Women

Quote: thecesspit

This will be the same reason it took until 1870 for the black man to get the vote, 1971 for an American under 21 to get the vote and for anyone with net worth less than 40 shillings to get the vote in 1832? A lack of trust?

I don't trust a lot of people to pick candidates objectively, and that's not because of the vagina between their legs.

I really don't think it's a trust thing, it's a power thing.

It's kind of unbelievable, in this modern day and age, that there are still people out there who think women are inferior to men. mentally or otherwise. It's such a stupid, ignorant, and archaic way to think. It's also dead wrong.

Many men believed this a century ago, that women were somehow inferior mentally to men because they were physically smaller. It's true that the reproductive structures of men's and women's bodies are different, but there's no significant structural differences between the brains of men and women. In fact, a pathologist looking at a brain removed from a human body would not be able to tell whether it belonged to a male or a female. Male and female human intellects have the same capabilities. More than half of current college graduates are women, for example. Women score slightly higher on standardized intelligence tests than men.

One thing EvenBob says is true--many men "didn't trust" women to vote "objectively". Many of those men thought that THEY were voting perfectly objectively, but they weren't. The truth is, hardly anyone, man or woman, then or now, votes perfectly objectively. The same men who wanted to deny women the vote for that reason voted on purely subjective criteria themselves.

Misogynist rhetoric, as you say, is very reminiscent of racist and other exclusionist rhetoric. Why let poor people vote? Why let black people vote? Why let women vote? The only real reason for white males to say that those groups couldn't vote was that those groups were "them". Any group of humans can always come up with a reason why "we" are better than "them".

Quote: mkl654321

It's kind of unbelievable, in this modern day and age, that there are still people out there who think women are inferior to men..

Its a surprise to you that the majority of women in the world are second class citizens? Where do you get your news from, outer space?

Quote: EvenBob

Women are still second class citizens in most countries in the world. Africa, China, India, the Middle East. Its more than a power thing, its far too wide spread.

It's wide spread that men have had the upper hand in power for many many years, what you state is evidence for what I'm saying. Women weren't given the vote later because men didn't trust them to use it. Why do you think it was that way that the vote was man's to give? Power.

Quote: EvenBob

Its a surprise to you that the majority of women in the world are second class citizens? Where do you get your news from, outer space?

Uh, when did I say that?

Women are second class citizens in much of the world for a variety of reasons, but I find it unbelievable that there are some men who think that they SHOULD BE second-class citizens.

It is a matter of power, and a matter of religion, and a matter of child-rearing, that women are demoted to "second class". Men made the money, and women were tasked to take care of them while the men conducted "Business". The Muslim religion, in more secular sects, demote women. Child rearing puts them at a disadvantage for earning power because they have more of a tendency to leave the workplace.

There is still a fairly large wage gap for women vs men for the same jobs in America and the western world. Corporate executive positions are still frequented mostly by men. This is a cultural bias that will be around for a long time. Causes for this bias are numerous. I mean, why didn't women get the vote for a long time? The same reason why only property owners were allowed to vote before the general populace was allowed to vote? Power.

Some women I believe love doting men just as much as some men love "doting" women who have no life and are subservient to them. Personally, I don't believe it makes for a happy marriage, but there is no magical formula for success in marriage. I think marriages are more apt to be happy if there is a constant line of communication open so that after 20 years, there is no chance to look at your spouse and say to them "who are you?" or really even to "drift apart" because you should have been close to or on the same page the whole time. And I think people in general are happy when they get what they want out of life and are more apt to have good relationships as a whole. I think people who constantly dote on another has issues because they are not fulfilling what they might really want in life. I think that men who dote on their women constantly (ok, it's fine to do that early in a relationship--that's courtship) have some deeper issues to contend with. They've been brainwashed to behave that way (hint -- look at their parent's relationship) and what usually ends up happening is that the man realizes that there's more to life then doting, and they end up having a secret life involving vices or they blow up and become violent. But women who are the same way with their doting are also susceptible.

Quote: EvenBob

Its a good question. Why did it take women so long to get the vote? Why did it take until 1920? I'll tell you why. Men didn't trust women to have the judgement to pick candidates objectively. Why did men feel this way? Because they'd been dealing with them forever, thats why. Men and women aren't the same, no amount of denial or wishful thinking will ever make it so.

Ruling men didn't allow other men the right to vote until the 1780s. Why did ruling men feel this way?

Even today, you don't cast a vote for president, but for a slate of electors. Does that make you as "untrustworthy" as a woman?

I think you're looking at this question through too narrow a temporal lens, and it might be causing you some distortion. It's not a good question at all. Whatever the reason for the delay of women's suffrage, it more closely resembles that for other types (?) of suffrage than any kind of ... uh ... "problem" with women.

Men and women aren't the same; nobody's saying they are. Good thing we are different. But one of those differences isn't "women have immutable and fundamental flaws, and the guys that were disallowing the vote for women had it right."

Wow, it's hard to believe there's someone out there who *really* believes that.

You mean if I want to discuss in detail why Michael Bluejay or any other analyst or mathematician are all too timid/confused by/unable to for whatever reasons to look at Rob Singer's play strategy which he says has broken barriers in -EV winning capability at the very frustrating video poker machines, on a premier gaming forum such as this, and I'm told to go jump in the lake unless I come up with cash payments of some type.....a thread on WOMEN that has no pictures, no sex talk, and few if any actual women joining in the conversation, is a more appropriate topic here? WTF??