The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Men and Women are different! C'mon, men are (Naturally stronger than women, but women have abilities better than men (no not ironing or any other crappy joke of the same theme))
A few years back Women were'nt allowed in the fireservice, now some of them had a sh!tfit and eventually the goverment said yes, now women can be firefighters, only problem, mens natural ability to be taller therefor stronger, made them better than MOST women, therefor, women failed the tests and couldnt become firefighters. Fair enough, we have these tests to make sure people are capable of saving and protecting lives...the goverment make the test ALOT easier for women, giving them a pass rate, therefor, more women are now firefighters, therefor my life is to be saved when a 5ft 5" woman carrys me out of a window ever her shoulder...?
Well then, that seems a little unfair, but get this, the women were demanding EQUAL rights! EQUAL. So, what do they do? They go out and make 'Diamond', the only car insurance JUST for women. That doesnt seem fantastically equal to me. But, men, we keep schtoomp, because we cant be bothered to argue. Woman howerever, if this was an advert saying 'Male onyl car insurance' or in other words 'Because its women who cause crashes and raise the rates', would get it banned. Now I dont mind the service, all I'm saying is Ladies, for god's sakes make up your mind, which is it you want, equal rights or privilages for different sexes?
Your veiws?
A few years back Women were'nt allowed in the fireservice, now some of them had a sh!tfit and eventually the goverment said yes, now women can be firefighters, only problem, mens natural ability to be taller therefor stronger, made them better than MOST women, therefor, women failed the tests and couldnt become firefighters. Fair enough, we have these tests to make sure people are capable of saving and protecting lives...the goverment make the test ALOT easier for women, giving them a pass rate, therefor, more women are now firefighters, therefor my life is to be saved when a 5ft 5" woman carrys me out of a window ever her shoulder...?
Well then, that seems a little unfair, but get this, the women were demanding EQUAL rights! EQUAL. So, what do they do? They go out and make 'Diamond', the only car insurance JUST for women. That doesnt seem fantastically equal to me. But, men, we keep schtoomp, because we cant be bothered to argue. Woman howerever, if this was an advert saying 'Male onyl car insurance' or in other words 'Because its women who cause crashes and raise the rates', would get it banned. Now I dont mind the service, all I'm saying is Ladies, for god's sakes make up your mind, which is it you want, equal rights or privilages for different sexes?
Your veiws?
Page:
>
>
> My next point would be; what does it matter? In general you could say
> that men are better than women at task X, but you'll always find
> women who are better than most men at said task. And vice-versa. What
> I'm driving at is that any attempt to make a sweeping statement based
> on prejudice and 'bloke said down the pub' anecdotal evidence is
> doomed to failure because it ignores the large numbers of both sexes
> who do not conform to the stereotypes.
>
It matters, for one example, that saying men or women or black/white/purple people at some things is generally true, so to enforce organisation such as the fire service in the original example to employ a certain number of people, or make people who possibly aren't as well suited get jobs over other, more suited applicants is rubbish.
>
> As a side point, statements of biological fact (he has a pen!s, that
> persons skin colour is black) are not anything-ist. They're facts
> that can't really be disputed, so it's a little disingenuous to try
> and apply them to the debate.
They are facts, and they are undisputable, but they also discriminate based on race, which as I understand it, is racist, which is axactly the point. I wasn't trying to use them as part of the argument, but simply to point out that some things can be said about a race/sex etc because they are irrefutably true. True, that anything irrefutable tells you know more about the current system, but it's also a biological fact that black people have more of an explosive type of muscle fiber, and longer tendons than white people. As you point out, the most non conforming black people to this will have shorter tendons, and less of the muscle fiber than some white people, but it still stands that generally black people run faster over short distances than white people.
It's a biological fact that men are generally more muscular than women, which is the key to the whole debate. My point was exactly that it's ingenuous. Black people have black skin, black people have long tendons. White people have short tendons. Long tendons mean you can run faster. Black people can run faster than white people.
I understand that there will always be exceptions, that the strongest women will be stronger than the weakest men, but in order to compensate for the anomolies you have to ignore race/sex/species all together.
From the original fire sevice example this is not what is happening.
anyhoo
>
> My next point would be; what does it matter? In general you could say
> that men are better than women at task X, but you'll always find
> women who are better than most men at said task. And vice-versa. What
> I'm driving at is that any attempt to make a sweeping statement based
> on prejudice and 'bloke said down the pub' anecdotal evidence is
> doomed to failure because it ignores the large numbers of both sexes
> who do not conform to the stereotypes.
>
It matters, for one example, that saying men or women or black/white/purple people at some things is generally true, so to enforce organisation such as the fire service in the original example to employ a certain number of people, or make people who possibly aren't as well suited get jobs over other, more suited applicants is rubbish.
>
> As a side point, statements of biological fact (he has a pen!s, that
> persons skin colour is black) are not anything-ist. They're facts
> that can't really be disputed, so it's a little disingenuous to try
> and apply them to the debate.
They are facts, and they are undisputable, but they also discriminate based on race, which as I understand it, is racist, which is axactly the point. I wasn't trying to use them as part of the argument, but simply to point out that some things can be said about a race/sex etc because they are irrefutably true. True, that anything irrefutable tells you know more about the current system, but it's also a biological fact that black people have more of an explosive type of muscle fiber, and longer tendons than white people. As you point out, the most non conforming black people to this will have shorter tendons, and less of the muscle fiber than some white people, but it still stands that generally black people run faster over short distances than white people.
It's a biological fact that men are generally more muscular than women, which is the key to the whole debate. My point was exactly that it's ingenuous. Black people have black skin, black people have long tendons. White people have short tendons. Long tendons mean you can run faster. Black people can run faster than white people.
I understand that there will always be exceptions, that the strongest women will be stronger than the weakest men, but in order to compensate for the anomolies you have to ignore race/sex/species all together.
From the original fire sevice example this is not what is happening.
anyhoo
And what's more you have to do the clothes in a certain order.
Well, you do in our house anyway.
Well, you do in our house anyway.
Ironing is a skill beyond me.
I know what to do, I know how to do it. But as soon as I try, it just goes wrong and I end up shirt-surfing with it and trying to iron in swear words.
I dont get it.
I know what to do, I know how to do it. But as soon as I try, it just goes wrong and I end up shirt-surfing with it and trying to iron in swear words.
I dont get it.
I can't iron
I've ruined two of my brother's t-shirts. That's what he gets for having a big stupid swoosh on them.
I've ruined two of my brother's t-shirts. That's what he gets for having a big stupid swoosh on them.
I hate the way most adverts these days portray men as blithering idiots, and women always seem to have one over on them.
positive discrimination has taken hold, it's the exact opposite to the 50s. Now I know how women felt back then, and it's not in the slightest bit funny.
positive discrimination has taken hold, it's the exact opposite to the 50s. Now I know how women felt back then, and it's not in the slightest bit funny.
**claps and salutes Mr Pink not necessarily in that order** I totally agree with you. Another thing I find stupid about Women demanding equal rights is when it comes to fighting. Many feminists will say "Women have the ability to do things as well as men or better and should be treated as equals!". However if a guy started mouthing of to me and starting a fight I'd hit him but if it was a woman I'd just walk on. If we treated women like equals and did to them the same things us guys do to each other we'd be barraged by woman saying "You can't hit a lady!" and things like that even though they want to be treated equal. They're going to have to accept that they are never going to be entirely equal (Not in my life time anyway and I'm 15!).
Heh. I've managed to persuade a friend of mine to do mine. Result...
I always did my own ironing.
The Ogre is much better at ironing than I am.
Goatboy wrote:
> Women are better at lying, being two-faced, hypocritical,
> game-playing, mindf###s and ironing.
> Men are better at throwing.
>
> End. Of. Story.
Not sure about the ironing comment.
> Women are better at lying, being two-faced, hypocritical,
> game-playing, mindf###s and ironing.
> Men are better at throwing.
>
> End. Of. Story.
Not sure about the ironing comment.
Page: