The state of Feminism, the good the bad

[HoonDing]

Oestrogen is the new testosterone.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Except... not really. A woman who devotes her life fully to becoming good at killing people will be better at killing people than 95% of her less devoted male peers.

 

I'm talking about the average. I really did not think I would have to say it. The strongest and fastest of women never were and never will be (unless we evolve somehow) as strong or as fast as the strongest and fastest of men. On average this will always show.

 

 

Oh for the love of god... when you unearth the tomb of a warrior woman, what the hell do you think you will find there, an "average woman", or someone who trained her whole life to become excellent at chopping down men?

[BruceVC]

I kind of agree with both KP and Bruce.

 

On the one hand, Bruce you have to see that if bigotry is wrong it's not wrong in a sense of restitution. It's wrong conceptually and intellectually. It's wrong because it diminishes the perpetrator as well as the victim.

 

On the other hand, KP you need to understand that Bruce is a white South African, and that's made him a bit more conscious of real bigotry happening all the time all around him. White on black, asian on gay, black on HIV, HIV on gnomes etc.

 

Bruce takes the angle he does because he wants to fix the bigotry he can see. KP takes the angle he does because he wants to fix the bigotry that he can see.

 

In the end I have to side with KP, because I'm afraid that Brice's angle merely exchanges one form of bigotry for another. No offence meant, Bruce.

 

Good post

 

And no I don't any offense at all. I expect people to be honest around this topic

[Fighter]

Oh for the love of god... when you unearth the tomb of a warrior woman, what the hell do you think you will find there, an "average woman", or someone who trained her whole life to become excellent at chopping down men?

 

Oh for the love of god... When people say, "We don't know that men were stronger, faster, etc, etc," one reasonably assumes we are talking about the average.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Fighter

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Oh for the love of god... when you unearth the tomb of a warrior woman, what the hell do you think you will find there, an "average woman", or someone who trained her whole life to become excellent at chopping down men?

 

Oh for the love of god... When people say, "We don't know that men were stronger, faster, etc, etc," one reasonably assumes we are talking about the average.

 

 

Not when they're talking about how they've reached that conclusion based on their findings of warrior women's tombs 

[NWN_babaYaga]

oh my... and 4000 years ago woman in the north had no tittys and their klitoris was able to get hard right ?

 

A woman fighter... most woman of the norse age were more into seidr. There is no tale of a woman fighter who went berzerk in a battle, the myth of freya told what story of her using swords against which army ? I doubt a sword in a tomb just say.. oh here we have a conan female who killed 100 romans.

 

That woman were respected as "strong" persons were more a spiritual thing and for guidance not for the action IN the battlefiled. So please dont lie to yourself that there was any important warrior woman. If you know what the valkyria were... they were for the male figthers!

 

And yes... there were some dwarf like looking "ladys" in that age... just like today. Look around to find a stumpy female wearing glasses and pretending to be very vip and a SJW and you have that today more then in the previous times. Quinn would be the prime example of a dwarf lady that no sane dude would touch. But hey, she is strong (of course the dark side is very strong with her) and very important....

 

if you are realy interested in norse myth then check out lady of the labyrinth on YT. She wrote a book about the myth and their meanings. She actually knows the original language.

Edited September 1, 2014 by NWN_babaYaga

[BruceVC]

oh my... and 4000 years ago woman in the north had no tittys and their klitoris was able to get hard right ?

 

A woman fighter... most woman of the norse age were more into seidr. There is no tale of a woman fighter who went berzerk in a battle, the myth of freya told what story of her using swords against which army ?

 

That woman were respected as "strong" persons were more a spiritual thing and for guidance not for the battlefiled. So please dont lie to yourself that there was any important warrior woman. If you know what the valkyria were... they were for the male figthers!

 

And yes... there were some dwarf like looking "ladys" in that age... just like today. Look around to find a stumpy female wearing glasses and pretending to be very vip and a SJW and you have that today more then in the previous times.

 

So let me get this straight, you are telling us we must ignore the input of the qualified archaeologist, TMZuk,  who actually works with excavations and believe you around the point that there were no significant female Viking fighters? And what do you do for a living again?

[NWN_babaYaga]

There were no important female fighters who fought in the battlefield thats right. Sorry to tell you my lady but you should check out lady of the labyrinth to get at least a clue what norse woman were and what definately not. I am myself here in germany knowing enough about my own ancient history what was and definately not.

 

And i am a pimp. I sell woman for a living!

 

ps

there is no single bone of a female fighter found in the teutoburger wald. Where the germans F***** the romans. But that doesnt rang a bell for you is not surprising!

 

And Vikings... damn you. Vikings were robbers and pirates. They were not realy liked by the rest of the norse people. But you have no clue!

The vikings were the end of the norse age.

Edited September 1, 2014 by NWN_babaYaga

[aluminiumtrioxid]

There were no important female fighters who fought in the battlefield thats right. Sorry to tell you my lady but you should check out lady of the labyrinth to get at least a clue what norse woman were and what definately not. I am myself here in germany knowing enough about my own ancient history what was and definately not.

 

And i am a pimp. I sell woman for a living!

 

9/10, would get trolled again.

[Fighter]

Not when they're talking about how they've reached that conclusion based on their findings of warrior women's tombs 

 

If said conclusion uses exceptions to make a generalization about gender then it is false. There were successful women warriors in both distant and more recent past, we all know this. They were a blip on the radar comparatively to how many men there were.

 

Why? Because men are better suited for that kind of activity as they develop physically easier than women and have a bigger potential. People like the idea that "the only difference between men and women is social" and don't like to hear about areas where it's just not true. Like this.

[Meshugger]

 

 

So how is that possible? We all know that men are bigger, stronger, faster etc. etc. than women, don't we? No, we don't. Not in Northern Europe at any rate, The further back we go, the harder it is to see the difference in build between men and women. They are about the same height and the same build. Only when we find the pelvis bone, can we easily determine the gender.

 

You had me until this. The time between then and now is pitifully small in evolutionary terms for the kind of changes you speak of.  Men are bigger, stronger, faster etc, etc.

 

Facts are against you. It has nothing to do with evolution. It has to do with equal (ly lack of) food and equally hard work.

 

 

Post the links already. It doesn't matter if they are in danish or not. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and all that.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Not when they're talking about how they've reached that conclusion based on their findings of warrior women's tombs 

 

If said conclusion uses exceptions to make a generalization about gender then it is false. 

 

 

But it doesn't.

 

 

Another interesting fact is that with the improved Osteology we have available, it has become clear that there's several women buried with weapons. With this being an accepted fact, we must redefine our entire outlook on the Viking Age. Because everything found before 1950 is gender determined from the grave goods alone. The osteology was very primitive and by and large not used. The first certain discovery of a female warrior grave dates from 1964, found in Southwestern Finland. Since then several more has surfaced.

 

So how is that possible? We all know that men are bigger, stronger, faster etc. etc. than women, don't we? No, we don't. Not in Northern Europe at any rate, The further back we go, the harder it is to see the difference in build between men and women. They are about the same height and the same build. Only when we find the pelvis bone, can we easily determine the gender.

 

 

When you look at the quote in context, it's fairly clear that he was talking about specifics.

[Volourn]

There should be no seperate woman and men sports leagues/competitions. They should face each other and let the absolute best athelte win no matter the genre..

[BruceVC]

There should be no seperate woman and men sports leagues/competitions. They should face each other and let the absolute best athelte win no matter the genre..

 

Volo that's a silly suggestion and you know it is

[Volourn]

Why? Aren't you a 'feminist' who believes everyone is equal? Let's prove it. Take the BEST female athletes and the BEST male athletes and have them compete.  BEST of the BEST win.  May the BEST win no matter the gender. If you think otherwise it means you are sexist.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Seriously ppl?

 

Just compare the Olympic achievements of men and women in the same sports categories based on strenght, endurance, speed etc.

Mind you:

1. There are no social stigma for women to score lower than men, yet they do.

2. There are no discrimination in training so the women would score lower than men, yet they do.

3. There is no discrimination in food and supplies so the women would score lower than men, yet they do.

 

Any thoughts?

 

My thoughts on the matter are that any dedicated female athlete who spent most of her life training would, practically in any physical contest, best 99,9% of the "hurr durr females are biologically weaker" crowd who, as a general rule, didn't spend their lives in pursuit of athletic achievement.

 

So yeah, given equal amount of training and resources, a male athlete will best a female one anytime (barring extreme circumstances), but that doesn't mean a sufficient amount of training couldn't endow a woman with better physical abilities than 90+% of men.

Edited September 1, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Malcador]

Oh for the love of god... when you unearth the tomb of a warrior woman, what the hell do you think you will find there, an "average woman", or someone who trained her whole life to become excellent at chopping down men?

She'd be less suitable for melee combat than an equally trained male though (well, at least in what is required of line infantry), I think Fighter's post had a "ceteris parabis" that was pretty obvious. So, what was the issue ?

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Oh for the love of god... when you unearth the tomb of a warrior woman, what the hell do you think you will find there, an "average woman", or someone who trained her whole life to become excellent at chopping down men?

She'd be less suitable for melee combat than an equally trained male though (well, at least in what is required of line infantry), I think Fighter's post had a "ceteris parabis" that was pretty obvious. So, what was the issue ?

 

 

The issue was that he took the original post discussing how there were very little differences in height and (presumably) strength* among male and female skeletons found in Viking tombs as talking about all males and females, ever.

 

*You can tell a lot about a person's muscle strength based on the impressions said muscles leave on the bones. (Don't ask about the particulars, though, the anatomy classes I took were not focused on that particular issue, to say the least.)

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

So... you just went full Columbus and discovered that DEDICATED ATHLETE  will be better than people that are not dedicated athletes?

 

 

I stated my opinion that people who talk down female athletes as being inferior to male ones while being physically less capable than them are ****ing ridiculous.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Does gargantuan overweight sport fans discussing which basketball player is better or which baseball team sucks more are also ridiculous?

 

On one hand, fat-shaming is baaaad. On the other hand, it is kind of ridiculous when whale-sized people talk crap about the achievements (or lack thereof) of athletes.

 

But that's actually fairly tangential to what I've said. My point is that "women are weaker than men, this is just a fact of biology" is kind of a misleading statement, since the gap can be overcome (in comparison to the large majority of men) with a sufficient amount of training.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

So basically:

- if you are not an athlete you cannot discuss athletes

- if you are not an actor you cannot discuss actors

- if you are not a filmmaker you cannot discuss films

- if you are not game developer you cannot discuss games

- if you are not an politician you cannot discuss politics

 

Oh, you are absolutely allowed to, just keep in mind the mental image of landwhales talking **** about an athlete for only having, say, 10 times their muscle strength and endurance instead of 15. You've gotta admit, it's kind of ridiculous.

 

 

"Women are weaker than men as a biology fact is completely true.

 

It can be technically true and still misleading, y'know.

[Blarghagh]

"Opinions on feminism are pretty much like nipples in that everyone has them but you only ever get to see men's."

 

Saw that on Twitter and was reminded of this debate.

[Malcador]

"Opinions on feminism are pretty much like nipples in that everyone has them but you only ever get to see men's."

 

Saw that on Twitter and was reminded of this debate.

So it shouldn't be discussed here at all then ?

[JadedWolf]

 

 

Does gargantuan overweight sport fans discussing which basketball player is better or which baseball team sucks more are also ridiculous?

 

On one hand, fat-shaming is baaaad. On the other hand, it is kind of ridiculous when whale-sized people talk crap about the achievements (or lack thereof) of athletes.

 

But that's actually fairly tangential to what I've said. My point is that "women are weaker than men, this is just a fact of biology" is kind of a misleading statement, since the gap can be overcome (in comparison to the large majority of men) with a sufficient amount of training.

 

 

So basically:

- if you are not an athlete you cannot discuss athletes

- if you are not an actor you cannot discuss actors

- if you are not a filmmaker you cannot discuss films

- if you are not game developer you cannot discuss games

- if you are not an politician you cannot discuss politics

 

This is of course false. "Women are weaker than men as a biology fact is completely true. What is false is the conclusions that people make of this statement. Like if women are weaker than men therefor I'm stronger than any women because I'm a man. That is false unless the man in question actually trains his physical prowess.

 

 

I'd like to add: if you're not a baker, you can't discuss bread. Sorry, if the baker gives you a blackened loaf of bread that tastes like charcoal, you'll have to eat it, and like it too. After all, you're not a baker, so you can't have a valid opinion on bread.

 

You get this a lot in discussions, and it's laughable.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I'd like to add: if you're not a baker, you can't discuss bread. Sorry, if the baker gives you a blackened loaf of bread that tastes like charcoal, you'll have to eat it, and like it too. After all, you're not a baker, so you can't have a valid opinion on bread.

 

 

It's more like a man who's completely unable to bake bread stating that women are genetically weaker at baking bread, and proving it with examples of certain women who bake worse bread than certain men.

 

He's allowed to do that, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't get utterly trounced at a bread-baking contest by the specific women he was talking down.

Edited September 2, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid