SWEDEN: The Battle of the Sexes goes on!

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

This thread has been viewed 30788 times.

Back
Top