Agreed, though the fascism comes to Brazil thread was a bit more golden.
The gender equality paradox
- Thread starter Quackers
- Start date
Well, you did implicitly say that racism was the correct default position until proven wrong
Racism was the default position until the early 20th Century. It wasn't correct, but it was held by virtually every scholar. Even the most enlightened people were mostly racists, including abolitionists. So to prove it wrong conclusively evidence was required, and evidence was presented (Franz Boas dealt the death blow on scientific racism, but that only happened well into the 20th Century).
Of course, it was only a hypothesis, supported by some very tenuous evidence (different skull sizes and civilization achievements were usually used as "proof"), while the vast physical differences between men and women are established facts supported by a mountain of evidence.
Your repeated suggestions that my marathon performance somehow influence the truth or not that men are faster than women is all anyone ever needs to know on how far willing stupidity and posing go.
I stupidly posed a question to try and get you to see the tremendous overlap in abilities, even when the top end and averages favor one gender.
Akka
Moody old mage.
Well, you may have noticed that the actual point made by someone is pretty irrelevant when it comes to answers made to him in this thread. I think Dutchfire worked pretty hard to prove this.
Has become a bit ?
It's been a complete mess since the first page...
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Women can even become quite adroit at participating in the circlejerk, even without the same equipment for the training regimens.
Of course nobody ever said there was no overlap, and to make the actual point that behavioral differences may come from physical differences (which was the whole point people were trying to make before the Great Egalitarian Posing begun), that is, to prove that physical differences exist and are meaningful, one only needs to show statistically significant different averages.
None of the posers actually disagreed with anything that was used as examples (men are faster, stronger, more resistant, etc), but instead chose to attack a ridiculous strawman (that ALL men are stronger and faster than ALL women), which nobody in the thread ever claimed, because it's completely absurd. And they carried on this attack for pages and pages, refusing to listen to the obvious and unnecessary clarifications, and instead trying to tell me and Akka what we actually meant by our own posts!. And obviously they claim we meant the stupid strawman version.
The same people pretending to be complete idiots in this case wouldn't do so in countless others. Averages and outliers are grasped by any semi-intelligent person, and used in virtually any argument. That they chose to be willingly stupid here is an emphatic statement on the extent that some people will humiliate themselves just to pose as ultra egalitarian and "progressive".
Yeah, but as has been pointed out here, even small men have stronger grips than athletic women, so I doubt a woman is strong enough to really be an adequate participant. I dare not question gripping credentials, given the hostile response to marathon time.
The bigger the overlap, the less meaningful outliers and averages really are.
The overlap in strength and other attributes however is statistically not that big, and it doesn't even take a scientist to note that women are really much weaker than men. A 50% difference in upper body strength is a huge difference; it's not a meaningless deviation that can be easily overcome by training.
And even if they were not as big as they are, the actual point, that there are significant physical differences and therefore there could be significant behavioral differences, would stand. This was the whole point.
That would only be relevant in pursuits where upper body strength was pretty much the end all, be all. On your marathoning example, there is huge overlap (and your elite men's marathoner would likely fare very poorly in an test of upper body strength). Once you get to ultras, some races are won outright by women. Perhaps they should sent a woman to deliver the news about the Battle of Marathon. She might not have died.
Akka
Moody old mage.
As said, the use of physical difference was simply used as an example to illustrate the existence of large differences between men and women.
That such an utterly obvious and undisprovable plain fact is still drawing strawmans after so many pages is just another proof that there is very little debate in good faith in this thread (actually, very little debate at all, just attempts after attempts at ignoring the points made and playing dumb).
That illustrates an isolated large difference between the average man and the average woman that doesn't really seem all that relevant to the point that women are capable of adequately performing most jobs. Trouncing the average man in a marathon seems within the capability of probably tens of thousands of women.
But nobody was arguing that no women is suitable for any given job... in fact we repeated again and again that many women could outperform the average men in virtually any job. The point we were trying to argue, which is actually quite obvious and non-controversial, is this:
me said:
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
So women are only half as strong as men on the upper body.
Yeah, I'm sure that didn't matter at all in ancient warfare!
luiz: ancient warfare scholar.
I guess all it takes to be an engineer in Brazil is to say "yeah I'm TOTALLY sure that metal can make a bridge stay up
," though I guess that'd be why the only structure of any note in Brazil is a big soapstone statue of Christ.Still declaring victory. Adding to that tally: one sick burn.
luiz: ancient warfare scholar.
I guess all it takes to be an engineer in Brazil is to say "yeah I'm TOTALLY sure that metal can make a bridge stay up
Still declaring victory. Adding to that tally: one sick burn.
The day you actually meet a woman other than your mom, or actually do some exercise other than picking up your wallet to buy a burger, come back and we'll conclude this talk.
Akka
Moody old mage.
=>
Did you even read the post before copy-pasting the same canned answer, or are you simply botting ?Akka said:
So there is a physical differerence in upper body strength. Who would have guessed? I guess the average woman better stay out of the pull-up profession. Or at least find a elite men's marathoner that is in the pull-up profession and steal his job. My point is that all the bellering about the average difference in one component doesn't really advance much of a point at all except for the fact there is an average difference in the component. It certainly doesn't address the significant overlap between the genders on many components.
Nobody ever denied overlap. The original point was not about that. It was something like this: "we all know there are significant physical differences between men and women, therefore it's no stretch to assume there probably are behavioral differences as well".
Nobody wants to prevent women from doing any job. At least in this thread.
Nobody wants to prevent women from doing any job. At least in this thread.
Would not the overlap concept apply to behavioral "differences" - maybe even moreso? Perhaps the average woman is less obtuse that some of you outliers here.
