SWEDEN: The Battle of the Sexes goes on!

[Miss Marple's nephew]

It’s difficult to explain our socials idiosyncrasies to someone who doesn’t know Sweden very well. You know how certain subjects are popular for a time and then it eventually slips away and on to the next “burning issue”. Well, that’s also true in Sweden except that there are one or two subjects that simply go on and on and on and on and on …. and it’s taken into the realm of idiocy.

The most tenacious subject in Sweden is “equality between the sexes”. This has been going on since the 60’s and although it is a subject worth discussing and rectifying, there must be limits to what one can expect to achieve, and sensible explanations as to who might to be responsible for any “inequalities”.

Now, equality to me means equal rights, etc. on all feasible levels. I hope that you’ll agree that it’s pointless to harp about such things as rights for men to give birth or that women have the right to grow a penis. And if one were to complain that women don’t actually have penises (yet) I don’t think it is fair to blame men.

Yesterday the news said that it has been determined that women are “home because of illness” nearly twice as much time as men are. The situation is being called “discrimination”! What can that mean? Is it our fault again or is it Mother Nature herself who’s discriminating against women?

[Maciamo]

Interesting topic. I know how women's rights (let's call it like this) is a hot issue in Sweden. Some Swedish friends told me that it would be offensive to tell a Swedish woman that a job was "for men".

Nevertheless if you look at employment statistics in Europe (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23995) it is undeniable that many jobs are overwhelmingly done by men and this is unlikely to change because men are physically and mentally better suited than women to do them. Need some examples ? Construction worker, roofer, mechanician (because they are all tough) and taxi driver (because testosterone increases the sense of directions and spatial skills).

I don't think that men really want traditionally female jobs though. How many (straight) male nannies or baby sitters are there in Sweden ?



Yesterday the news said that it has been determined that women are “home because of illness” nearly twice as much time as men are. The situation is being called “discrimination”! What can that mean? Is it our fault again or is it Mother Nature herself who’s discriminating against women?

Women have a biology that make them more vulnerable for a few days each month. There is no reason to try to overcome that. The more masculine women become and the less likely they are to have children, because repressing female hormones and stimulating male ones (e.g. by doing body building or doing "male jobs") interferes with the human physiology.

Another way to look at it is to ask if there are more gay women in Sweden than elsewhere. Why else would this vociferous minority absolutely want to become like men ? It's not better for a woman to be overly masculine (physically or mentally) than for a man to be overly feminine. Actually feminine men are becoming more easily accepted in today's society. Just look at popular "role models" (in the sense that they influence a certain part of the population) like David Beckham, who wear nail polish or care as much about their looks as (straight) women.

Unfortunately, I think that this masculinisation of northern European women is one of the reasons why the fecundity rate is dropping.

Women want careers like men that prevent them from having babies younger (or at all, if they care too much about their job).

They dress and behave more and more like men, which is not a turn on for men, and therefore leaves more professional women single, or at least not long enough in a relationship to consider having children.

The third factor, which few people ever think about, is the effect of a overly masculine behaviour on the female physiology. That may be why an increasing number of women have difficulties procreating although they have no genetic predisposition towards infertility. Hormones are controlled by the brain. A brain that want to be a man won't make as much female hormones as it should, disrupting the reproductive system.

I am all for women's rights in the sense of equal salaries and opportunities for "unisex jobs" (mostly office jobs), but who are we kidding thinking that it is a good thing for society to let women build our houses and men try to become wet nurses ? Let's be reasonable (and reasoned).

[TheCaptain]

Unfortunately, I think that this masculinisation of northern European women is one of the reasons why the fecundity rate is dropping.


So how do you explain the fact that the fertility rate is LOWER in Southern Europe than in the Nordic countries?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rat e

Iceland 1.91
Norway 1.78
Denmark 1.74
Finland 1.73
Sweden 1.67

Portugal 1.49
Greece 1.36
Italy 1.30
Spain 1.30

Your theory doesn't hold water.

[Maciamo]

So how do you explain the fact that the fertility rate is LOWER in Southern Europe than in the Nordic countries?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rat e

Iceland 1.91
Norway 1.78
Denmark 1.74
Finland 1.73
Sweden 1.67

Portugal 1.49
Greece 1.36
Italy 1.30
Spain 1.30

Your theory doesn't hold water.

That's a good point. But you selected the extremes. France has a fertility rate of 1.89, higher than any Nordic country but Iceland.

I think that the reasons for the dropping fecundity is lower Europe is different. It is mostly for socio-economical reasons, but also because the population of southern Europe (and Germany) has aged more quickly than in Nordic countries, leaving a smaller percentage of people in reproductive age.

[Miss Marple's nephew]

Some Swedish friends told me that it would be offensive to tell a Swedish woman that a job was "for men". This is absolutely true. But ……………. it is perfectly accepted to annons, “We look forward to women applications.” which means = WE WILL NOT EMPLOY A MAN.

In Sweden you can find a 99% employment of women in such professions as the post office, travel agency, tourist agencies, city delivery services, doctors, physcologists, social services, advocat, försäkringskassan (Swedish) krakenkasse (German) – don’t know the English word, etc. etc. etc. Yet Swedish women make a big protest that there are so few women construction-workers in Sweden!

Some of our universities are now refusing male applicants on the grounds that there must be 50% women students. There was always acceptance of student places available according to grade/performance application examinations but this has now changed. One’s ability is no longer the most important factor in advanced Swedish studies. Also, the present government promised that there will be “at least” 50 % women employed in their government posts by next year. So if there is merely 49% women before next year (and there is absolutely no qualified women to take the last seat) will they stand on the corner and take the first woman who passes by?






How many (straight) male nannies or baby sitters are there in Sweden ? There was one publicized nanny, that I remember, but I don’t know if he was (straight) male.




Women have a biology that make them more vulnerable for a few days each month. The worst part of it is that Sweden wouldn’t have mentioned the rate of missed working days caused by ill-health other than the fact that we men miss nearly half as many days as women do. I can only speak for myself (and what I suppose is the “norm” for men in general) in that I don’t stay at home for a simple cold unless it gets particularly nasty. Women, on the other hand are “ill” as soon as they sneeze twice. It seems to me that the discrimination is in the hearts of the women, not in the hearts of us men (in general) or male employers.




Another way to look at it is to ask if there are more gay women in Sweden than elsewhere. I do believe there is, yes. One can suppose that the vast majority of women serving in the armed forces are lesbians and it is also documented that women (majority apparently) police officers are lesbians. Just last month it was publicized that there are now more women in the Swedish police academy than there are men.






Hormones are controlled by the brain. A brain that want to be a man won't make as much female hormones as it should, disrupting the reproductive system. I didn’t know that.


BTW: In the article I read it stated that 46 million SEK has be allotted by the Swedish Office of Discrimination to assist women who miss working days because of illness. I have no idea what this money will be used for nor what their illness has to do with “discrimination”. http://k43.pbase.com/o4/42/267742/1/58335092.crazy.gif

[Marianne]

After having discussed this topic several times with friendly couples from Greece and Italy, the reason they don't have more than one kid is mostly cause of economical reasons. Bringing up a child costs a lot and when a 25 year old person that just graduated is getting paid for less than 1000 euros (for his/her first job), meaning less than 2k euros per month, if both parents work, it's not easy to manage the expenses of 2 kids. By the time the parents manage to get well paid jobs, their first kid is too old, they are too old (or at least they think they are) so they don't consider having another baby. That's the case most of the times.
In southern European countries people are getting paid a lot less than in northern European countries ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita ) and everything costs more also. When i visited Germany and France for example i was surprised by how much cheaper everything was, including food, clothing, electronic devices etc.
I also think that Scandinavian countries' legislation helps more young parents than southern European countries, making it easier to deal with the expenses of raising a kid.

I'm 21 years old and I've always been dreaming of having 3 kids but seeing how hard it is to get a well paid job nowadays, even if u have a university diploma, I don't know if i will be able to have more than 1..

[Marianne]

Some of our universities are now refusing male applicants on the grounds that there must be 50% women students.

In Greece u will usually find more female students in universities than male ones. Of course it depends on the field of studies, for example 90% of philosophy students are girls as opposed to 70-80% of computer science students being males.
But for example in the army (army in Greece is mandatory for guys for 1 year when they become 18 but not for girls. Girls can join the army if they want to, as a permanent job) the law states that at least 30% of the army high ranked officers, even military pilots, must be female, so men that scored high in their entry exams to join the army are getting rejected so that women with lower scores can join to fill this 30%

[TheCaptain]

Indeed, Sweden has gone too far! I'm not a fan of those quota systems that many Swedish and Norwegian politicians apparently like...

It doesn't make sense to me. If 40% of directors in companies must be women, what's next? 10% must be homosexual, 20 % left-handed or 5% red-haired? :rolleyes:

Don't get me wrong, I believe in equality between the sexes, but employers, universities etc must be able to hire or take in the people they want without quota systems, so they can choose the persons with the best qualifications. So if a man wants to train as a nurse, or woman applys for a job as a construction worker they should be free to do so. But the employer must have the freedom to hire they people they want.


In southern European countries people are getting paid a lot less than in northern European countries ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita ) and everything costs more also. When i visited Germany and France for example i was surprised by how much cheaper everything was, including food, clothing, electronic devices etc.
I also think that Scandinavian countries' legislation helps more young parents than southern European countries, making it easier to deal with the expenses of raising a kid.


I agree. The Scandinavian countries are very "child-friendly", thanks to the generous welfare states. The government offers well-paid maternity leave (and paternity leave, for that matter), cheap child care (kindergarten, day care centers etc.), so there is rarely financial reason not to have children here in Scandinavia. I believe that this, largely, explains the difference in fertility rates.

But obviously, there is a downside: the taxes are sky-high in Scandinavia...

Concerning the cost of living, Scandinavia is much more expensive than Germany and France! Especially Norway is pricey, you would faint if you saw the Norwegian prices :eek2:

[Maciamo]

After having discussed this topic several times with friendly couples from Greece and Italy, the reason they don't have more than one kid is mostly cause of economical reasons. Bringing up a child costs a lot and when a 25 year old person that just graduated is getting paid for less than 1000 euros (for his/her first job), meaning less than 2k euros per month, if both parents work, it's not easy to manage the expenses of 2 kids. By the time the parents manage to get well paid jobs, their first kid is too old, they are too old (or at least they think they are) so they don't consider having another baby. That's the case most of the times.

I have lived a bit in Italy and in Spain and that is also what I heard.

It is well-known that it is not recommended for women over 40 to have children because of higher risk of genetic defects such as Down's syndrome (not to mention miscarriages). But few people know that it is also a problem for men. Chances of genetic defects increase progressively with age and become serious enough around 40 years old for men too. A recent article in the Scientific American (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-father-factor) explained that 40-year-old men have a 6-fold increased risk of fathering a child with schizophrenia, autism or bipolar disorder compared with 30 year-old men. Over 50 the risk is 9-fold than of a 30 year-old.

Governments should consider this and give incentives to young (European) parents. Immigration from Africa is not the solution against birth decline.



In southern European countries people are getting paid a lot less than in northern European countries ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita ) and everything costs more also. When i visited Germany and France for example i was surprised by how much cheaper everything was, including food, clothing, electronic devices etc.

I have also been surprised by the cost of food in northern and central Italy.

[Marianne]

Governments should consider this and give incentives to young (European) parents. Immigration from Africa is not the solution against birth decline.


Exactly... Almost every parent would choose to bring up one kid and provide it the best he/she can, than have more than one kids and not be able to support them well enough...So goverments should realise that and help financially new parents.

It is already discussed among Greeks that new parents don't have the incentives to have more than 1 baby while immigrants from other countries don't seem to have a problem with having at least 3, meaning that Greek population becomes less and less while immigrant population is increasing. Its a common joke (not in a rasist way) that in a few years u will be lucky to find a Greek person in Greece.



I agree. The Scandinavian countries are very "child-friendly", thanks to the generous welfare states. The government offers well-paid maternity leave (and paternity leave, for that matter), cheap child care (kindergarten, day care centers etc.), so there is rarely financial reason not to have children here in Scandinavia.

Those "services" also exist in Greece too but not in such an extend from what I know. For example, for your kid to go to a free public kindergarden you need to qualify as "low income" family, but to qualify as "low" you practically need to have around 700 euros monthly income.. There is no paternity leave, only maternity one and that means: you can stop working 2 months before you give birth and 2 months after and then you either choose to get 9 more months w/o working at all or 2 years working part time (whatever you choose, you are getting paid normally for either 4months-9months or 4months-2years). After kindergarden public schools and universities are completely free for everyone.

[Maciamo]

So how do you explain the fact that the fertility rate is LOWER in Southern Europe than in the Nordic countries?
...
Your theory doesn't hold water.

Here is some data that confirms that northern Europeans have less sex than southern Europeans : 2005 Global Sex Survey results (http://www.consulta.com.mx/interiores/99_pdfs/14_entorno_i_pdf/ei_051115_GlosbalSexSurveyDurex.pdf) (check page 20)

Sweden is the country where people have sex the least often in Europe, followed by Ireland (also a quite feminist country), Norway, Denmark and Finland.

The top of the list (where people have sex most often) happen to be all southern European countries : Greece, Croatia, Serbia & Montenegro and Bulgaria, and incidentally also countries where gender roles are among the strongest by European standard (stronger than in Spain or in northern Italy).

[Miss Marple's nephew]

In Greece u will usually find more female students in universities than male ones. Of course it depends on the field of studies, for example 90% of philosophy students are girls as opposed to 70-80% of computer science students being males. This is perfectly acceptable for me. It’s not important if women (or men) are predominate in certain professions. Show me any profession or establishment where there are EXACTLY 50% men, 50% men! If you tally up all the people with red hair (for example) you will certainly find that there are more X than Y. Who cares?

But when gender is THE factor in determining anything then you’ve got a case of discrimination. It’s “funny” (not really) that the people who complain about discrimination are the ones who implement discrimination as a profession in itself! Refusing men into university because of gender quotas are doing the bidding of GENDER DISCRIMINATION. Is there any other name to call it?


……… It doesn't make sense to me. If 40% of directors in companies must be women, what's next? 10% must be homosexual, 20 % left-handed or 5% red-haired? And what about us short people? I want a director’s job because short people are discriminated against. Never mind that I’m a complete idiot.


….. universities etc must be able to hire or take in the people they want without quota systems, so they can choose the persons with the best qualifications. …... Yes. I agree. This should be the sole motivation for accepting anyone in any capacity.



Sweden is the country where people have sex the least often in Europe ….. Are you speaking strictly about heterosexuals? I’m guessing that Swedish lesbians are bunging one another even before the lights go out. It’s all about testosterone and lesbians have loads of it. Maybe that’s why they’re so tenaciously aggressive towards men?

The Swedish male testicles are little more than dried prunes, what with the need for producing testosterone being denied them. I’m one of the lucky ones: my wife is Slovak and my masculinity is not only appreciated but actually required of me. Grâce à Dieu!

[Maciamo]

Are you speaking strictly about heterosexuals? I’m guessing that Swedish lesbians are bunging one another even before the lights go out.

I don't think that the Durex survey only counts heterosexual sex. After all it is self-reported, so anything you consider as sex is in the stats. There may be cultural differences regarding what qualifies as sex though. Is masturbation sex ? Probably not. What if the partner helps ? How about oral sex ? It is not clear what is included or excluded when people are asked how often they have sex.

[sawyer]

Sure. And there are some moral aspects connected with understanding sex, like feelings (love), and stuff like that. And about lesbians. Are they all really agressive? I think that heterosexual woman can be just as much agressive as some lesbians. It's genetic and homornal

[Nasturtium]

Sweden is the country where people have sex the least often in Europe, followed by Ireland (also a quite feminist country), Norway, Denmark and Finland.
So much for my Viking fetish...:grin:

[keyoghettson]

I live in the Skåneland (aka Scania). Skåneland consist of the four provinces Skåne, Halland, Blekinge and Bornholm. Skåne, Halland and Blekinge belong to Sweden. Bornholm belongs to Denmark. We want to have our own nation. We are not Swedes or Danes. I live in the part of Skåneland that belong to Sweden. Denmark and Sweden are very different from one another. Scanians are more like Danes. I hate Swedish culture. In Sweden everything is about political correctness and feminism.

[Michel Gilson]

The same in America. The radicalism of the 60's has run amok.

[james stock]

The same in America. The radicalism of the 60's has run amok.
The problem with feminism is that women, en masse, attempt to hide the fact that a large part of what they are is the machinery of the womb. In any biological point of view, an ability that requires a high degree of energy to sustain, such as a womb, cannot exist without sacrificing other abilities that also demand energy. It should not be controversial to say that the sole purpose of women is to give birth and nurture offspring.

The vast majority of human progress was facilitated through the minds of the select men that were capable of reason.

[Balder]

I live in the Skåneland (aka Scania). Skåneland consist of the four provinces Skåne, Halland, Blekinge and Bornholm. Skåne, Halland and Blekinge belong to Sweden. Bornholm belongs to Denmark. We want to have our own nation. We are not Swedes or Danes. I live in the part of Skåneland that belong to Sweden. Denmark and Sweden are very different from one another. Scanians are more like Danes. I hate Swedish culture. In Sweden everything is about political correctness and feminism.
Which galaxy are you from? :laughing:

[LeBrok]

The vast majority of human progress was facilitated through the minds of the select men that were capable of reason.
And who raised these men?
I assure you the first farmers were women. Men were still hunting when women attended gardens and fields by their homes. If they wouldn't have done that we wouldn't have any civilisations and progress. Don't sell women short...

[james stock]

And who raised these men?
I assure you the first farmers were women. Men were still hunting when women attended gardens and fields by their homes. If they wouldn't have done that we wouldn't have any civilisations and progress. Don't sell women short...
Is there any evidence to support your hypothesis that women were the original farmers? This is pure speculation and it doesn't appear to be supported by evidence.

I am not selling women short, i am simply stating the fact that the majority of human achievement, either intellectual or otherwise, was facilitated by men. You will find isolated cases where women contributed to math, science and or philosophy, but not many. Those cases are the exception to the norm.

Women are intellectually inferior to men. The reasons are numerous, and as I stated in my previous post, the machinery of the womb and reproduction in women is much more energy consuming than that in men. Thus, from an evolutionary perspective such machinery would require a trade off with other systems that also demand energy, such as the muscular or nervous system.

If we compare the capabilities of women and men in an intellectually demanding activity such as chess we can observe a clear divergence between the sexes.

Players rated 2600+
Men: 100+
Women: 2

Players rated 2700
Men: 49
Women: 0

People will attempt to claim that it was or is taboo for women to enjoy chess and were pressured to avoid it. The problem with this reasoning is that is requires a burden of proof, of which it lacks. It is not rational to claim, absent of any evidence, that the cause of something is the secondary hypothesis, rather than the primary condition. In which, we are describing the primary condition as a factual gap of ability between the sexes and the secondary hypothesis being an explanation that does not consider the primary condition, rather external forces to the condition.

To prove that women are as intellectually capable as men in Chess, a woman will have to occupy the highest rating in Chess. Until that happens, which it won't, it is rational to conclude that their purpose on earth lies within the machinery of the womb.

[ElHorsto]

And who raised these men?
I assure you the first farmers were women. Men were still hunting when women attended gardens and fields by their homes. If they wouldn't have done that we wouldn't have any civilisations and progress. Don't sell women short...

Well possible. Maybe that's why the Bible blames a woman Eva for the expulsion from the paradise, which according to some researchers was an allegory to the end of the hunter-gatherer society. :)

[Balder]

Classical one. The men hunted, leaving the women to plant the crops. ;-)

The way it was taught to me was that men were the hunter/gatherers while women hung out at the cave or mud hut or whatever being pregnant and taking care of the children who didn't die. Women were the first to plant things but it was mostly by accident due to discarded seeds from what was gathered but organized farming was done by the whole family since planting and harvesting was so labor intensive. But it does not change the fact that the discovery of agriculture was done by women.

Accidentally or not. No matter. If women wouldn't have done that we wouldn't have any civilisations and progress.

[james stock]

Classical one. The men hunted, leaving the women to plant the crops. ;-)

The way it was taught to me was that men were the hunter/gatherers while women hung out at the cave or mud hut or whatever being pregnant and taking care of the children who didn't die. Women were the first to plant things but it was mostly by accident due to discarded seeds from what was gathered but organized farming was done by the whole family since planting and harvesting was so labor intensive. But it does not change the fact that the discovery of agriculture was done by women.

Accidentally or not. No matter. If women wouldn't have done that we wouldn't have any civilisations and progress.
I'm not going to debate the topic of agriculture because it is irrelevant and purely based on speculation, not fact. We simply do not know how whether agriculture began with men or women. Furthermore, if something occurs purely by chance, as Balder suggested above, it has no merit on the person or thing that discovered it. If a woman threw some seeds on the ground and the seeds spawned a fruit bush, it is not the mind of woman that created the fruit, it is only her arm that threw the seeds.

I never stated that women are irrelevant. I stated that their biological function, naturally, lies within the machinery of the womb and to give birth and nurture children. That is what they are efficient at and their phenotype is reflective of it. I also stated that any intellectual discoveries or progress created by women would be the exception, rather than the norm. This much should be obvious to anyone that has studied science or philosophy.

[ElHorsto]

Cattle-breeding was probably more of a male occupation, because it is next to hunting animals, just without killing them.

[LeBrok]

Is there any evidence to support your hypothesis that women were the original farmers? This is pure speculation and it doesn't appear to be supported by evidence.
1. Women have more taste for starches and sugars, while men is more inclined towards eating meat. All women love good pasta. This denotes our evolutionary past, meaning that women (also kids) diet consisted of starches much longer (thousands of years longer) than men. Men were still either hunting or herding, while women were already on mostly starch, nut, fruit diet.
2. Do you think women were not capable of figuring out how to plant veggies and wheat close to home, instead of walking and gathering for millies? As Balder mentioned, it makes so much more sense to have stuff growing around the house, while also tending and cooking for 10 kids.
3. It took time till proper crops (big scale farming) were developed, which needed men to control oxens with the plow or scatter manure around fields. Till that time there was no reason to pull men away from herding or hunting (essential source of protein), just to tend small gardens. For gardens and small fields women and kids were adequate.
4. Go to the village and you will see that gardens by homes are attended almost only by women.
5. Women have straing (comparing men) inclination towards flowers and small scale gardening. They make them happy.







I am not selling women short, i am simply stating the fact that the majority of human achievement, either intellectual or otherwise, was facilitated by men. You will find isolated cases where women contributed to math, science and or philosophy, but not many. Those cases are the exception to the norm.

To prove that women are as intellectually capable as men in Chess, a woman will have to occupy the highest rating in Chess. Until that happens, which it won't, it is rational to conclude that their purpose on earth lies within the machinery of the womb.
It should be self explanatory...

By the same token, man has a penis and sperm, so what is man's purpose?

For god sake, it doesn't mean that women should stop there. Do you want them to walk around impregnated all the time to fulfil their main purpose of life?


Women are intellectually inferior to men. I hope you'll be so open to your girlfriend or wife.


To prove that women are as intellectually capable as men in Chess, a woman will have to occupy the highest rating in Chess. Until that happens, which it won't, it is rational to conclude that their purpose on earth lies within the machinery of the womb. You know what, keep your chess, because if it comes to multitasking at work or family life women are superior to men. And it is so much more important in real life, unless you're Kasparov.

I'm not saying that men and women are the same and have same capabilities to do all jobs equally. In some men are better in some women are. But we have to keep in mind that only decades passed since women got equal rights in western world, and till today have to prove themselves in business, politics and science to be accepted as equal in traditionally male oriented fields. So cut them some slack at the moment, make sure you treat them with respect and give them same opportunities, and after 100 years we will know for sure who is good for what.

[sparkey]

The problem with feminism is that women, en masse, attempt to hide the fact that a large part of what they are is the machinery of the womb. In any biological point of view, an ability that requires a high degree of energy to sustain, such as a womb, cannot exist without sacrificing other abilities that also demand energy.

Feminists can be nuts when it comes to trying to prove a point by appealing to biology. I've seriously read an argument recently that human sexual dimorphism is a result of social pressure alone. You're right that such biological misconceptions should be corrected. But...


It should not be controversial to say that the sole purpose of women is to give birth and nurture offspring.

What the..? First of all, it's unclear what type of "purpose" you're talking about here. Societal purpose, biological purpose, or what? Feminism addresses social issues, but from a societal perspective, you're clearly wrong. In every society women perform additional duties, ranging from gathering to being Chancellor of Germany. Even if you're speaking from a biological perspective, you're still wrong. Women have the such similar mental capacity as men that they have a biological tendency to adopt additional duties.

If you're looking for something "not controversial," you picked the wrong thing to say here.