tombola)
    Are you telling me the ratio is equal?
    If so then I'll agree with you,
    If not then I stand by my point.
    I fon't know the exact ratio, why don't you look it up.

    However, that's not a problem since you said it wasn't open to males. It is. You did not say that it was an exact 50/50 activity, and you did not challenge people to do that.

    If that is what you meant to do you should word your posts more carefully. If it wasn't then you're wrong in the case of ballet.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleekchic)
    We'd probably be at an even more advanced stage than we currently are.

    There I said it. That's the exact oppsite of what you were hoping someone would say right?
    GEDER!
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tombola)
    Yes, because we need our strenght to build things that are important within society. I'm a proud house builder, oh wait... a van full of cement is coming. WTF, my strenght has been ignored?!??!? Give me that van I can carry it.
    So you're trying to say that machines have rendered strength irrelevant? Have to disagree, there's still a large amount of manual labour in building etc, to use your example.

    EDIT: By the way, just to point out I never said society would be disadvantaged without men. I said it would be different.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonty99)
    http://www.amazon.com/Brain-Sex-Diff.../dp/0385311834

    While you're looking at that, I'm off to give birth. Men and women are identical after all, aren't they? :o: Oh, and males and females have the same average strength, don't they? Cos we all know they're identical. And of course, females are JUST as aggressive as males aren't they?
    You have misunderstood. Of course we are biologically different. But where is the conclusive evidence that men and women have 'different skills' i.e, they are best suited to gender specific professions?
    Oh and I think women can be just as agressive as men, but perhaps in different ways. In reality, these 'gender differences' are used to perpetuate inequality against women and have little basis in fact.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    Mud huts instead of sky scrapers, candles instead of lightbulbs and horses as a major form of transport. Does that seem accurate?
    What's to stop women inventing that stuff though? You don't know what would happen during that time. With no such things, women may well think to invent them just like men did.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleekchic)
    We'd probably be at an even more advanced stage than we currently are.

    There I said it. That's the exact oppsite of what you were hoping someone would say right?
    That's what I figured as well. I couldn't work out how people are coming to the conclusion that we'd be somehow worse.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    You have misunderstood. Of course we are biologically different. But where is the conclusive evidence that men and women have 'different skills' i.e, they are best suited to gender specific professions?
    Oh and I think women can be just as agressive as men, but perhaps in different ways. In reality, these 'gender differences' are used to perpetuate inequality against women and have little basis in fact.
    Oh right, yeh I sort of thought that might be what you meant. Well I never mentioned "gender specific professions", but I suppose that was one of the things I may have been thinking of. Basically, if women are less aggressive, they may be better negotiators, if men are stronger, they will be better at manual labour. I just sort of meant pretty obvious stuff like that really, where the skills would be closely linked to the biological differences. I can't imagine, with all the biological differences, that men and women are exactly as good as each other at every single thing.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    I fon't know the exact ratio, why don't you look it up.

    However, that's not a problem since you said it wasn't open to males. It is. You did not say that it was an exact 50/50 activity, and you did not challenge people to do that.

    If that is what you meant to do you should word your posts more carefully. If it wasn't then you're wrong in the case of ballet.
    You were the one posting the positive claim that there are boys that do, and to be fair, I already knew this.

    My point was that there are many activities that are open to both gender, however it's seen as being a female activity, the fact that it's not girls only is irrelevant. We're dealing with perception that ties in with an early argument about how sciences are seen as predominantly male subjects, even though it's technically not just open to males.

    Just looking back on my own post: Never once did I mention that it was exclusive to females, I merely comment on the fact that it's a predominantly female activity which is most likely true. If not, I don't see any reason why stereotypes would exist. It's just like how pink is now seen as a female colour, but only about 100 years ago boys used to wear pink, and girls blue.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    You have misunderstood. Of course we are biologically different. But where is the conclusive evidence that men and women have 'different skills' i.e, they are best suited to gender specific professions?
    Oh and I think women can be just as agressive as men, but perhaps in different ways. In reality, these 'gender differences' are used to perpetuate inequality against women and have little basis in fact.
    I hate feminist propaganda... it's not perpetuated.
    Also, you're proving his point.
    There just isn't equality, ever.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    If that's true, why don't they 'educate themselves' now? Why don't they outdo men at their own game or at least show equivalent competence in each field?
    You do know that women actually outstrip males in educational performance now, right?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Extinct

    Yeah, I read it all
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2 + 2 = 5)
    Extinct

    Yeah, I read it all
    Hello Pete.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    You do know that women actually outstrip males in educational performance now, right?
    No I don't.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stettin)
    Computers were invented by men. The modern computers are descended of computers used to decode German signals during a war started by men and fought by men. Women were just in the sidelines as usual staying at home and calling men cowards if they conscientiously objected to killing others.

    So how would women invent computers? It's not a matter of when it's a matter of if. There has to be a need for for an invention to occur usually.

    Would medicine have advanced if Pasteur and Koch weren't there? Some of their advances can be liked to Franc-German rivalry which again was something started by men and fought by men.

    At the end of the day the sum of achievement that men have done for and against society is very high. How ever for women it's very little. That is why people get shocked at women when they murder kids but when it comes to men it's an another case of been there done that.

    People still talk about Myra Hindley even though she wasn't has evil has her boyfriend.
    You have misunderstood. Men have been wiped out post 1800 according to the OP - the question is 'where would women be now?'. The point is, at the point of male extinction women would have had to take on the responsibilities previously held by men.
    No one is denying that in our current history, medicine would not have advanced without Koch and Pasteur with the Germ Theory and the factors such as the Franco Prussian war which contributed to its discovery. However if men had been wiped out, women would have acquired new freedoms to attend university and enter professions previously closed to them and dominated by men. Therefore at some point these inventions (such as the computer) and discoveries, would have been made by women. In this way, it is perfectly possible that civilisation would have progressed in a similar manner to our own and we would now be living an existence little removed from our current one.


    Oh, did you study Medicine and Public Health Throughout Time by any chance?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    No I don't.
    It's in a bunch of economics journals + textbooks and such from various surveys and statistics :dontknow:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    Hello Pete.
    Hello. Can we all get drunk now? Like, as a thread?

    Also, what's this "wingardium leviosa" meme? I've been trying to use it everywhere since I read that it pissed Mad Vlad off
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    You do know that women actually outstrip males in educational performance now, right?
    If it were the other way about women would be crying discrimination!

    Any walk of life which women dominate it's because "men are just ****"

    Any walk of life which men dominate it's because "men are big bad bullies :cry: "
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    You do know that women actually outstrip males in educational performance now, right?
    Perhaps the examination system favours the female brain. :p:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2 + 2 = 5)
    Hello. Can we all get drunk now? Like, as a thread?

    Also, what's this "wingardium leviosa" meme? I've been trying to use it everywhere since I read that it pissed Mad Vlad off
    I'm getting drunk as we speak.

    Refer to the 'Rupert Grint has swine flu' thread to learn more about it's origins, and yes, it's true apparently it brings Mad Vlad's urine to a boil so use it liberally.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PrinceValiant)
    If it were the other way about women would be crying discrimination!

    Any walk of life which women dominate it's because "men are just ****"

    Any walk of life which men dominate it's because "men are big bad bullies :cry: "

    And this, so much.

    Men have invented more stuff, why it's due to "male oppression".

    Females doing better in exams now, why it must be because females are more intelligent.

    :rolleyes:
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 23, 2018
The home of Results and Clearing

1,404

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

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

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