men are more intelligent than women

Jake, the point is that is research was created to promote a political message. The author has a bias which is very relevent to the subject matter.

Credibility is important in the scientific community. Lynn's prior work is not credible because it is based on junk science. Read it for yourself. I have. It's not rooted in reality. This recent study uses the same methodology, basing results on flawed IQ tests, ignoring environmental effects--and promoting a political agenda funded by a radical political group that has historical ties to the Nazis.

Someone who promotes concepts based on junk science, which is what Richard Lynn is doing, is not credible. It has nothing to do with political correctness. Before you attack me, get your facts straight.

And if someone were to research this with better credibility you wouldn't attack them, too? Would any? If they did, what would their credibility become, no matter the results?

By the way, I wasn't attacking you, I was showing how this research doesn't mean a thing to you as an individual. I have a problem with any research being stoped for political reasons but, you know what? I don't have a problem with it being started for political reasons. The whole environmental issue was begun for political reasons, but we've learned a lot from it. Start the research for any reason, stop it only because you've found the answer.

Originally posted by junglejake
And if someone were to research this with better credibility you wouldn't attack them, too? Would any? If they did, what would their credibility become, no matter the results?

I know what your really saying..

"You just have penis envy!!"

Standardised IQ tests generally do not give an adequate reflection of overall intelligence.. and are usually geered more towards 'male' strengths and ignore female strengths.. if this wasn't taken into account these results were guarenteed [may've been his point]. Men and women have very different brain chemistries so both would be superior to the other depending on what kind of intelligence is being measured.
I don't understand why this is coming out now.. [must be a female thing..] IQ tests have been in use for the last 60 years apx so this 'fact' should've been noticed by now. I enquired about gender differences a while ago and was told that the result more or less evened out on average. What changed?

[edit on 27-8-2005 by riley]

Five points on an IQ test tells me nothing. Numerous decades of experience tells me much, especially if you add wisdom to the equation. Although us men like to think we're smarter, I think it's just a fanciful delusion.

Given our track record, I think it's time to replace all male leaders with more intelligent, more wise, and clearly more elegant ladies.

I bet you whoever wrote this has a trophy wife...

After all You seek those that are like you don't you??

True Lies

I get what you are saying about the roles, and I agree, but if I was to say "I believe that women should submit to men in marriage" I would get abused although I believe it to be true.

It is not societies roles that are correct, but natural inherancies of the two genders who each have traits that compliment the other in such a fashion as to make a stellar team of the two.

Perhaps the equity of the roles would be a better conversation.

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
I get what you are saying about the roles, and I agree, but if I was to say "I believe that women should submit to men in marriage" I would get abused although I believe it to be true.

But you did say it [with a disclaimer ]. Is this based on the 'logic' of a 'scientific' study which says men are intellectually superior [so women should submit] or religious superstition? If men are smarter than women.. why is it I scored in the top 5% in IQ? I'm female.. if this study is indeed correct and not a crude generalisation, I must have either just misslaid my penis [no pun intended] or there are exeptions in shich case the study is complete bs.

Again I do not put much stock in IQ tests as they do not test overall intelligence, only some portions. Ignoring the others does not mean they do not exist.. it just creates more fuel for the propaganda fire.

[edit on 29-8-2005 by riley]

Riley: I make no claims of intelligence monopolies between the sexes, as it's something that will probably change 100 times as new "data" comes out.

My belief comes partly from science, but more sociological study of the world and people around me. It comes from the inherencies of men and women, although I would surely never advocate forcing anyone to live in my way because I think it's the best. That would be counterproductive and would greatly discount those that do it willingly.

My wife wants it this way as well, and many women do, although many do not. To each their own, but when looking at the destruction of marital roles, the subsequent destruction of the family (which is ongoing), the following destruction of the community, has lead this country to some of the most dire problems we have faced.

-The Social system and the entitlement generations.
-Increased single parenting (which is damaging in itself).
-Lack of judgment (even the good kind).
-Increased need for governmental involvement
-The killing of the true feminist movement

etc.

This is long and involved, but you get the gist.


[edit on 29-8-2005 by KrazyJethro]

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
My belief comes partly from science, but more sociological study of the world and people around me.

As does my own.

It comes from the inherencies of men and women, although I would surely never advocate forcing anyone to live in my way because I think it's the best. That would be counterproductive and would greatly discount those that do it willingly.

My point is what you think is 'best' would not apply to ALL women and ALL men across the board because there are great variances psychologically in both genders. Some women are more 'male' than most while some males are more feminine.

My wife wants it this way as well, and many women do, although many do not. To each their own, but when looking at the destruction of marital roles, the subsequent destruction of the family (which is ongoing), the following destruction of the community, has lead this country to some of the most dire problems we have faced.

I find that a very naive stance. There have ALWAYS been problems with marital roles.. it seems that when remembering the illusion of what was considered 'the good old days' it's easy to forget why they were left behind. In some states in the US it is still legal to rape a wife in marriage.. fifty years ago this was the common attitude and domestic violence was seen as justifiable 'dicipline'. In the 1950s there was a major problem where most housewives took 'happy' pills [speed] to make them better wives and to keep them 'smiling [that was how it was advertised].. is it better to have a 'happy wife' who's got a drug addiction than a frustrated one that can't cope in an unhappy marriage?

-The Social system and the entitlement generations.

I've known women with children who had to go onto social security because they were being abused by husbands/defactos [it is in the culture and always has been].. if women decide to leave distructive marriages how is that a worse than the distruction of that marriage?

-Increased single parenting (which is damaging in itself).

I agree a parent needs support.. are you again assuming that the other parent was 'good'? Remember also that the 'dependent' generations are cyclicle and poverty is an haven for addiction, domestic violence, sexual abuse and these people can't get their heads above water. This is not the fault of 'marriage breakdown'.. this has always existed in impoverished areas [thats not to say that addiction and abuse doesn't happen in rich familes].

-Lack of judgment (even the good kind).

I agree with this.. hence the need for good education systems.

-Increased need for governmental involvement

Teach a man to fish etc. Governments are usually only interested in short term stradegies that will get them re-elected. Governments need to focus on breaking cycles rather than giving handouts.

-The killing of the true feminist movement

Which is?

[edit on 29-8-2005 by riley]

ashes to ashes
dust to dust
if it wasn't for women
our ..... would rust.


I personally love women and if they're smarter than me, so be it, maybe they will teach me something new

Call me rebellious but I will not submit to that kind of man who thinks that way.
History hasn't been nice to women, even today there are degrading stereotypes and jokes made about them.. I recently went to see four brothers, and the one woman in the show was, you guessed it, being degraded, told to get in the kitchen, to 'shut up bitch' and to clean # up.. .

It may have been a joke, and sure it's funny sometimes, but it's not funny at the same time.

Female genital mutilation still occurs today, women in saudi arabia can't drive a car or go out in public without a male counterpart.

Women are being killed by their own family member if they discrace their male family members in some way, they don't ask for it, and i'm sure as hell they don't want it... But they are powerless, and men are stronger so that helps the man out with carrying out their agenda.

men don't want women to have any power. Unless "they are willing to approve of it", if they don't, either thats really too bad for the woman, or it's too bad for the man because she will leave.


Do I have penis envy? yes and no, I was raised by my father mostly, from growing up a tomboy, i'm aggressive in nature, and have always gotten what I want as I child, and i'm quick to react, sometimes thats not a good thing, but in last minute instances, it's a blessing, thinking under pressure is a gift.
As a kid I could beat boys up for saying snide remarks, I played sports, I helped my dad out in the garage, but as an adult women you are given little choices in roles, unless you don't mind being a social deviant.

You can't go around beating men up, but you can file sexual assault charges, many of which men scough at and roll their eyes...
But that's all we can do...


Sometimes I don't feel comfortable in the skin i'm in, do I think about this topic alot? Of course I do. I don't want to play the victim here and i'm really trying to avoid it.

Point 4, All these clothes for women are snug, they fit the curves of one's body, you have low cut shirts that show your boobs, turtle necks that are snug around your waist, tight shirts, mini t shirts, but nothing normal, nothing that is 'comfortable' if I want to be 'comfortable' i have to wear my husbands shirts. I wear his clothes to bed, and around the house. When I go out, it's jeans and a chick shirt cuz thats all I have for shirts. Why do women only have feminine looking clothes to choose from? I could go shop in the ladies department, but then all the clothes are for a 40 yr old and they don't fit right..

There is no in between. Your either this way or that way. It's like goldy locks trying to find clothes that just fit right.. It's a struggle and the shopping takes forever to do.. And I hate shopping.

There's the other stereotype, women love to shop? Women are crazy for shoes, ok so it's true for some, but why do I get thrown automatically into this category? because I have a vagina?

Ok so I guess i'm going to have to start making my own clothes.. That's fine.

Why do they have jokes about men not helping in the kitchen, and doing the laundry, and using a broom? I've heard stand up comedians making jokes about this... I as a woman don't particularly enjoy doing these things either, but if someone doesn't do it, this house will go to #.

I've let it go to # just to prove a point.. I don't like doing these things as much as brian doesn't, so we're both not going to do them and see what happens... Brian says what the hell, why is this house dirty? so I ask him he ever saw me sign up for these jobs..

Did I voluntarily assign myself to these jobs? No, but as someone who lives in this house I need to take responsibility because the other jack ass doesn't want to pull his weight.

So he's getting better but it's this kind of thing that irks me the most.
I get mad, and he wants to know what's wrong naturally, but the minute I let him know what the problem is, he doesn't want to hear anything of it.
And this is the part when some women can get naggy or annoying, or maybe even violent.. But it's for a reason, and men don't want to hear it.


No need to think about intellect right? Man judges on the outside and it's a problem because it's just flat out moronic and unfair.

I have a brain ok, it works, I think, I'm rational, and emotional, i'm good at problem solving, and i'm good with spatial abilities, my reasoning is just as good as anybody else's working brain.

But because I have a vagina i have to play certain roles to satisfy the male species? No I don't have to, and don't, but not filling one role will destroy the home we live in.


This is the silent war, it's ongoing, it's a struggle, I wish it wasn't so, but it is, and because it is, I will not give up and allow myself to be degraded in such a matter.

I wish men could see us as equals, and i'm sure they try and say they want an equal but when it comes down to it, by nature we just aren't..

I want the same respect, on all levels, namely intellect.

In one of those quotes on page one that i pasted it talks about how

Men have been found to deny woman intellect; they have credited her with instinct, with intuition, with a capacity to correlate cause and effect much as a dog connects its collar with a walk.

and this is my beef... Because I see it, I hear it, and as a result of this, jokes are made, stereotypes are created, women around the world over have problems living with their male counterpart within society because they are second classed without having a voice in fear of consequences. (violence against women? stoning? hanging? all because they want to break the status quo and live free?)

I would just like to know how a man would feel if their was a dominating species above the male that treated them as dogs?
Degraded? Unfaily treated?


I've seen enough and heard enough in my 22 years of being on this planet from various sources to know that this statement above is indeed a real truth in this day. And i'm not going to accept any man, or respect any man that doesn't respect a woman on all levels the way they should.

Just because a woman decides to look pretty, feel pretty, smell nice, and dress to their liking, doesn't make them any less of an intelligent being.


Look at our children today, they go into a store to find clothes and there are little modest outfits left. Parents by the hundreds write in to columnists complaining about this very thing. They are conditioned to dress cheap, like streetwalkers, and if they don't, they aren't cool to their friends, because that's whats in in these days.. It doesn't make them stupid but it sure sends that message across.

There's all kinds of examples like this I could rant about, and this is a problem, and I don't condone it. I guess i'm fighting the status quo because of these instances, because I believe them to be flawed, and they send the wrong messages.

Go ahead and jump on me for saying these things, but I will not agree with you, nor apologise, for I have seen things with my own two eyes, heard things with my own two ears, and been talked down to, belittled, and told I am a wench, a bitch, the c word, ect.. I am but 22 years old, and this is a truth.

Originally posted by riley
As does my own.

Good.

My point is what you think is 'best' would not apply to ALL women and ALL men across the board because there are great variances psychologically in both genders. Some women are more 'male' than most while some males are more feminine.

Nothing applies to everyone, much like saying a child is best off with both a mother and a father. Without getting into hypotheticals all day, because that would do nothing for reality, it is still majoritivly true.

I find that a very naive stance. There have ALWAYS been problems with marital roles.. it seems that when remembering the illusion of what was considered 'the good old days' it's easy to forget why they were left behind. In some states in the US it is still legal to rape a wife in marriage.. fifty years ago this was the common attitude and domestic violence was seen as justifiable 'dicipline'. In the 1950s there was a major problem where most housewives took 'happy' pills [speed] to make them better wives and to keep them 'smiling [that was how it was advertised].. is it better to have a 'happy wife' who's got a drug addiction than a frustrated one that can't cope in an unhappy marriage?

You find this to be NAIVE? That's odd because although there have been problems with marrital roles, it is only now that the roles have been destroyed and considered wrong societally. Marriage is hard, but the rampant divorce is rediculous. Regardless of the problems (which have been addressed in the past 55 years) it is the final destruction of the marrital roles that has lead to the destruction of the family, leading to the destruction of the community, leading to increased need to rely on the government adding more and more socialism over a capitalist system. Hence the high tax rates, bloated wasteful government, etc.

Do you find it naive because it's an in depth study of social trends? Because that seems silly. Or is it because you disagree for some reason?

I've known women with children who had to go onto social security because they were being abused by husbands/defactos [it is in the culture and always has been].. if women decide to leave distructive marriages how is that a worse than the distruction of that marriage?

No one said that abuse should be tolerated against woman, children, or even men, but the few do not represent the whole so it's not a great example. There are ways to help them without government assistance for less money, greater effect, and allow the people to CHOOSE the fate of their money and future (which last time I checked was one of the selling points of America).

I agree a parent needs support.. are you again assuming that the other parent was 'good'? Remember also that the 'dependent' generations are cyclicle and poverty is an haven for addiction, domestic violence, sexual abuse and these people can't get their heads above water. This is not the fault of 'marriage breakdown'.. this has always existed in impoverished areas [thats not to say that addiction and abuse doesn't happen in rich familes].

Again, this is a slippery slope. I would submit that a good many (actually most) single parents are a function of lack of responcibility rather than abuse or addiction of some kind.

I agree with this.. hence the need for good education systems.

Glad you agree. Communist educational systems aren't going to work for us. I believe private education is the answer.

Teach a man to fish etc. Governments are usually only interested in short term stradegies that will get them re-elected. Governments need to focus on breaking cycles rather than giving handouts.

Again, I agree. We have been caught up in handouts rather than a hand up. Private charity does more for giving a hand up where the government's blanket bandaids are handouts.

-The killing of the true feminist movement

Which is?

That's a whole different conversation, and a long one at that.

Originally posted by Belgarath
Five points on an IQ test tells me nothing. Numerous decades of experience tells me much, especially if you add wisdom to the equation. Although us men like to think we're smarter, I think it's just a fanciful delusion.

Given our track record, I think it's time to replace all male leaders with more intelligent, more wise, and clearly more elegant ladies.

I wish I had a WATS left.

Even 20 points on an IQ test tells me nothing. Who made the tests? If these results were true, then the IQ tests made by white men would prove that black people are less intelligent, too. Bah!

Men and women both have the capacity to be highly intelligent. I think intelligence is a product of environment, genes, education and nurturing. Sex has very little if anything to do with it.

Men win more nobel prizes and such because men go after them. They're taught to achieve, succeed, compete.

SIRR1, the fact that you posted this dis-proves your point (j/k - I've been wanting to say that for several days now.)

Men are more clever than women? Puh-lease! Most men don't even know when they're being manipulated by women! Women are far more clever.

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
You find this to be NAIVE? That's odd because although there have been problems with marrital roles, it is only now that the roles have been destroyed and considered wrong societally.

Marriage used to be a business transaction and bias to the male's 'needs'. Nowadays people can just divorce [and do] if things are unhealthy [though I'm sure many divorce for trivial reasons]. It is adult relationships themselves that need to be worked on.. if a marriage is not mutually beneficial divorce is the likely conclusion.

Marriage is hard, but the rampant divorce is rediculous. Regardless of the problems (which have been addressed in the past 55 years)

These problems have not been addressed. Domestic violence and rape are still very common place.

it is the final destruction of the marrital roles that has lead to the destruction of the family, leading to the destruction of the community, leading to increased need to rely on the government adding more and more socialism over a capitalist system. Hence the high tax rates, bloated wasteful government, etc.

For startes the breakdown of marriage did not cause inflation or cause capitalism.. usually after I hear this I expect "feminism is to blame for this" next. Look harder.. 'society' was already in dissoray.. just before feminism there was slavery. Not all wives enjoyed their role of servitude based on "love honour and OBEY" so half of society was probably not very happy at all.. especially when husbands asserted their god given superiority to bash their wives. Ah then good old days.

Do you find it naive because it's an in depth study of social trends? Because that seems silly. Or is it because you disagree for some reason?

I's naive from my own observation of the world.. you do not seem to know much regarding women's issues. There is plenty of information available on the net if you are interested.

No one said that abuse should be tolerated against woman, children, or even men, but the few do not represent the whole so it's not a great example.

This is exactly what I mean.. it is NOT 'the few'.. I think the % is about 1 in 3 women are abused by their spouses. Please do not assume most women leave their husbands because they don't like cooking hubby dinner.

There are ways to help them without government assistance for less money, greater effect, and allow the people to CHOOSE the fate of their money and future (which last time I checked was one of the selling points of America).

Thing is they have to actually get out of the relationship first.. it would be difficult as most abusive husbands 'ration' money out so they can't escape. they usually have to escape with the clothes on their back and thats it.

Again, this is a slippery slope. I would submit that a good many (actually most) single parents are a function of lack of responcibility rather than abuse or addiction of some kind.

As I said earlier I admit there is a problem with generational poverty.. this however goes hand in hand with abuse and addiction and they haven't got the resaurces to become responsible. Again.. there's plenty of info available.

Glad you agree. Communist educational systems aren't going to work for us. I believe private education is the answer.

Private education? How do you suggest the poor pay for this?

Again, I agree. We have been caught up in handouts rather than a hand up. Private charity does more for giving a hand up where the government's blanket bandaids are handouts.

It depends how the money is applied.. teaching people skills is primary.. teaching them dependancy is not. I do not suggest throwing people in the deep end hoping they'll swim though.

Sorry, Double Post.



[edit on 31-8-2005 by KrazyJethro]

Originally posted by rileyMarriage used to be a business transaction and bias to the male's 'needs'. Nowadays people can just divorce [and do] if things are unhealthy [though I'm sure many divorce for trivial reasons]. It is adult relationships themselves that need to be worked on.. if a marriage is not mutually beneficial divorce is the likely conclusion.

Well, if we are branching into other departments (which is where this will lead if we really get in-depth) will take this out of the fishbowl it's normally discussed in. In that case that will temper my responses to a different light.

Because of the bias shown towards men, wrongly I might add, but many sources (the church, the government, etc, creating the society in the first place) there has obviously been abuse.

I'll speak more on it, but it will be responses further down the post.

These problems have not been addressed. Domestic violence and rape are still very common place.

Again, the problems are not gone, but it is not in the hands of the government (aside from enforcement and longer jail sentences), but rather society to fix the problems still left (which I assure you are better than they were).

In speaking about "addressing" the problem, I was referring to the public, legal, and financial recourse of women with real problems. It is up to them to take the resources available to them.

For starters the breakdown of marriage did not cause inflation or cause capitalism.. usually after I hear this I expect "feminism is to blame for this" next. Look harder.. 'society' was already in disarray.. just before feminism there was slavery. Not all wives enjoyed their role of servitude based on "love honor and OBEY" so half of society was probably not very happy at all.. especially when husbands asserted their god given superiority to bash their wives. Ah then good old days.

For one, I did not say it caused it, but it certainly is a factor looking at the divorce rates between poverty and affluency. It is in the worst areas that the community is normally in the worst state. I do not blame feminism, because I do not think their role in the current situation was done with malice, although it's fair to say that something as large and spanning as the American woman's movement would have a large impact on the fabric of society.

Personally I think it was a valid movement corrected in the wrong fashion and subverted in some very nasty way by religion (not all but some), government, and various "old boys clubs" to which the response was more strenuous and response, call and response, to what we have now.

I's naive from my own observation of the world.. you do not seem to know much regarding women's issues. There is plenty of information available on the net if you are interested.

Actually I have a very good knowledge of it, being that my wife was date raped and came from a Welfare family. I was a product one of the few families that actually stayed together. It's a striking juxtaposition really, and lead me on my journey to learn about this topic in the first place.

You have to understand that I have my positions and learn so that I might help both sexes come to a better understanding about the relationship between men and women in relationship and societally as learn as well.

This is exactly what I mean.. it is NOT 'the few'.. I think the % is about 1 in 3 women are abused by their spouses. Please do not assume most women leave their husbands because they don't like cooking hubby dinner..

I'm sure that quote was taking into consideration many things, to include verbal abuse (which is quite subjective) and considered over their lifetimes rather than a yearly tally.

I understand your point, but it does nothing to show the recourse taken, it's success, nor does it point out the problems in the system.

Thing is they have to actually get out of the relationship first.. it would be difficult as most abusive husbands 'ration' money out so they can't escape. they usually have to escape with the clothes on their back and that’s it.

Understood, but there are many more problems than these, stretching into foster care, Welfare, drugs, parental training, etc.

We are slowly becoming a nation that has no clue how a man should treat a woman and where women are not willing to treat a man properly either. The training has been curtailed by many sources.

As I said earlier I admit there is a problem with generational poverty.. this however goes hand in hand with abuse and addiction and they haven't got the resources to become responsible. Again.. there's plenty of info available.

I know the information, and agree that poverty and the consumer driven, credit based economy we have now allows for many resources for the right money. Taxes have become high, small business is bogged down, regulations and red tape cover almost anything you do, to name a few.

Private education? How do you suggest the poor pay for this?

This is long and involved also, but you can't look at it in a fishbowl or it won't work. You must give the money back to the people rather than to the hands of men who would gladly spend 500 bucks for a toilet seat and then shrug when it's paid for but never arrives.

Education is something that needs to be taken out of the hands of the government for the betterment of all.

It depends how the money is applied.. teaching people skills is primary.. teaching them dependency is not. I do not suggest throwing people in the deep end hoping they'll swim though.

Neither do I. In fact I would rather give people the tools with which to get themselves out, but in many cases that is money.


The major problem with poverty has a few major facets.

1) Credit is depended upon too much leaving power in the hands of the bankers and creditors.

2) The domestic buying power of the dollar is junk at the moment, and you can see it when the price of ONE commodity goes up (oil) even when comparative cost is lower than it has been in the past.

3) Federal and State Welfare, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, industrial and transportation subsidies, Free Trade Agreements, and more are far beyond their original intention and add many layers of bureaucracy between the aider and the aidee that private charity has never had.

a) It has terrible transparency, and even if a citizen could spend millions to figure it out still wouldn't be given much credence at all. Therefore nothing has or will change unless something major happens

b) Could not possibly account for the on the ground problems of local areas like local government or local charities or communities can.

c) Poor access to and little to no response from the people making the policy regarding it.

To name a few.

and 4) The rebellion level taxes we pay from county, state, federal, sales, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc on things we buy, money we earn, things we OWN, things we make, things we sell and pretty much everything we do.


The problems are many, but you can be sure that saying traditional roles are wrong because they have been abused by people that do not understand them is not the way to go.

In addition, I wouldn't blame religion for the failings of man, because he has, does, and will do this to himself in any institution he builds.

It does not make the thing evil.

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Well, if we are branching into other departments (which is where this will lead if we really get in-depth) will take this out of the fishbowl it's normally discussed in. In that case that will temper my responses to a different light.

Because of the bias shown towards men, wrongly I might add, but many sources (the church, the government, etc, creating the society in the first place) there has obviously been abuse.

I'll speak more on it, but it will be responses further down the post.

I do believe that pre-jueochristianity marriage in some cultures was not biased towards men.. perhaps in another 50 years when the traditional 'values' of marriage are discarded a new ideal will be placed on it more based on love, respect [not authoritive] and partnership than dominence and servitude.

Again, the problems are not gone, but it is not in the hands of the government (aside from enforcement and longer jail sentences), but rather society to fix the problems still left (which I assure you are better than they were).

They are either worse or just ignored. Society at least acknowledges these problems exist now which is a step in the right direction.

In speaking about "addressing" the problem, I was referring to the public, legal, and financial recourse of women with real problems. It is up to them to take the resources available to them.

Resources a very thinly stretched.. there is never enough to go around.

For one, I did not say it caused it, but it certainly is a factor looking at the divorce rates between poverty and affluency.

Inflation forced women to go to work.. first they had the option to.. then suddenly they had no choice. Two wages are required now.. this has; despite feminism impacted on the traditional dynamics of marriage. Little boys grow up with expectations of how a wife should be.. but suddenly she can't cook dinner because she's working overtime. This causes conflict as it becomes expectations vs fairness.

It is in the worst areas that the community is normally in the worst state. I do not blame feminism, because I do not think their role in the current situation was done with malice, although it's fair to say that something as large and spanning as the American woman's movement would have a large impact on the fabric of society.

I think there are other more obvious factors.. such as population growth and technology. Human progress is probably what triggered feminism.. seems the movement was an inevitable one. To assume something as 'large' as the feminism could make a difference to society when you consider how much the world has changed since we travelled in horse and cart seems fairly blinkered.

Personally I think it was a valid movement corrected in the wrong fashion and subverted in some very nasty way by religion (not all but some), government, and various "old boys clubs" to which the response was more strenuous and response, call and response, to what we have now.

Ah yes the propaganda.. I told my father once I was a feminist [was pretty obvious anyway] .. he responded with "You're a lesbian?"

I's naive from my own observation of the world.. you do not seem to know much regarding women's issues. There is plenty of information available on the net if you are interested.

Actually I have a very good knowledge of it, being that my wife was date raped and came from a Welfare family. I was a product one of the few families that actually stayed together. It's a striking juxtaposition really, and lead me on my journey to learn about this topic in the first place.

I'm sorry to hear this and hope she recovered okay. I've known many in the welfare sytem.. though you seem to have been one of the lucky ones. Seems foster families [in Australia anyway] are not screened properly and are attractive to predators.

You have to understand that I have my positions and learn so that I might help both sexes come to a better understanding about the relationship between men and women in relationship and societally as learn as well.

I guess this discourse would be beneficial to you as well then if you want to 'help' understanding. However if you place your preconceptions on either [generally speaking] not only could it possibly create resentment as people know their own capabilities and potential [hopefully they do anyway] but you would prevent yourself from learning as you've already put limits on how people should behave.

I'm sure that quote was taking into consideration many things, to include verbal abuse (which is quite subjective) and considered over their lifetimes rather than a yearly tally.

Not mainly verbal abuse [emotional abuse is a whole different yet still serious issue]:

nearly 1 in 3 adult women experience at least one physical assault by a partner during adulthood.
www.abanet.org...

Another that may be of interest:
endabuse.org...
I'm also not sure why calculating over lifetimes would be less significant that yearly ones.

I understand your point, but it does nothing to show the recourse taken, it's success, nor does it point out the problems in the system.

The problems in the system come from our culture trying to adapt to itself and find some sort of balance. We are still having holy wars for %#@ sake.. I believe we are in transition trying to find a 'balance'.

We are slowly becoming a nation that has no clue how a man should treat a woman and where women are not willing to treat a man properly either. The training has been curtailed by many sources.

I agree with this.. the media shows complete contempt for women and monkey see monkey do. I'm not sure what you mean about how men are to be treated as they are not the ones with the long hostory of being maltreated. I know some women are quite capable of being very vindictive [cleshe woman scorned] which I don't condone but bad behaviour is bad behaviour and I put it in the context of 'behaving like a grownup'. People should just show eachother respect.. I expect this from both genders.

I know the information, and agree that poverty and the consumer driven, credit based economy we have now allows for many resources for the right money. Taxes have become high, small business is bogged down, regulations and red tape cover almost anything you do, to name a few.

The rich get richer.. humanity hasn't made progress in every area obviously. Greed is still the driving force.

This is long and involved also, but you can't look at it in a fishbowl or it won't work. You must give the money back to the people rather than to the hands of men who would gladly spend 500 bucks for a toilet seat and then shrug when it's paid for but never arrives.

Can't change human nature.. the conscience can always be wiped clean with "It's their own fault."

Education is something that needs to be taken out of the hands of the government for the betterment of all.

But 'private' education the mark of the priviledged.. I kind of know what you mean but it would be another 1/200 years before the rich/poor gap in education could be bridged.

Neither do I. In fact I would rather give people the tools with which to get themselves out, but in many cases that is money.

I actually agree with all the points you made in regards to poverty.

The problems are many, but you can be sure that saying traditional roles are wrong because they have been abused by people that do not understand them is not the way to go.

Again.. the problems in society are not caused by giving up taditional roles.. traditional roles were given up because of the problems.. inflation just made it compulsory [genearlley speaking]. Gone are the days where a house could be paid of in ten years with one wage instead of a lifetime [unless you are born into money or incredibly lucky].

In addition, I wouldn't blame religion for the failings of man, because he has, does, and will do this to himself in any institution he builds.

It does not make the thing evil.

Don't you mean 'God'? Religious institutions are also manmade.

Originally posted by Amuk
Moving this to slugfest before it even gets started

Slugfest?

We need to create another level of Slugfest called Suicidefest

Wait until all the girls on the board get wind of this! I know a member who'll be torn to shreds and we'll have to create yet another forum called ATS Boot Hill!!

Riley:

Rather than keep quoting, I think we need a reset so they don't become too long and conveluded. I do appreciate your willingness to debate constructivly.

Perhaps I should address a point for clarity.

1) Traditional roles in my definition is not the classic version that so many think I am talking about. Perhaps I should find a better term, like "The Real Traditional Roles"

2) Yes, I was including religion in the man-made institutions that are prone to corruption and misuse of power (or money, or whatever).

3) I agree that the mistaken roles are not always the way it was, although I'd agree that abuse in the past was most likely extemely underestimated, so it's hard to really judge if things are better or not. Not even 30 years ago did women have the availibility of many resources (like police and judicial support) that they have today and was probably still underestimated.

4) Traditional Roles (truly) are rather opposite of those currently thought. Sure some of the wording is the same (i.e. "women submitting to men in marriage), but the meaning is so vastly different that it's almost the other polar exterme. Submit does not mean subjegate, and marriage does not mean societally.

5) Men are trained wrongly, in that they do not have a good understanding of what women want or need because they have less background and experience (on the whole) as time goes on from a number of sources from Reality TV to single parenting (typically by mothers) which really isn't good for formative males to grow up properly regardless of the effort of the mother.

6) Women are trained wrongly, in that they also do not have a good understanding of what men want or need for the same reasons as men. Women growing up with bad, no, or little exposure to good men is hurtful and really does nothing for the divorce rate.

7) The situation is exasorbated by each other as kids are having more sex, younger (well before they are ready), with more people, exposed to much more mature things than their age should really be shown, and many other things.

There is no more judgement. Anytime it's seen it's labeled as bigotry, closemindedness, or biblethumping nonsense (which don't get me wrong is sometimes the case). But not always.

Changing 'traditional roles' to 'real traditional roles' is as meaningful as to me as ''true christian'. You haven't actually given a definition. I also don't understand what you mean when you say "Males and females are trained wrongly" as you haven't described the 'alternative' to the oppresive traditional training and explained how they were misunderstood by the majority of people who passed these ideals down the generations. I do not believe in gender conditioning personally. It imposes ristrictions on both emotional and intellectual development. You've also said neither are taught what the other 'needs'. What do they both need? What should girls and boys be trained in exclusively? All children should be loved, have their strengths nurtured and be taught how to give and recieve respect [and especially how to respect themselves. Shouldn't that be sufficent?

[edit on 2-9-2005 by riley]