Battle Of The Sexes!, No chivalry here! Options

Fight club, folks! Let's keep it in the ring!!

Let's start off with some background...
(IMG:http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p130/thexenomancer/battleofthesexes.jpg)
And some music...

There we go!!

So, after seeing these whining women lamenting their woes with wailing and gnashing of teeth, I notice that they do so to the men. They say things about how women are better, how men are worthless, and just by being near them, they assail me with their negativity.

No more. It's time to show them where their place is. (IMG:http://workfarce.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/bitch_slap.jpg) Because I, too, can own this look of satisfaction.

Happily, I will remind every radical man-hater who invented their synthetics in their clothes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Frederick_Cross) (Crossreference: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/22620) ,
who invented their cars (Karl Benz, Founder of the Benz Motor Dynasty),
their computers (First modern computer by John Mauchly and J. Presper Eckert of the University of Pennsylvania, WWII era),
radios (Nikola Tesla and Guglielmo Marconi),
Air Flight (The Wright Brothers!),
their cellphones (Reginald Fessenden with technology adapted from Nikola Tesla),
and every other medium they mean to use to spread their sexist anti-man lies.

Men invented the concrete and asphalt that made the roads (John Smeaton, 1756). A man invented the Alternating Current used in the powergrid to power your hair dryer and everything in our country (Nikola Telsa). Men made the factories and shops that manufacture and distribute their so-beloved purses (First ever true assembly line by Marc Isambard Brunel, 1801). Men made the equipment they enjoy music to, and dancing at clubs to (Harry Olsen and Herbert Belar, 1955 with the first electronic synthesizer).

Men amongst men.(IMG:http://www.myepicwin.com/thumbs/MLSZRNCREI2R/NVCVNF03GS7P/GTFO-Bitch-Im-Doing-Science.jpg)

Women? There is ONE off the top of my head that I always consider to be a paragon amongst women, that deserves my respect. Florence Nightingale. She had the bright idea to sterilize the medical equipment. Let me rephrase that:

The woman improved the human condition by cleaning. How about that. I don't recall ever reading anything about her denouncing men. Then again, I don't ever recall any man-haters ever improving humanity in the first place with their bitching.

That's my first swing. I'm not going to use my right hook just yet. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sport_boxing.gif)

This post has been edited by Xenomancer: Jun 25 2010, 11:33 AM

The primacy of male inventors can be explained by millenia of domination by the physical prowess of man. Nowadays, females are well-represented in every academic field, and supposedly the smartest person still alive is a woman - though William James Sidis might have had a higher IQ when he was alive.

But that's just the preamble. Consider this: even if only 10% of scientists were women, they'd still win... because what, like 2% of violent criminals are female. If you want to talk about an area where one sex is extremely fucking over-represented, it is crime. Women may nag or whatever yadda yadda, but the fact is, the world would be a better place if men were more like women.

/end sex traitor speech (IMG:style_emoticons/default/13.gif)

so you got dumped eh?

Yes.

hehe, i was actually directing that to xenomancer.

you don't sound like you're full of misogynistic angst Vilhajalmr (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Honestly i would have to say me being a guy yeah men do have muscle and such. But to be very vague and honest with MOST men's lust towards women they do trully control men. With that being said i understand that women can have the same lust as men but most seem to be able to control it better. Therefore ruleing the world... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/i_triangle.gif)

hehe, i was actually directing that to xenomancer.

you don't sound like you're full of misogynistic angst Vilhajalmr (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/lol_2.gif) I figured that. I'm full of angst... but it's not misogynistic!

Quite frankly Men are so domineering because they're jealous of Women's Orgasms, I mean that's why I'm an ass to them.

so you got dumped eh?

Naw. Usually when I'm feeling pissed I find the nearest point of cynicism I can sink my higher mind into, and use whatever brain power I can muster to milk it for all it's worth.

But your thought was on the right track: In retrospect, mind you, this post was primarily for cathartic purposes. I may not have realized it at the time because I was just so pissed with so many anti-man dregs. I'm talking about the kind that have nothing to offer a man, and overprice themselves in the way of a man's status and power. On that note, look at what happens when the market offers something crap quality at a high price: People get jilted, gypped, and because no one's buying into it, there's a crash. Honestly, I think many American women are setting themselves up for a Lysistrata-esque backlash coming from the men. I really think eventually, the general populace of men will just get fed up and choose to be celibate. That seems extreme, but hey, I believe it! Unless... something changes.

Quite frankly Men are so domineering because they're jealous of Women's Orgasms, I mean that's why I'm an ass to them.

From what medical journals say, and a little bit of weird metaphor, if the human body was an automobile, women's orgasms are like turbochargers, and men's would be nitrous tanks.

(IMG:http://www.sciperformance.com/turbo.gif) Women build up. When they have an orgasm, its not a release, it's just an apex in gathered energy. Very much, metaphorically speaking, like the power curve of a turbo-charger in an engine. When the woman is revved high, there is a high tension, then a jolting release of pressure. The process repeats over and over, depending if the person who's steering is capable of handling that. Similarly, when the turbo is revved high, there is high tension, then a jolting release of pressure. The process repeats over and over, depending if the person who's in control is capable of handling that! In either case, make sure that there is plenty of lube, as heat without proper lubrication will cause something to rupture. This is bad.

(IMG:http://image.mustang50magazine.com/f/images/18971643%20w200/m5lp_0907_30_z%20s197_bolt_on%20nitrous_oxide_tank.jpg) Men just dump it all. ATTENTION WOMEN: THIS IS WHY MEN ARE SO INCLINED TO FALL ASLEEP AFTER SEX!! For men, orgasms are so intense, they can paralyze. Or, at least, drain completely. Of course, true to the inclination of man's nature, what's better than power? More power. So at the height of pleasure, what do men do? Go for that jam of energy. It grips the brain and wrenches it with pleasure, much like how a NO2 tank just jams an engine with all that gas. What to do in either case after it's spent? Let the damn thing cool down!! You don't want it to break!!

I'm not jealous of a woman's orgasm, as much as I am upset over the "I deserve everything good because I am a woman" attitude they have about life, much less about sex. They fought for equality, so let them have it. They want everything good? They'll have to work for it. The "Queen of Entitlement" attitude does NOT attract men at all. And there's just no justification for hating on men because they can't land one. None.

I digress. Orgasm? Studied it. Nothing to be jealous about. One is not better than the other, because in either case, each sex is hardwired to seek their own orgasm per their natures. Men are hardwired to seek that pleasure dump. Women are hardwired to reach that apex. Neither is better, or worse. What's better or worse is how each handles their machine (metaphor: Body). A well lubed machine won't suffer a completely blown and junked turbo. A machine with clean ports, headers, and exhaust can handle nitrous much better.Turbo engines need to be tight and well lubed, engines with Nitrous tanks need to be clean and efficient. Women need to be toned and hydrated, men need to eat healthy and learn breath control. Sexuality is a science.

This post has been edited by Xenomancer: Jun 30 2010, 10:34 PM

I think turbochargers are better than nitrous. For my purposes, anyway. But nice metaphor. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

This post has been edited by Vilhjalmr: Jul 1 2010, 01:28 AM

What follows is a sincere criticism, not a personal attack.

To put it very bluntly, I think that you're allowing 'bitches' to inspire you towards thought processes & attitudes which represent you as kind of a 'dickhead'.

I think you'd be happier, as well as perhaps better received, if you tried to find an alternative to being simplistically reactionary to negative stimuli, becoming essentially a mirror of it.

I think you'd be happier, as well as perhaps better received, if you tried to find an alternative to being simplistically reactionary to negative stimuli, becoming essentially a mirror of it.

Easier said than done.

Anyhow, I am very amazed at how quickly the community here was able to dispel the stagnant negativity! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/clapping.gif) You really have come a long way if now you're all at the point where such rants don't so much as phase you!

Amazing. Bravo. I am very impressed. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

This post has been edited by Xenomancer: Jul 1 2010, 05:27 PM

It's really hard to tell if there even is a better gender. I see gender as a life form that was naturally devided in half, and now exist as a 2-piece puzzle.
I'm too busy thinking about my goals to worry about the psychological negativities of women.
But I suppose that if I felt that passionately about women, I'd probably go gay.
For now, I'm happily single and non sexual.

I love women. I have sex with them. How can you argue with that? the good ones even make you food and bring you beer! c'mon

I voted for men, but mostly because it would temporarily result in a 33.33% and I like that number.

Humanity is incomplete, for the moment, without both genders, and that in my opinion ought to simply nullify the question at the start. If both are critically required to continue as a species, then they are of equal value. When it comes to control, I have seen men completely controlled by women - sometimes more than one! - and also women completely controlled by men. Controlled by lust, controlled by circumstance or social status, by money, etc. To me this is not one gender having power over another (at its absolute root) but, people controlling other people. Because women are more (but not necessarily totally) incapacitated during pregnancy, it just so turned out that men have historically maintained most of the power and control across the cultural board. In any group of people where there is no pregnancy for a sufficient length of time, there is the possibility that either gender may achieve dominance due to any number of factors. If we did not propagate but were all immortal, control would have nothing to do with gender.

I do believe that men and women function, in general, in basically different ways - not that they cannot do the same thing, but that there are different hormones that produce different effects on the brain which results in differences in behavior. There are a multitude of combinations within each gender that gives rise to a wide variety of differences developmentally, behaviorally, and ultimately culturally both on the micro and macro scale.

I will say, however, that although I enjoy being a man for a variety of reasons and have no desire to change my gender, I do envy women the ability to give birth.

<begin gushy mushy stuff>

Seeing my sister carry and give birth to my two nephews is what began this envy for me. I was there throughout the labor of my first nephew at my sisters request - yes we're very close, no not like that - and for a big chunk of the pregnancy, and it was perhaps one of the most moving spiritual experiences I have had. It gave me a particular spiritual respect for women. From the beginnings of gestation through the process of birth, a women literally embodies that gateway by which a spiritual being is drawn into a physical body, given form, and entering into the phenomenal world of experience. It may be that men act as the keyholders to that gate, but we can never know what it means to walk the very edge of that line between this world and the other, undergo and ordeal which is very much a journey to the edge of life and death, and give forth a new being with their own experiences and potential in this world. I do not credit women alone with the power of creation, because they do not have that power any more than a man by himself does. However, although it may sound as though I romanticize the process - and I may - only a woman has the chance to feel Spirit moving through her and into this world in that way. For that moment, despite all the smelly, sweaty, ugly, screaming, etc., I ached to be in her place.

<end gushy mushy stuff>

As a very gay man, I have absolutely no lust towards women whatsoever, not buried deep down inside, or covered up by a complex, or otherwise hidden or obscured from me in some way. So for me, I am able to operate on a more level field with women than your average straight male, from the control perspective. It irritates me endlessly when the women I work with or interact with begin to enact this 'defer to the male' or 'Oooh, big strong man' drama. I have come to recognize over time that it isn't always the man that creates this inequality. Women very often - this happens to me constantly, which is why it irritates me - foster this inequality by deferring, or by trying to control a man's 'urge' to be the worker, the doer, etc., using sex-appeal, etc. I know that this is cultural conditioning to some degree, but the worst of it is that you can't even call them out on it without sounding like you are stereotyping all women in the worst way.

I worked with a girl - this is a specific example, not a unique event - who wore fantastic clothing. Everytime she came into work I was just amazed at what she was wearing, she just had incredible fashion sense and I am not a fashion person. They were just great outfits. I complimented her a few times, the fact that I am gay was common knowledge, and she appreciated my compliments. However, at some point she must have gotten the wrong idea and made and obvious gesture of, first flirtation, then later rejection, with out my responding to either at all. The flirtation I was used to and always saw it as playful because I make it well known where I stand. The rejection baffled me because I never responded to the flirting in the first place. It seemed to me that she somehow became frustrated by the fact that I didn't treat her differently because she was pretty and dressed appealingly - think, a very classy display of assets - and then turned it around like I was the one making a pass at her. I have never had this happen with a man, straight (obviously) or gay. And that is an example, not an isolated incident.

So, there are varying degrees of stability, of control, of maturity, on the general scale, on both sides. There are common, but not absolute, strengths and weaknesses to either gender I believe, but between any two individuals there are either two many differences, or not enough differences, to say that one gender is better than the other. I will say that I have on the whole experienced more frustration with women than with men, but its fair to say that male to male communication is in general somewhat less complicated. Female to female communication appears to be, just from my outside perspective, far more complicated. Not necessarily complex, just complicated.

peace

Sorry I'm not into penises unless its mine and until men start lossing hair in awkard locations, grow boobs/vaginas and start blowing me, women get the benefit of the doubt in my book...

As far as which gender is more dominant? Obviously guys. I mean even now pay wages vary by gender lines in many places. Throughout history cultures all over the world have women taking on lesser "submissive" roles to men. There are few exceptions.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/connie_mini_oldman.gif) Old thread is old. Kath dispelled the cynicism.

it irritates me endlessly when the women I work with or interact with begin to enact this 'defer to the male' or 'Oooh, big strong man' drama.

EXACTLY. Women are just as, if not more, sexist than men.

(IMG:http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p130/thexenomancer/1272215347629.jpg)

So, there are varying degrees of stability, of control, of maturity, on the general scale, on both sides. There are common, but not absolute, strengths and weaknesses to either gender I believe, but between any two individuals there are either two many differences, or not enough differences, to say that one gender is better than the other

And yet, I recall hearing these words in the same breath of a woman: "Sexism is wrong. Men are worthless pigs."

Both sexes are human. But when compassion is eclipsed by ideological pretense *coughcoughfeminismcoughcoughcough* sorry, where was I? Oh yeah---ideological pretense, then the fundamental spiritual drive within all of us to improve the human condition is hence lost.

By that same token, however, I need to be vigilant to myself to ensure that my own righteous indignation doesn't get out of hand to turn into full-blown fury. That would get nothing done.

So what do you call a guy who's sexist? Masculinist? Either way I'm sure there are plenty of guys who are sexist and think men have some righteousness over women.

I voted MEN.But thats because I am a man in this life,in my next life I might be a woman again, and then I would vote in favour of woman.The question is Irrelevant ,ying&yang of the same coin.

Actually Ada Lovelace was the first to conceptualize the computer and in fact designed the first program....eat your words cheesebutt! You may recognize her philandering egotistical father: Lord Byron. No credit when standing in Daddy's shadow huh? And did anyone forget Madame Curie, who sacrificed her LIFE for her studies? And by the way....no one surrounding her valued her enough to award her with the proper recognition until well after her death. Instead her husband received the credit. That begs a question: How many inventions through out history were really a woman's?

I am by nature a feminist. I have to be. But I'm also a sexist. I believe that women are better than men but I can't say why. Of course, there are so many standards a woman has to fulfill before she receives credit. A man merely has to do well to be recognized...a woman has to do better, still doesn't get payed the same. So a woman HAS to be better, by nature, just to be considered equal. Thats how I feel. I don't blame it on men...and I also don't look down on men just because they weren't born with a vagina. Its not their fault. I also tend to get along more with men...so I guess I don't make a good sexist but there you go. There are exceptions to every rule. I am the first to admit when there is a man who is better than me. There will ALWAYS be someone better than me. Doesn't hurt my sensibilities.

I am not even going to step into this puddle of puerile horse crap.

As a historian, I could tell you the contributions of women to history. The list is much longer and more impressive than Florence Nightengale.

As for the "feminists" -- let me state that when one group demeans another, be it men or women demeaning the other -- they've lost sight of their fundamental humanity. Using the word "b--ch" to describe a woman is just as repulsive as the neologism "mansplain" that faux-feminists are using these days.

No gender is superior. Period.

That being said: gays are superior to straight people. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/Gigakach_02.gif)

I am not even going to step into this puddle of puerile horse crap.

As a historian, I could tell you the contributions of women to history. The list is much longer and more impressive than Florence Nightengale.

As for the "feminists" -- let me state that when one group demeans another, be it men or women demeaning the other -- they've lost sight of their fundamental humanity. Using the word "b--ch" to describe a woman is just as repulsive as the neologism "mansplain" that faux-feminists are using these days.

No gender is superior. Period.

I was thinking about this today and completely agree, people need to remember that a fundamental humanity is the big deal here, not the gender which is the tip of a very deep iceberd. I've been reading feminist literature and it's really interesting.

I have yet to really understand what it means to be fundamentally humanistic...aren't I inherently in touch with my humanity any way I think or act??? I'd hate to be all toohey here but In fact, you could be considered a humanitarian and still look down on people, right?. I know of a LOT people who are philanthropic, not because they admire their species on a whole but on the contrary, look towards the future with a sliver of hope and the past and present with disdain. These same people could be considered hypocrites, yes???

About this "puerile crap" statement.... its puerile crap to call it puerile crap.

P.S. Feminists are not sexists. They're two separate things. Feminism celebrates a gender. Sexism prizes one over the other.

This post has been edited by lyah: Sep 30 2012, 01:22 PM

I have yet to really understand what it means to be fundamentally humanistic...aren't I inherently in touch with my humanity any way I think or act???

Humanism acknowledges the humanity in everyone, not just in ourselves. Everyone is human.

I'd hate to be all toohey here but In fact, you could be considered a humanitarian and still look down on people, right?. I know of a LOT people who are philanthropic, not because they admire their species on a whole but on the contrary, look towards the future with a sliver of hope and the past and present with disdain. These same people could be considered hypocrites, yes???

No, no, no. Humanism is not humanitarianism.

Humanism holds that human beings must always be considered human beings. Rational beings (humans) are always humans. Dehumanizing language, no matter who uses it, is fundamentally dehumanizing. Likening people to animals is dehumanizing. Advocating that Group A is superior to Group B for any reason is anti-humanist.

About this "puerile crap" statement.... its puerile crap to call it puerile crap.

Ahem. "Pick one: Men are superior to women vs Women are superior to men" is puerile crap. If you answer the question either way, you've elected to dehumanize a whole half of humanity by arguing that the other half is superior. People must ever remain in the category of people or else we end up with atrocities out the wazoo. History is chock full of such examples.

When I concluded with my "Gays are better than straights" I had my tongue firmly in my cheek and made the machine-gun icon next to it to blow it away. lol

P.S. Feminists are not sexists. They're two separate things. Feminism celebrates a gender. Sexism prizes one over the other.

There are feminists who advocate celebrating women, yes. But of late there have been some in feminist circles who have uttered such nonsense as "All men are rapists" and other such drivel. More to the point, even if such quotes can not accurately be attributed to a particular source, some feminists elect to believe them, none-the-less.

I believe in equal right for everyone. I do not consider myself a feminist because the word has become loaded, is not understood by many claiming to be feminists, and is fragmented along lines both absurd and obscene. Academic feminism, as applied to literary analysis and social science, is great stuff. Unfortunately, there's a new breed of Internet feminism that behaves re-actively, not proactively, to women's issues today. Blaming men for everything isn't empowering for women, it's just pathetic and dis-empowering for women as a whole.

There's feminism and then there's fauxmenism.

This post has been edited by Faustus: Sep 30 2012, 08:42 PM

"Humanism acknowledges the humanity in everyone, not just in ourselves. Everyone is human.
No, no, no. Humanism is not humanitarianism."

my bad. I thought they were relatively the same thing.

"Humanism holds that human beings must always be considered human beings. Rational beings (humans) are always humans. Dehumanizing language, no matter who uses it, is fundamentally dehumanizing. Likening people to animals is dehumanizing. Advocating that Group A is superior to Group B for any reason is anti-humanist."

where is the logic in that statement? you might as well say youre wrong im right. You cannot state the key subject matter you are advocating for as fact before you prove that it is. Thats cheating. If that was how we ran a debate, there would no point to filibustering (just joking!) If thats how we ran a debate, essays would be a hell of a lot shorter, theorems would be laws, and conjectures would be immediate and undeniable fact.

"Ahem. "Pick one: Men are superior to women vs Women are superior to men" is puerile crap. If you answer the question either way, you've elected to dehumanize a whole half of humanity by arguing that the other half is superior. People must ever remain in the category of people or else we end up with atrocities out the wazoo. History is chock full of such examples."

Replying angrily to a post that is evidently designed to provoke people is puerile crap. It doesn't matter if you find it tacky or not, the fact that you are responding in a condescending tone is tacky. Its supposed to be fun. Im NOT electing to do anything but admit what I feel to be true. By your logic, you cannot say that I am not a humanist without electing that you are privileged with a superior point of view. Therefore, you are no longer humanist either. So there.

"When I concluded with my "Gays are better than straights" I had my tongue firmly in my cheek and made the machine-gun icon next to it to blow it away. lol "

Resorting to humor to avoid too much scrutiny in a debate is one thing. I understand that a degree of silliness is necessary and also its a way to remind us that none of us really know what were talking about. But to use it as a weapon to make fun of someone is a little underhanded.

"There are feminists who advocate celebrating women, yes. But of late there have been some in feminist circles who have uttered such nonsense as "All men are rapists" and other such drivel. More to the point, even if such quotes can not accurately be attributed to a particular source, some feminists elect to believe them, none-the-less. "

Wow I have nothing to say about this drivel. Who is generalizing again?

"I believe in equal right for everyone. I do not consider myself a feminist because the word has become loaded, is not understood by many claiming to be feminists, and is fragmented along lines both absurd and obscene. Academic feminism, as applied to literary analysis and social science, is great stuff. Unfortunately, there's a new breed of Internet feminism that behaves re-actively, not proactively, to women's issues today. Blaming men for everything isn't empowering for women, it's just pathetic and dis-empowering for women as a whole.

There's feminism and then there's fauxmenism."

Ive never seen any of my feminist friends scream rape or burn bras. I agree that reacting is bad though. And I don't blame men. I never did. I blame women for not stepping up and proving that they are better. I do not exclude myself from these standards.

This post has been edited by lyah: Oct 16 2012, 09:30 PM

Anyhow, I am very amazed at how quickly the community here was able to dispel the stagnant negativity! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/clapping.gif) You really have come a long way if now you're all at the point where such rants don't so much as phase you!

Amazing. Bravo. I am very impressed. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

you spoke a couple years too soon, (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)




lyah: the feminist movement does attract "man haters" to it, much like a celibate religious order attracts guilt-ridden pedophiles...
but...
faustus: saying that feminism is significantly driven by man hating, is like saying the catholic church is significantly driven by a desire to force sex on children.


I'll say this, for every one time I've actually heard a woman say something sincerely sexist about men, I've heard ten men sincerely decry the evils of all those sexist womenfolk.
and that does get old. really it does.
actually I have a sudden sympathy for the 99% of priests out there who would probably rather die than harm a child.


as far as my use of the word bitch to describe a woman... notice in the same sentence I describe a man being a "dickhead"? There's no side taking, or marginalization of any particular group involved.
I'm being a humanist quasi-misanthrope who's not too serious to poke a bit of fun at her own primate species. anyway, get over the scary words, and look at the content entire. what did I really say?

I was reading between the lines of this thread, to the underlying cause of distress for the OP, and recommending (in a kind and humorous way) that he try not to let unlikable people inspire him to become unlikeable.


by the way, technically, humans are animals. We're animals, we're just tenuously on the cusp of "sentience", which is to say somewhat more developed than the other animals. But still, no need to avoid calling a spade a spade. Also, 'bitch' used to be a term of respect and admiration for women. It was meant as a compliment, implying that she was strong, loyal, a natural leader (dogs are matriarchal) etc. The meaning of the compliment got twisted at some point between 1000 BCE and 0 CE, during what historians call the rise of chauvanism in the middle eastern region. Granted, I was talking about 'mean girls', so I was using it in the post-'chauvanized' context.


anyway, yes the whole thread is purile crap. all the posts in it too. that's a given, you can know that just reading the title. But we all clicked it anyway eh?
what? purile crap can be marginally amusing.

This post has been edited by Kath: Nov 8 2012, 11:57 AM