It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by eye open doors
Men are bigger in stature, and are built to take the brunt of any physical threat. Women in my opinion are far more valuable to society, than men. If there was a village, and there was more men then women. That village would fail. Why? because the pregnancy process takes 9 months. With more women than men, there can be more children being born, which means a higher probability of more baby girl being born.
Now, one could bring up the modern overpopulation factors. Either way, women bear children, and this is a miracle to me.
This energy is used to bear the babies, which by the way is the purest form of love on earth.
Yes giving birth is great and all but woman cant get pregnant without a man so saying that woman are more valuable because they give life is non sense because men help them out with that.
The point is that men and woman need each other and because we need each other one is not better than the other because one without the other is worthless all together. Men without woman would have nothing to impregnate, woman without men would not be able to get pregnant.
That village with more men would not fail unless some outside force or the men did not provide enough food to support the village,
woman in the village would still be able to give birth and the population would grow probably more slowly than a village with more woman but it would still grow.
In no way does having more men doom civilization to absolute failure and it is ridiculous to suggest such a thing on a theoretical situation.
Are you saying fathers love their children less than a mother because they did not give birth?
Women can provide food to support the village just as easily as men can.
Thats depends on how they get thier food. If they tend to hunt big game with primitive tools, then no they cant. If they are farmers with primitive equipment, then probably not as well. If on the other hand its a commune in the midwest and they get food form the gorcery store.....
Originally posted by eye open doors
Thats depends on how they get thier food. If they tend to hunt big game with primitive tools, then no they cant. If they are farmers with primitive equipment, then probably not as well. If on the other hand its a commune in the midwest and they get food form the gorcery store.....
Uh...huh yeah sure, what ever you say big man.
There is a greater probability for those nine women, if they get pregnant, to have a female baby. In my opinion, this makes women more valuable to the survival of the human race. One could include test tube babies into this, however that is something else.
My point was that they are more valuable to the human race. Treating them as second class citizens is harmful in so many ways.
Could nature be considered an outside force? Women can provide food to support the village just as easily as men can.
How about another village, one with more women, which has more people. Decides to raid the village that is stunted due to the lack of child bearing women. They are more likely to be dominated, due to the larger amount of people.
That is your opinion. We could say look at society now. In my opinion, having more men in charge has doomed us.
Speaking of mothers, and raising children. I had the differences between the sexes put to me as this. Women are smaller in stature because the womb saps energy from the woman. This energy is used to bear the babies, which by the way is the purest form of love on earth.
Men are bigger in stature, and are built to take the brunt of any physical threat. Women in my opinion are far more valuable to society, than men.
Equal in life, if not in function. And my functions are every bit as valuable as a mans. I don't ask that a man subsume his will, time, efforts to my benefit but I insist that he not expect me to subsume mine to him. Respect is genderless.
Both are dedicated to their job and their family-just in different degrees due to their different functions. The acceptable standard of behavior in your scenario is the dedication, not the degree of its expression.
I didn't know for certain, but it sounded good when it was explained to me. His point was that men who hit women are jerks because women have wombs and men are stronger.
I honestly believe that everyone (especially men) should have mandatory extensive parenting classes, including child psychology, and health care.
...huh yeah sure, what ever you say big man.
Originally posted by orangetom1999
Shazam,
I strongly suggest you rethink your view of male power.
What these women who want to RISK it are telling you to your face..is that for every man who claims brawn and brain..there is a woman knowlegable and expereienced enough to redirect his efforts such that he thinks it is his idea all along. Dude...that is alot of power.
Do not ever get all enamoured of what males tend to think is alot of power. It is easily turned to flatulance by a skillful woman who can read a man like radar in the dark. I've seen it done over and over.
As I often say..only a man can be this naturally stupid. Subtily is a very very powerful tool.
What these women are telling you with subtilty and yet out in the open..is that properly applied..they can run circles around your brawn and get you to do it for them.
Dont be a textbook male...they are expendable and disposable. A dime a dozen.
Thanks,
Orangetom
And that contradicts the point I was making in what way?
Yes and Ive seen men wrap women around thier pinkie finger. What is your point beyond rehashing tied sterotyopes of "men big and dumb" "Women sneaky and smart
and only a slave could be this self hating.
In some circumstances perhaps. And perhaps they aren't "running circles" around #. Most men know when a woman is trying to "manipulate them", and so long as we get what we want out of it, dont really care.
Originally posted by orangetom1999
Hunting is a very time and skill consuming occupation. I dont put much stock in todays male to accomplish this...many today having been raised on a diet of television and video games...ie..sports and cheerleaders.
Also today ..remember..alot of what our fathers and grandfathers used to do manually is done with machines. This alone would leave many of the men today by the wayside...with the women.
My point is that though women may be smaller and weaker across the board than men..do not mistate their ability to get a task accomplished by getting a man to do it for them and the man think it was his idea.
This is what I mean when I say ..substitute his value and thinking system with her's. It requires great subtilty and strength. A different kind but no less strength an power. Many women do ??
Somehow this concept seems to upset alot of men. Reference my tale above of the guy who bought his wife the new van. That is a lot of power and control over a man.
I submit to you what I was explaining above about merchandizers , advertiseres and manufacturers.
Your homework assignment Shazam..
is when you are out and about...go into any of the department stores...any of them. Pennys, Macys, Belk, Wally World et al. Do a careful overview of the quantity of merchandize and the floorspace dedicated to it. How much is dedicated to womens products verses mens products. You will find the floorspace about 6 to 1 or 7 to 1 female. This is alot of power. Economic power. It is alot of default. Understand??
Economic power is political power..is educational power..is reflected in the court system. Understand now??
Remember what I said..only men can be this dumb they dont get it. Why would they...they have NASCAR, Hooters, the LA Lakers...cheerleaders et al...etc etc. LOL LOL ..its so great to be a man...in this world.
LOL LOL misandrist hatred..lol lol..well done Shazam...
Truth is ..I dont think much more of what passes for manhood today as I do for womanhood. To me they are both about as dumb and defaulting.
This is not my point and it is similar to what many do in misdirection. I dont think much of a man who does this to a woman without any real value in return. It is just as cheap as what many women do to men.
When I do put light on it I get exactly the reactions from people like yourself. Ironically with many points I make ...the women ..many of them tend to be silent..they dont want light put on this concept either.
this is misdirection off the topic and concepts. It is what many women and politicians do. Keep aiming at tangents...never the bullseye.
How does this help..it is exactly how many women and politicians conduct themselves...as long as we get what we want out of it ..dont really care. This is why the children today suffer alot in this system. No ..alot of men I know do not know when a woman is manipulating them...they only "begin" to catch on when the risks come due. This is why my emphasis on RISK!!
My position still stands..in this affluent social structure..the most expendable and disposable sex ...is the male by far..this is nothing to boast and toot ones horn about . It is definitely not equality. Nor is it Love.
It is consumption, consumption rates and the justification for it.
In any case this is a completely theoretical situation that would most likely not happen Nature balances it out so that we as a species dont have to encounter this problem.
And treating men as second class citizens would be just as harmful in a lot of the same ways, thats why you cant put more value on one gender more than the other we need each other therefore we are of equal value.
Yes woman can provide food and that is the way it is in many villages around the world, but men also provide meat from hunting they provide protection woman cannot provide and they do all of the manual labor that woman cannot help with.
so yes they can provide some of the food provided to the village but men will most likely provide more. An example being the Kombai tribe of new guinea the woman make some sort of bread dish while men hunt daily for the protein given to the tribe. the men in kombai also cut down the trees used for the bread that woman make.
To say woman are of more value would mean they can sustain the population themselves and they cant, they NEED men to help them and men NEED woman to help them as well.
thats a logical fallacy, because defense from other tribes depends on the streangth of their tribe, so a larger tribe could just as easily be subdued especially if its made up of more woman than men they wouldnt even have a fighting chance.
and this is your opinion however i agree an disagree with this opinion. Men have done a lot of good and bad for society but so have woman. You cant focus on one gender and pin humanities problems on them its is for the most part equally distributed. Woman are just as immoral and greedy as men are and to say otherwise is non-sense.
While I do believe that women bearing babies is love and very important. This concept as a mantra as a dogma ...pales ...when you realize what the abortion issue has done and it clearly demonstrates that expedience is more important to many women than is love. Also...this abortion buisness has gelled down to the concept that male love does not count for his offspring by default.
Originally posted by eye open doorsSo why is it that women are commonly undervalued in society even though they bear children?
However I still believe that womens value to our survival as a species outweighs the ego grasping ways of the commonly accepted male image.
I disagree. Women tend to be more agile, and flexible. If women are allowed to fight, and wield weapons (like the celts, and vikings) they could cut a throat, or bust open a skull just as aptly as any man.
Are women incapable of defending themselves, or wielding weapons?
I disagree. Women tend to be more agile, and flexible. If women are allowed to fight, and wield weapons (like the celts, and vikings) they could cut a throat, or bust open a skull just as aptly as any man.
Take a look the most commonly accepted creation myth in western society. What does it imply?
So why is it that women are commonly undervalued in society even though they bear children?
I bet if any woman in that society chooses to cut down one of those threes, or any other social taboo. she will either be beaten, outcasted, or killed. I am willing to also bet that their creation myth supports reasons why.
That is a very good point. However I still believe that womens value to our survival as a species outweighs the ego grasping ways of the commonly accepted male image
I guess we will have to agree to disagree since we are both headstong on our own stances.
Since those sports are based on the exact same skills that one would need to defend ones life. More to the point, if women cant comepte in the far more orderly, regulated, and less dangerous "sports" why would they be able to in a life or death struggle.
Originally posted by eye open doors
Shazam,
Since when does Life or Death battle equate to sports?