Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Leafsnail]

That is sickeningly true.

Because you've had a lot of experience living in both countries...?

[Urist is dead tome]

I said we have guns where I live. Why would we use fists?

That is sickeningly true.

Because you've had a lot of experience living in both countries...?

No I have researched the British gun laws. Do you have any idea how strict they are?

[Heron TSG]

I don't think there would be many who'd go: Whoa that guy's strong, he'll be successful in life, while there are far more who think "That girl's smart, she's going to make one hell of a career"

Except for a couple things. Yes, people can make a good career out of being very strong. Sports pay big money. Women can get in on sports too, because competitions are usually divided between men and women leagues. Men are just as smart as women, and they can 'make one hell of a career' just as often.

[breadbocks]

Thanks for calling a man with a honest opinion a troll. It always improves the situation, don't you think?

I am surprised at the amount of people here thinking that men and women are equal, while women are usually (statistically speaking) better motivated, better at complex tasks, less prone to violence and more empathic than men...

Yeah... I'm calling BS on this until you provide a reliable source. As in, not wikipedia, and not a source that paints everything in a feminist light.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/education/09college.html?_r=1
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2009/07/30/2009-07-30_who_makes_the_better_boss_men_or_women.html
http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com/2009/03/women-really-are-better-than-men-at.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080220104244.htm
http://www.qatarliving.com/node/1429919
http://www.forbes.com/2010/05/10/women-doctors-patients-mother-forbes-woman-well-being-health.html


Because you were apparently in a hurry, I wasn't able to get more references (or to be more specific, more specific search terms), but these should at least shed some light on my reasoning.

*Cracks knuckles, flexes fingers* So let's get down to it, shall we?

Link 1: Fail perception of an article is fail. At the beginning, it is quite clear about how of the sample they had, most of the boys were only in it for the subject they went to uni for, and the experience. (When I go to uni, I'm going to be in it for Electrical Engineering and related subjects, not in-depth studying of the migration patterns of the moose.) The example of the girl was the cream-of-the-crop, while the guy was someone who wanted to get what he wanted to know, and the fun, and nothing else. If you'd taken the time to read or even skim more than the first page, you'd know that professors say that men also dominate the top when they want to. ("Professors interviewed on several campuses say that in their experience men seem to cluster in a disproportionate share at both ends of the spectrum — students who are the most brilliantly creative, and students who cannot keep up.
"My best male students are every bit as good as my best female students," said Wendy Moffat, a longtime English professor at Dickinson College in Pennsylvania. "But the range among the guys is wider.") A few paragraphs further down the page you find this little gem: "Many male students say with something resembling pride that they get by without much studying.
"If I take a class and never study, I can still get a B," said Scott Daniels, a 22-year-old at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro. "I know that if I'd applied myself more, I would have had better grades.""
Later on in the article, you get a Ms.Smyers who concludes that because guys are more laid back at uni, it means they don't give a crap about life and think "they can sit back and relax and when they graduate, they'll still get a good job. They seem to think that if they have a firm handshake and speak properly, they'll be fine."" A few paragraphs up, you see this same woman dumped a guy because he tried to limit his gaming problem for her. Sure has people skills, huh?
Later on, it says something about how men screw up more, but is then quick to smother that argument with a simple explanation about how boys are, and how it gets labeled as a problem by teachers who are too lazy to handle it.
The rest of the article pretty much rambles about how guy-girl ratios are changing drastically, however at the end, we run into this: "Still, men in the work force have always done better in pay and promotions, in part because they tend to work longer hours, and have fewer career interruptions than women, who bear the children and most of the responsibility for raising them."
As the author of Dilbert put it, men are more willing to bend over and kiss ass.
Result: Lots of strawmen, nothing that helps your argument.

Link 2:Much shorter article this time. The intro quote even has an admittance to her irrational generalization of male bosses. Essentially all the rest says is that women empathize and communicate better. However we still get this one quote that emphasizes the difference between the male and female boss: "“The same behavior of a woman and man gets judged very differently,” Gallagher says. “If a male boss bangs his fist on the table and says, I want to get that done immediately, people say, well, he has what it takes. If a woman does it, people say, what’s with her? it must be her time of the month.”".
Result: Nothing at all. All it does is say how some women think they make better bosses.

Link 3: Another short article. Congrats. Females can tell faces apart easier.
Result: Girls get the novelty of better facial recognition. Woo.

Link 4: Slightly longer, and more scientific meat. Actually gave me hard facts about how women have better memory than men.
Result: Any more belief in women being better than men was utterly canceled out by the rest of the articles.

Link 5: ... Dear god this article sucks. But to make my point, have all the refutes.

• Yeah... no. And those aren't even Isreali.
• Once again with the memory thing. I'm starting to get the idea that it is the only thing they even remotely have over men.
• Have you ever seen a group of females working together? Just plain no.
• It's because girls jump at the slightest disgusting looking thing. Men suck it up and eat what tastes good.
• Oh hia memory thing.
• What would this be based off of?
• Communication. Otherwise known as gossip.
• Sigh. Memory.
• It's because the ones that don't do well are quick to drop it.
• Correction: They cope differently

Result: Things are not looking very pretty.

Link 6: Another one I can read without laughing out loud. So apparently patients showing more dominance over their female doctor helps them get better?("But what's really interesting is that patients respond differently to women in white coats than they do to men. Both female and male patients are more assertive with female doctors. They interrupt more, and they ask more questions.") Aye-aye captain Women-are-better. And it ends with the author saying they're neutral on the matter.
Results: No argument is even present to be refuted. Not helping.

Face it, you are claiming your opinions are facts. If you'd even taken the time to check your "sources" then you'd know how much fail they are.

[Leafsnail]

No I have researched the British gun laws. Do you have any idea how strict they are?

Dude, I fucking LIVE here.

[The Merchant Of Menace]

As do I.

[Urist is dead tome]

No I have researched the British gun laws. Do you have any idea how strict they are?

Dude, I fucking LIVE here.

And do you own or know anyone who owns a gun larger than 22. caliber?

[Leafsnail]

Yes, I own someone with a 22 inch calibre gun .

In all seriousness, no.

[Earthquake Damage]

Yes, I own someone with a 22 inch calibre gun .

In all seriousness, no.

You beat me to the punch.  Kudos.

[Urist is dead tome]

Thanks for making me look stupid. I really appreciate it. Cause someone this good lookin' don't jav to pel

[Leafsnail]

Did you just edit it to make it even worse...?

[Urist is dead tome]

Accidenlty. No more spell checks. Even if I am just writing it.

[Virex]

Thanks for calling a man with a honest opinion a troll. It always improves the situation, don't you think?

I am surprised at the amount of people here thinking that men and women are equal, while women are usually (statistically speaking) better motivated, better at complex tasks, less prone to violence and more empathic than men...

Yeah... I'm calling BS on this until you provide a reliable source. As in, not wikipedia, and not a source that paints everything in a feminist light.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/education/09college.html?_r=1
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2009/07/30/2009-07-30_who_makes_the_better_boss_men_or_women.html
http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com/2009/03/women-really-are-better-than-men-at.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080220104244.htm
http://www.qatarliving.com/node/1429919
http://www.forbes.com/2010/05/10/women-doctors-patients-mother-forbes-woman-well-being-health.html


Because you were apparently in a hurry, I wasn't able to get more references (or to be more specific, more specific search terms), but these should at least shed some light on my reasoning.

*Cracks knuckles, flexes fingers* So let's get down to it, shall we?

Link 1: Fail perception of an article is fail. At the beginning, it is quite clear about how of the sample they had, most of the boys were only in it for the subject they went to uni for, and the experience. (When I go to uni, I'm going to be in it for Electrical Engineering and related subjects, not in-depth studying of the migration patterns of the moose.) The example of the girl was the cream-of-the-crop, while the guy was someone who wanted to get what he wanted to know, and the fun, and nothing else. If you'd taken the time to read or even skim more than the first page, you'd know that professors say that men also dominate the top when they want to. ("Professors interviewed on several campuses say that in their experience men seem to cluster in a disproportionate share at both ends of the spectrum — students who are the most brilliantly creative, and students who cannot keep up.
"My best male students are every bit as good as my best female students," said Wendy Moffat, a longtime English professor at Dickinson College in Pennsylvania. "But the range among the guys is wider.") A few paragraphs further down the page you find this little gem: "Many male students say with something resembling pride that they get by without much studying.
"If I take a class and never study, I can still get a B," said Scott Daniels, a 22-year-old at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro. "I know that if I'd applied myself more, I would have had better grades.""
Later on in the article, you get a Ms.Smyers who concludes that because guys are more laid back at uni, it means they don't give a crap about life and think "they can sit back and relax and when they graduate, they'll still get a good job. They seem to think that if they have a firm handshake and speak properly, they'll be fine."" A few paragraphs up, you see this same woman dumped a guy because he tried to limit his gaming problem for her. Sure has people skills, huh?
Later on, it says something about how men screw up more, but is then quick to smother that argument with a simple explanation about how boys are, and how it gets labeled as a problem by teachers who are too lazy to handle it.
The rest of the article pretty much rambles about how guy-girl ratios are changing drastically, however at the end, we run into this: "Still, men in the work force have always done better in pay and promotions, in part because they tend to work longer hours, and have fewer career interruptions than women, who bear the children and most of the responsibility for raising them."
As the author of Dilbert put it, men are more willing to bend over and kiss ass.
Result: Lots of strawmen, nothing that helps your argument.

It is interesting that you label them as strawmen, while I see them as pretty indicative. First off I never asserted that women were better than men by biological reasons alone, because to asses someone's capabilities you need to take the full picture. This means that if boys work less intensively, settling for a B instead of an A, then that has to be considered as well. Their tendency to slack off and do with just enough means they're in my eyes worse students then their female counterparts who are less likely to wimp out at a hard course. And from the article it is clear that women work harder, prepare better and slack less then men. The results are clear: A far higher attendance and graduation rate, better results and most of all ,women finish the same study quicker and better.
Secondly, a wider range with an equal average means that on average, a disproportionately large amount of men will be, to put it politely, rather slow. Maybe the best of the best are on average men, but the best of the best are a minute group compared to those who really count, the above average. A country can't rely on the best of the best to do all the work after all. Since more men then women are caught up trying to learn how to count to 10 when they're old enough to work, this means that women are on average more valuable to have then men, because you know that nearly every one of them will contribute, instead of only a part of them.
But in the end it comes down to you and the article justifying the discrepancy between men and women by pointing out the differences between men and women, which was exactly my point.

Link 2:Much shorter article this time. The intro quote even has an admittance to her irrational generalization of male bosses. Essentially all the rest says is that women empathize and communicate better. However we still get this one quote that emphasizes the difference between the male and female boss: "“The same behavior of a woman and man gets judged very differently,” Gallagher says. “If a male boss bangs his fist on the table and says, I want to get that done immediately, people say, well, he has what it takes. If a woman does it, people say, what’s with her? it must be her time of the month.”".
Result: Nothing at all. All it does is say how some women think they make better bosses.

Just because she doesn't think it's indicative doesn't mean that it can't be interpreted that way. Anyway, the article highlights the differences between men and women but most importantly also tells us what this means on the floor. If people actually work better and more focused, are more passionate and can more often be found on positions that suit them under female chefs compared with the situation under a male chef then that is a good argument to assert that women make better chefs then men in most occasions, unless you want to argue beyond "people react differently to men and women"?

Link 3: Another short article. Congrats. Females can tell faces apart easier.
Result: Girls get the novelty of better facial recognition. Woo.

Just as big a novelty as "men are stronger".

Link 4: Slightly longer, and more scientific meat. Actually gave me hard facts about how women have better memory than men.
Result: Any more belief in women being better than men was utterly canceled out by the rest of the articles.

How was it canceled out? None of my articles had a negative impact, so this should stand above the null line?

Link 5: ... Dear god this article sucks. But to make my point, have all the refutes.

• Yeah... no. And those aren't even Isreali.
• Once again with the memory thing. I'm starting to get the idea that it is the only thing they even remotely have over men.
• Have you ever seen a group of females working together? Just plain no.
• It's because girls jump at the slightest disgusting looking thing. Men suck it up and eat what tastes good.
• Oh hia memory thing.
• What would this be based off of?
• Communication. Otherwise known as gossip.
• Sigh. Memory.
• It's because the ones that don't do well are quick to drop it.
• Correction: They cope differently

Result: Things are not looking very pretty.

1. Thanks for the hilarious video, but if you're trying to prove with this that the study was wrong, well, I can only stare.

2. Glad you at least recognize some of the points I'm trying to make
3. Have you ever seen a group of men work together? Have you ever compared the two? These guys did (Yes I know, one of the games showed a smaller difference, but still if there's a large difference on half of the tests, then that can't be ignored)
4. The end result is still that women have better eating habits. Again, the origin of the difference is used to explain it away, while that was exactly my original point.
5. The study focused on intelligence and speed, not on memory.
6. Was that rhetorical?
7. Fetuses sure gossip a lot.
8. Nope, better sharing of learned information and better reviewing as a result of this.
9. Anything to back this up?
10. If the way they cope with it has better result then different is better.

Link 6: Another one I can read without laughing out loud. So apparently patients showing more dominance over their female doctor helps them get better?("But what's really interesting is that patients respond differently to women in white coats than they do to men. Both female and male patients are more assertive with female doctors. They interrupt more, and they ask more questions.") Aye-aye captain Women-are-better. And it ends with the author saying they're neutral on the matter.
Results: No argument is even present to be refuted. Not helping.

Considering the paragraph following the one quoted, that's a pretty substantial gain to be had.[/quote]

[The Merchant Of Menace]

I don't have great eating habits, Nor does my girlfriend, or any of her friends that I know.

[Virex]

Ever heard of averages?