Dominating Women

Jen Pigs Fly

It would be amazing!

Hehe I'd like to be the boss

Naomi00

Domo230 wrote: »

You have no idea what women in prehistory did do you?

They hunted and did pretty much the same things men did.

You sir have just shown yourself to be a sexist pig.

Yup, especially the Celts. They did the same things, fought in the wars etc. Ever read a history book OP?

Battered Mars Bar

Casillas wrote: »

There's been loads of female inventions;

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0906931.html

Just to pick one from that "exhaustive" list...

Medical syringe, Letitia Geer, 1899..."Letitia" lolz

Acutally it was invented by an Irishman Francis Rynd in 1844. :pac:

RDM_83 again

Domo230 wrote: »

Where is this idea that women didn't hunt coming from?

In most tribes in the past and today, Women were just as involved with the hunting as men.

Naomi00 wrote: »

Yup, especially the Celts. They did the same things, fought in the wars etc. Ever read a history book OP?

I know this is probably the first time its been asked on this forum but references please ? I am sort of curious about those these points, not saying they weren't excluded completely from hunting or warfare but have never came across a point that females were involved with either of these activities as much as men in most cultural groups

Zab

Tym wrote: »

Yeah, I think it does aid muscle growth, but I think a diet filled with protein, carbohydrites and various red-meats helps as well:D

Diet definitely has an effect on muscle growth but if we agree that men have more testosterone than women and that testosterone aids muscle growth then it seems likely that men will be "naturally" stronger than women. This has no bearing on whether some individual woman is stronger than an individual man, but I'm pretty sure it's medically accepted that men have an easier time gaining muscle and strength.

Jarren

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rQkJhCRyng

She can dominate me anytime :pac::pac::pac:

Dudess

o1s1n wrote: »

I can't decide how to read the thread title - as women who dominate or the act of dominating women

I had hoped it was the latter... :mad:

Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

Name a good invention by a woman

Flawed. It's not like women had the same opportunities and education that men had to research and invent.

paul_mcshane wrote: »

all the men would have committed suicide

a hard as nails dominering man will leave you alone and respect you if you show your worth

a ball busting feminazi isnt happy untill you have been hammered into submission and are bereft of self esteem and dignity

paul_mcshane wrote: »

the pc gender neutral zealots who influence every facet of western culture are working hard to root out traditional male traits , masculinity is potrayed as probelmatic , agressive and highly objectionable , yet we wonder why young men have an identity crisis and are taking their own lives

Oh it's you again... Yes, male suicide is caused by non compliant women - automatically ball busting feminazis. Pity we can't go back to the days when marital rape wasn't a crime. And any hard-as-nails, domineering man at all will leave you alone and respect you if you show your worth. Any - even the ones you don't know.

Tym wrote: »

IMO, that's really more of an on average thing.:P I personal don't think men are naturally stronger then women, but society's view of a good male is strong, and six-packed while society's view of a good looking female is slim.

The average man is physically stronger than the average woman - it's a fact.

The King of Moo

Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

Be still stuck in the stone age tbh. Name a good invention by a woman Wars would've lasted 100 times longer too with both sides b*tching about each other to some poor neutral country for decades on end. Wars would also start over the slighest thing, like if the Queen of Germany said her husbands a great cook, the Queen of France would take that as saying her husband can't cook or some nonsense.

Don't think democracy would've developed either. Every country would need a queen with an attitude of "I'm right all the time"

Do you not think the reason that there are fewer (not "no") inventions by women is the obvious one that for most of our history very few women have been in any kind of position to invent something?

How are you supposed to invent things if you're a full-time mother and housewife?

"Now darling that's no excuse! Is the kitchen not basically a chemistry lab?"

Pandora2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcMd1F1acSo

flutterflye

Georgia Salpa is a bag of ming.

General Relativity

Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

Be still stuck in the stone age tbh. Name a good invention by a woman Wars would've lasted 100 times longer too with both sides b*tching about each other to some poor neutral country for decades on end. Wars would also start over the slighest thing, like if the Queen of Germany said her husbands a great cook, the Queen of France would take that as saying her husband can't cook or some nonsense.

Don't think democracy would've developed either. Every country would need a queen with an attitude of "I'm right all the time"

Marie Curie pioneered the X-ray.

paul_mcshane

Jarren wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rQkJhCRyng

She can dominate me anytime :pac::pac::pac:

their,s sticky stuff running down her chest

paul_mcshane

Dudess wrote: »

I had hoped it was the latter... :mad:

Flawed. It's not like women had the same opportunities and education that men had to research and invent.


Oh it's you again... Yes, male suicide is caused by non compliant women - automatically ball busting feminazis. Pity we can't go back to the days when marital rape wasn't a crime. And any hard-as-nails, domineering man at all will leave you alone and respect you if you show your worth. Any - even the ones you don't know.

The average man is physically stronger than the average woman - it's a fact.

i didnt say hard women were a contributor to male suicide , i said the present day norm of frowning upon traditional male charechteristics was contributing to male suicide , young men have an identity crisis

Dudess

paul_mcshane wrote: »

i didnt say hard women were a contributor to male suicide , i said the present day norm of frowning upon traditional male charechteristics was contributing to male suicide , young men have an identity crisis

Well the frowning on traditional "manliness" isn't as widespread as you think, and usually, the frowning is for the right reasons. I appreciate old-fashioned masculinity in a lot of ways - I'm actually more old-skool than people here might think, but if frat-boy, laddish shyte is frowned upon, it can only be a good thing. And there's still plenty of that crap about.
I'm not convinced that's a factor in male suicide causes - until I see evidence of it. If anything, the fact it's less taboo now for men to express their emotions can only be a positive element in the fight against suicide.
Male suicide is high in rural areas - I'd speculate it's the lack of allowance for them to show their feelings that's a big part of the problem... hardly the result of an eradication of blokeyness.

paul_mcshane

Dudess wrote: »

Well the frowning on traditional "manliness" isn't as widespread as you think, and usually, the frowning is for the right reasons. I appreciate old-fashioned masculinity in a lot of ways - I'm actually more old-skool than people here might think, but if frat-boy, laddish shyte is frowned upon, it can only be a good thing. And there's still plenty of that crap about.
I'm not convinced that's a factor in male suicide causes - until I see evidence of it. If anything, the fact it's less taboo now for men to express their emotions can only be a positive element in the fight against suicide.
Male suicide is high in rural areas - I'd speculate it's the lack of allowance for them to show their feelings that's a big part of the problem... hardly the result of an eradication of blokeyness.

i dont really consider frat boy shenanigans to be particulary manly

men in rural areas didnt express their feelings anymore forty years ago yet suicide rates were much lower than in 2012 , go figure

im not sure this therapy culture is all its cracked up to be

Battered Mars Bar

Dudess wrote: »

Flawed. It's not like women had the same opportunities and education that men had to research and invent.

That's no excuse, what happened to their amazing multitasking abilities :rolleyes: or what have they done in the past couple of decades

The King of Moo wrote: »

Do you not think the reason that there are fewer (not "no") inventions by women is the obvious one that for most of our history very few women have been in any kind of position to invent something?

No I don't. There's always some excuse with them. :mad:

General Relativity wrote: »

Marie Curie pioneered the X-ray.

Head explodes, covered umpteen times already in this thread. Did she not have a fine strapping husband helping her in the shed? You know like doing the groundwork while she made ham sammigages :pac:

kowloon

I wonder if we'd have hovercars. I'd like a hovercar.

kowloon

I'll just leave this here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

Dudess

Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

That's no excuse

Of course it is, don't be silly.

what have they done in the past couple of decades

Google isn't down.

Oh dear, thought you were pretty much joking, but it seems you have a bit of a prob with women. There there...

The King of Moo

paul_mcshane wrote: »

i didnt say hard women were a contributor to male suicide , i said the present day norm of frowning upon traditional male charechteristics was contributing to male suicide , young men have an identity crisis

In what ways do you think traditional male characteristics are frowned upon today?
I only ask as it's a complaint I hear from a lot of men, but, as someone who combines characteristics considered stereotypically masculine and feminine, I don't really see it happening.

paul_mcshane

Dudess wrote: »

Of course it is, don't be silly.

Google isn't down.

Oh dear, thought you were pretty much joking, but it seems you have a bit of a prob with women. There there...

you must have a full pack of gender cards in your arse pocket

Battered Mars Bar

Dudess wrote: »

Oh dear, thought you were pretty much joking, but it seems you have a bit of a prob with women. There there...

Looks like you've difficulty in taking a bit of light hearted banter or maybe you've a problem with being a woman. There there

paul_mcshane

The King of Moo wrote: »

In what ways do you think traditional male characteristics are frowned upon today?
I only ask as it's a complaint I hear from a lot of men, but, as someone who combines characteristics considered stereotypically masculine and feminine, I don't really see it happening.

boys in school are urged not to use their fists to defend themselves against bullies , go to the teacher ( usually a female ) is the advice

most tv shows potray men as irresponsible and wreckless buffoons

our courts marginalise men when it comes to parental rights , when a young boy grows up with seperated parents and witnesses his father being treated like a second class citizen by the family courts , it gives him a poor view of the most important male figure in his life and this reflects badly upon him

FishBowel

Stiffler2 wrote: »

What in your opinion would be different about the world today ??

Really bad movies.

flutterflye

paul_mcshane wrote: »

boys in school are urged not to use their fists to defend themselves against bullies , go to the teacher ( usually a female ) is the advice

most tv shows potray men as irresponsible and wreckless buffoons

our courts marginalise men when it comes to parental rights , when a young boy grows up with seperated parents and witnesses his father being treated like a second class citizen by the family courts , it gives him a poor view of the most important male figure in his life and this reflects badly upon him

Okay, so have I got this?
You want boys to be able to use violence to solve their problems.
But not to be portrayed as reckless on tv.
And whatever that is about court - I'm not getting it.

Yeah, your points aren't very clear to me.
I'm not really understanding your point of view.

The King of Moo

paul_mcshane wrote: »

boys in school are urged not to use their fists to defend themselves against bullies , go to the teacher ( usually a female ) is the advice

Because violence isn't always the answer. Sometimes the old cliché of "hit the bully and he'll respect you and stop" might work, but more often than not violence just leads to more violence, and leads to it being seen by some people as the most effective solution to other problems, when a more peaceful plan of action would be better.
I don't think violence is an inherently male characteristic either: some men tend towards violence more than others, but I don't think men are violent types by and large.
I think the idea that men should be able to handle themselves physically is a largely a social construct caused by the fact that many men feel that previous generations were more macho than their contemporaries, which is something men always seem to have thought, and not a new development.

most tv shows potray men as irresponsible and wreckless buffoons

It seems to me like most people on most TV shows (soaps, generic cop dramas etc) are really stupid, regardless of their gender.

The same goes for ads: the Boots ads are often pointed out as being discriminatory against men, and they do make men look stupid, but I also think the women in those ads are incredibly annoying, vain and stupid.
And most people hate those ads, so I don't think they have any real influence. Ditto for most TV programmes. The Loose Women might get away with saying ridiculous sexist things about men, but very few people care a jot about what they think.

Quality programmes, at least the ones I've watched, seem to portray all characters as made of both positive and negative characteristics.

our courts marginalise men when it comes to parental rights , when a young boy grows up with seperated parents and witnesses his father being treated like a second class citizen by the family courts , it gives him a poor view of the most important male figure in his life and this reflects badly upon him

I agree that in Ireland, men get the short end of the stick in terms of parental rights, and it's something I'd like to see changed. That's also the case with the law on underage sex which discriminates against men.

But by and large, men have it pretty good, and I'd still say that even in the enlightened, 21st-century western world, we have it better than women overall in terms of discrimination.

paul_mcshane

flutterflye wrote: »

Okay, so have I got this?
You want boys to be able to use violence to solve their problems.
But not to be portrayed as reckless on tv.
And whatever that is about court - I'm not getting it.

Yeah, your points aren't very clear to me.
I'm not really understanding your point of view.

since when is self defense violence


let me guess , you think someone like padraig nally was out of order

Dudess

paul_mcshane wrote: »

you must have a full pack of gender cards in your arse pocket

Sorry if I made points you couldn't answer. :pac:
I don't know what that means but you're not exactly in possession of a balanced view of the genders yourself now are ya?

paul_mcshane wrote: »

our courts marginalise men when it comes to parental rights , when a young boy grows up with seperated parents and witnesses his father being treated like a second class citizen by the family courts , it gives him a poor view of the most important male figure in his life and this reflects badly upon him

Let me guess: you blame feminism for this, even though it existed before feminism?
I agree on the dreadful way men can be depicted in various media. I don't see the problem with a kid hitting back to defend themselves, but what if the boy doesn't have the physical strength to match the bully? The resultant violence and humiliation is hardly going to strengthen his confidence.

Haelium

Domo230 wrote: »

You have no idea what women in prehistory did do you?

They hunted and did pretty much the same things men did.

You sir have just shown yourself to be a sexist pig.

You're being sarcastic, right?

Sindri

The King of Moo wrote: »

In what ways do you think traditional male characteristics are frowned upon today?
I only ask as it's a complaint I hear from a lot of men, but, as someone who combines characteristics considered stereotypically masculine and feminine, I don't really see it happening.

It would be anger and aggression which would be the main ones that have been and mainly are discouraged traits typically displayed by men. Not an attitude I'd attribute to women but to society. But I don't think that that was what paul_mcshane "The Irish Football God of this Era" was getting at.

Sindri

kowloon wrote: »

I'll just leave this here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

Yes. Crick and his colleagues actually at their eureka moment after seeing research done by Franklin. Before hand they had thought that the structure of DNA was actually a triple Helix rather than a double Helix IIRC. As Bronowski said it should have been obvious and the clue was staring them in the face.

BornToKill

Jarren wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rQkJhCRyng

She can dominate me anytime :pac::pac::pac:

That's just so very clumsy. With a little care and attention she wouldn't spill the maple syrup like that. And it's so sticky too. What a mess.

paul_mcshane

Dudess wrote: »

Sorry if I made points you couldn't answer. :pac:
I don't know what that means but you're not exactly in possession of a balanced view of the genders yourself now are ya?

Let me guess: you blame feminism for this, even though it existed before feminism?
I agree on the dreadful way men can be depicted in various media. I don't see the problem with a kid hitting back to defend themselves, but what if the boy doesn't have the physical strength to match the bully? The resultant violence and humiliation is hardly going to strengthen his confidence.

i bet your nice behind the over used armour

of course fighting back in not always enough in the playground , my point was how the very idea of fighting back is frowned upon , flutterflye proved my point

teednab-el

There would be plenty of tittys flying about.

paul_mcshane

The King of Moo wrote: »

Because violence isn't always the answer. Sometimes the old cliché of "hit the bully and he'll respect you and stop" might work, but more often than not violence just leads to more violence, and leads to it being seen by some people as the most effective solution to other problems, when a more peaceful plan of action would be better.
I don't think violence is an inherently male characteristic either: some men tend towards violence more than others, but I don't think men are violent types by and large.
I think the idea that men should be able to handle themselves physically is a largely a social construct caused by the fact that many men feel that previous generations were more macho than their contemporaries, which is something men always seem to have thought, and not a new development.



It seems to me like most people on most TV shows (soaps, generic cop dramas etc) are really stupid, regardless of their gender.

The same goes for ads: the Boots ads are often pointed out as being discriminatory against men, and they do make men look stupid, but I also think the women in those ads are incredibly annoying, vain and stupid.
And most people hate those ads, so I don't think they have any real influence. Ditto for most TV programmes. The Loose Women might get away with saying ridiculous sexist things about men, but very few people care a jot about what they think.

Quality programmes, at least the ones I've watched, seem to portray all characters as made of both positive and negative characteristics.



I agree that in Ireland, men get the short end of the stick in terms of parental rights, and it's something I'd like to see changed. That's also the case with the law on underage sex which discriminates against men.

But by and large, men have it pretty good, and I'd still say that even in the enlightened, 21st-century western world, we have it better than women overall in terms of discrimination.

how are men less discriminated than women in this country

how many women have thier charges dismissed having killed their abusive husbands and even those who are sent to jail , they dont slop out or even share cells , anyone who is familiar with garda culture in this country knows that a different approach is taken with women than men , any kind of complaint made by a woman towards a man will be listened to , the opposite is not true

flutterflye

paul_mcshane wrote: »

flutterflye proved my point

What point did I prove?
I think you'll find that I didn't prove any point of yours at all!

I never said my opinion on it at all!

paul_mcshane

flutterflye wrote: »

What point did I prove?
I think you'll find that I didn't prove any point of yours at all!

I never said my opinion on it at all!

you made a condescending remark about using violence to solve problems , do you expect a ten year old to issue the school yard bully with a court summons

flutterflye

paul_mcshane wrote: »

you made a condescending remark about using violence to solve problems , do you expect a ten year old to issue the school yard bully with a court summons

I'm sorry if you found my post condescending.

Daveysil15

Dudess wrote: »

Sorry if I made points you couldn't answer. :pac:
I don't know what that means but you're not exactly in possession of a balanced view of the genders yourself now are ya?

Anyone else see the irony in that statement?

Lynfo

Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

Be still stuck in the stone age tbh. Name a good invention by a woman

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0906931.html

The King of Moo

paul_mcshane wrote: »

how are men less discriminated than women in this country

how many women have thier charges dismissed having killed their abusive husbands and even those who are sent to jail , they dont slop out or even share cells , anyone who is familiar with garda culture in this country knows that a different approach is taken with women than men , any kind of complaint made by a woman towards a man will be listened to , the opposite is not true

Well, just in terms of the police, off the top of my head, there's been plenty of cases of women reporting rape to the Gardaí and not being taken seriously.

SIR PEADO BAILOUT

Jeez wouldnt it be great i cud throw da hoover around then feet up watch jeremy k eat a bag of maltesers and then throw summat in da micro when yer woman gets in :pac:

Battered Mars Bar

Lynfo wrote: »

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0906931.html

Is this International Repeat Everything to Battered Mars Bar day

My response to someone that posted that to me already...

"Just to pick one from that "exhaustive" list...

Medical syringe, Letitia Geer, 1899..."Letitia" lolz

Acutally it was invented by an Irishman Francis Rynd in 1844. :pac:"

What do you people want from me??? wahahahahaha

dark crystal

paul_mcshane wrote: »

our courts marginalise men when it comes to parental rights , when a young boy grows up with seperated parents and witnesses his father being treated like a second class citizen by the family courts , it gives him a poor view of the most important male figure in his life and this reflects badly upon him

I agree men are unfairly discriminated against in many family courts, but then ask yourself - which gender brought these laws into effect in the first place?

Also, the vast majority of judges are men. Out of 143 sitting judges in Ireland, only a quarter (36) of those are women. Taking those figures into account, you can't lay the blame of bias toward the mother squarely on female's shoulders.

PrincessLola

paul_mcshane wrote: »

all the men would have committed suicide

a hard as nails dominering man will leave you alone and respect you if you show your worth

a ball busting feminazi isnt happy untill you have been hammered into submission and are bereft of self esteem and dignity

Oh Paul, you silly goose.
I normally wouldn't bother with this drivel but why not.

Traditional patriarchy = women were not allowed to vote until the 20th century, were not allowed be in control of their own finances, were raped and then either blamed for that rape or forced to marry their rapists, were given no autonomy or agency in society, had no way of escape from violent husbands.

hmm not good.

So what we did Paul, was we give women rights, so that they could operate on an equal standing with men, that is not the same thing as matriarchy or "femnazis" (anyone who uses that term in all seriousness can only be unintelligent)


Men are not being "hammered into submission", to think so whiny, self-pitying, and pathetic.

paul_mcshane wrote: »

boys in school are urged not to use their fists to defend themselves against bullies , go to the teacher ( usually a female ) is the advice

most tv shows potray men as irresponsible and wreckless buffoons

our courts marginalise men when it comes to parental rights , when a young boy grows up with seperated parents and witnesses his father being treated like a second class citizen by the family courts , it gives him a poor view of the most important male figure in his life and this reflects badly upon him

There are mostly male polititions, there has never been a female taoiseach, but WAIT! OH noes a female teacher!! we can't have that now can we?

NO SON OF MINE WILL HAVE HIS EYES DEFILED BY THE SIGHT OF A WOMAN IN AUTHORITY.

Pandora2

Pandora2 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcMd1F1acSo

Thanks:o No fear of me inventing anything, anytime soon!!!

newport2

PrincessLola wrote: »

Men are not being "hammered into submission", to think so whiny, self-pitying, and pathetic.

You make a lot of valid points in your post. Why demean your side of debate then by resorting to personal insults? No better than men calling women who feel oppressed as "whiny, self-pitying and pathetic". Which is not true or my opinion either.

Ms.M

Haelium wrote: »

You're being sarcastic, right?

No, the poster isn't being sarcastic. The assumptions about women's roles in prehistorical society were made long after society became patriarchal. They have no basis in fact and excavations have proved that women hunted with men. Why wouldn't they? It's not like they had washing-machines to fill... We're all guilty of putting too much stock in gender roles though. I think a desire for power is what's screwed the world over; not the y chromosome.

I hate this talk of feminists being crazy women. Any "us and them" crap from either gender. Most men I know are feminists. Same way most white people I know aren't racist.

I like men- folk I do. I don't know any bashy bashy hitty over the head men-folk at all. However, I predict this thread is going to be a magnet for macho eejits....

Enkidu

I think some people here have a very inaccurate view of Stone Age man. Men didn't hunt in groups for the tribe, while women minded the children. Rather most individuals of both genders picked berries and nuts, e.t.c. Women also went along on game hunts. In fact we know of all female game hunts. (Remember for most of the Stone Age, women were hairy, naked, muscular from constant physical activity with wounds, dirt and with literally shít dried into their hair. Sorry for the visual image, but you have to come away from imagining women being "softer".)

It isn't until the advent of farming that you see a major difference between men and women's roles.

Wibbs

Enkidu wrote: »

I think some people here have a very inaccurate view of Stone Age man. Men didn't hunt in groups for the tribe, while women minded the children. Rather most individuals of both genders picked berries and nuts, e.t.c. Women also went along on game hunts. In fact we know of all female game hunts. (Remember for most of the Stone Age, women were hairy, naked, muscular from constant physical activity with wounds, dirt and with literally shít dried into their hair. Sorry for the visual image, but you have to come away from imagining women being "softer".)

It isn't until the advent of farming that you see a major difference between men and women's roles.

Kinda. Some would argue the role differences started earlier than that. It appears that in humans before us both genders hunted and gathered equally, but some differences came along when modern humans show up. The theory has it that this was one of the big advantages we had over them. A broader division of labour on vaguely gender lines collected more calories which was in turn able to support a larger population. On that score looking at modern hunter gatherers it's actually the women who bring in the largest calorie bounty to the group. Cave paintings also show some gender division. When hunts are shown it's nearly always male stick figures involved. Today in groups like this, while women may hunt smaller animals and certainly are involved in fishing, large prey animal hunting is nearly exclusively male in flavour.

I'd be a little spurious on the theory that we were the first to be different mind you. Neandertal's skeletons show numerous traumas, broken bones etc. Their injuries are very similar to those found in modern rodeo riders. IE being knocked about by large animals. Their hunting techniques seemed to be very close in ambush type tactics(their spears are for stabbing, not throwing). Interestingly the female remains don't show these injuries to nearly the same extent, so it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to surmise that women weren't as involved in such hunts and that some gender division of labour was in play with them. Contrary to popular they weren't always pure carnivores either as a type of stone tool found shows repeated wear from digging, probably from digging for roots and tubers(they've even found cooked grains between some of their teeth). That may have been a more female thing.

On the hairy, naked caked in dirt front, maybe for the early stone age, but by the time of modern humans/late stone age(60kya onwards) we were wearing fitted clothing and it's likely our hairiness was significantly less than previous folks. The jury is out on our neandertal cousins as no needles have been found at their sites, but they certainly worked leather and lots of it judging by the tools they left for that purpose. I'd personally believe the more recent reconstructions that make them look more like us on the hair front may be going too far and that they were a hairier human. Modern hunter gatherers are actually very clean people too and very prissy about their bodily appearance. Indeed the men are often more prissy than the women. Regardless you see very few of them with hair caked in muck, unless as a type of hair gel. It makes very good sense from a health point of view.