40 replies to this topic

[Cardie]

sp, do you ever worry that you might steal while in a store, or cheat on a test, or forge a check? While it may be a fact of biology that a man who loses control and isn't deterred by his morality might manifest that turn to the dark side by raping, it doesn't mean that a good man will do it any more than he will rob a gas station.

You've always seemed a pretty good guy to me, so I would n't worry that your testosterone was somehow a ticking time bomb pre-disposing you to rape.

Cardie

[QueenTiye]

Chiming in...

schoolpsycho...the fact of life is that there are some really ugly sides of humanity out there...and they are generally advertised in the news media for all the world to see... a fact I disagree with fundamentally.

Quite frankly - I don't really care about the guy who raped someone, or killed someone or any other ugly thing.  I care more about the family of the people affected who's lives are being turned into a media circus so that we can all look on voyeuristically and go "Wow. That's horrible."
I care more about how well the police are doing when they apprehend said criminals - and how well our justice system is doing when these criminals are prosecuted.  I don't want to know the life histories of suspects or criminals.  If I ran a newspaper, it would be about some of the people G mentions - the everyday heros who go through life unrecognized, while mass murderers have serial killer trading cards.

Lets see more of these people in the media, and see what we think of men and women respectively then.

QT

[Rhea]

Cardie, on Jul 10 2003, 11:02 AM, said:

sp, do you ever worry that you might steal while in a store, or cheat on a test, or forge a check? While it may be a fact of biology that a man who loses control and isn't deterred by his morality might manifest that turn to the dark side by raping, it doesn't mean that a good man will do it any more than he will rob a gas station.

You've always seemed a pretty good guy to me, so I would n't worry that your testosterone was somehow a ticking time bomb pre-disposing you to rape.

Cardie

What Cardie said.

As I said in another thread where we were talking biblically about the thought being equal to the deed, I don't buy it.

All of us have less than honorable thoughts - the difference between the criminals and us is that WE don't go out and act on them.

[Delvo]

Males and females have different ways of being evil. Men do physical violence more often, and women more often cause harm to others via calculated mind-games. The former is probably usually more damaging per incident, but there are more incidents of the latter to go around (even if they're often carefully hidden).

This is part of a larger pattern I've noticed. It applies to both morality and intelligence: those with the most of either are usually men, and so are those with the least. Thus, the best contributors to life and society are men, and so are the worst parasites and criminals and slackers. Neither extreme reflects upon the other; it just means that one half of the species is more prone to such extremes than the other.

[Shalamar]

Chiming in to say..What QT, Cardie, Nikcara, and Rhea said.

We CAN control what we do, wether we are male of female. That is why I have never agreed with the concept of a "crime of passion"..sorry thats abrogating responsibility...

The thought does not equal deed, and if it did I think most of us would be up on charges...I don't think a single person that ever lived has not had a thought that could be considered criminal, unkind, threatening, what have you...

Because NO ONE is perfect. ...the grace is in the trying your best.

Edited by Shalamar, 11 July 2003 - 01:26 PM.

[Shalamar]

Delvo Wrote:

Quote

This is part of a larger pattern I've noticed. It applies to both morality and intelligence: those with the most of either are usually men, and so are those with the least. Thus, the best contributors to life and society are men, and so are the worst parasites and criminals and slackers. Neither extreme reflects upon the other; it just means that one half of the species is more prone to such extremes than the other.

Double posting because Delvo, I am offended in the extreme!

To say that Men are/have a greater Morality and Intellegence is so offensive as to be inexcuseable!

I ajm sorry for what ever experences you may have had with women to give you that thinking; but there are just as many Moral and Intellegent women as there are men!

and there are just as many slackers, parasites and criminal women as ther are men

[Josh]

^

Agreed with Shal. Those are massive generalizations you're pandering around, Delvo.

[bandit]

To say that one sex is more intelligent then the other, or prone to be so is absolute BS.
It has nothing to do with gender.
To say that one sex is more prone to be criminal, or slackers, or parasites the nthe other, is also absolute BS.
we are equal.
It is true that women will often find less physically, but more mentally or emotionally violent ways of attacking, but that is merely becouse that men have a higher muscle mass, due to reactions to hormones in the body.
that is the only reason.
A man attacking a woman aften will ebat her, simply becouse he does not need to look for another way.
So one might say that women are more intelligent, which i would find highly offensive.
I have been in situations where i could not physically fight a person, and my sisters will tell you, i am as capable of being a bitch as any woman.

[the 'Hawk]

Delvo, on Jul 10 2003, 09:54 PM, said:

the best contributors to life and society are men

Of course a patriarchal society is going to have its best contributors be male, Delvo. Of course a generalized morality based in almost every major religion on a central male deity or deistic figure is going to have its best contributors be male. Of course a general intelligence built within a society which, historically, has both encouraged and supported men of all walks of life to the point of exclusion until a scant two hundred years past (and even then, it's been a long fight) is going to have its best contributors be male.

But I rigourously disagree that the best contributors to life are male.

Let's not forget that it takes both sexes TO contribute life in the first place.

(To say nothing of the fact that all of the best contributors to my life have been women as exquisite in their personalities, as elegant in their compassion, and as beautiful in their sincerity, if not more so, than anything either God nor man has ever contributed to life on this planet.)

[Shalamar]

Eloquence thy name is 'Hawk...

Thank you 'Hawk, you bring tears to my eyes.

I love men, they are what, to me, makes being a woman worthwhile.

as far as I am concerned, men need women and women need men, we are lifes compliments to each other, we may be wonderful on our own, but together, we are far more than the sum of our parts.

But to say that one or the other is better than the other is...flat out sexist, and unintellegent

[sierraleone]

Delvo, on Jul 10 2003, 05:54 PM, said:

Males and females have different ways of being evil. Men do physical violence more often, and women more often cause harm to others via calculated mind-games. The former is probably usually more damaging per incident, but there are more incidents of the latter to go around (even if they're often carefully hidden).

This is part of a larger pattern I've noticed. It applies to both morality and intelligence: those with the most of either are usually men, and so are those with the least. Thus, the best contributors to life and society are men, and so are the worst parasites and criminals and slackers. Neither extreme reflects upon the other; it just means that one half of the species is more prone to such extremes than the other.

Trying to figure out how to respond to this. On the surface it almost seems to be true, if you take everything at face value (I mean about men contributing most of the intellectual thought & morality, and criminal activity). Of course, one could argue that men contributing their idea of morality for the last few millenium has caused most of our problems today I would agree more or less with the first paragraph. But both genders will also use other people to do their dirty deeds (whether the person knows it or not) and that could hide quite a few of the nasty things people do.

As for the second paragraph. I would say that men have almost dictated morality (maybe men in general, but also the men of intellectual thought, and or the ones with power) for the last thousand years, for their own ends. (In the past, women must be virtuous, because they want to be sure of the paternity of their kids, but them, nawww. People still see women that sleep around worse than men that do). But my definition of morality... Being kind and respecting all life, or at least trying to, no gender has any ownership of that. As for intelligence. Women werenèt tended to be given educations, and or they were expected to get married and have children, not hold a career in which to use their intelligence. Therefor were also discouraged against choosing a career. Those women that did go after careers were often discrimnated against, their thoughts, ideas and intelligence often not allowed to express to the public. Even today, if a woman has a family and a career, shes likely going to try to keep a happy family then advance as far in her career as sheèd need to get noticed.

As for parasites and criminals. Fatally violent ones do tend to be men. And probably criminals in general. As mentioned, in the past women were expected to run a household and a family. Theyèd be discouraged from this kind of activity, like men, but unlike men they wouldnèt have the opportunities and or their attitudes they learned about a womans place and behavour would often prevent it. Women can be as much scum as men though, given the chance. They may go as far as doing something criminally, they may not. They might have someone else do it for them. I donèt know enough about criminals or criminal activities, or women criminals to say. It also probably has something to do with the fact young men are encouraged to be risk takers, in which some start doing stupid stuff. Women arenèt encourage to take risks in any area of their life, whether if be career, personal life, or stupid andor criminal stunts.

[Delvo]

Shalamar, on Jul 10 2003, 08:30 PM, said:

To say that Men are/have a greater Morality and Intellegence is so offensive as to be inexcuseable!

Good thing I didn't, then, huh?

Gewd gawd, you could try paying at least a teeny little dash of attention...

[sierraleone]

Delvo, on Jul 10 2003, 05:54 PM, said:

This is part of a larger pattern I've noticed. It applies to both morality and intelligence: those with the most of either are usually men, and so are those with the least. Thus, the best contributors to life and society are men, and so are the worst parasites and criminals and slackers. Neither extreme reflects upon the other; it just means that one half of the species is more prone to such extremes than the other.

Is this what you were refering to in response to Shalamar Delvo.

First of all, intelligence and lack of morality arenèt neccessarily exclusive

Secondly, you said usually men have the most intelligence and morallity, and usually men have the least. While you did not say men have more intelligence or morallity than women, you say that is how it is usually. Its like someone saying that men are usually taller than women - someone objecting to it by saying you said men are taller than women, leaving out the usually - and you saying back that is not what you said. You were making a generalization that those with the most intelligence and or morality are usually men, and that men usually cover the other extreme as well. You did not say men *are* more intelligent or more moral than women, just that men tended to have most  (and least) of both, which is the next best thing.

So, basically, instead of saying men *are* taller than women (when taken in the simplist statement is true, but used as an absolute is totally ridiculous and not always accurate), you said men are usually taller than women, while accurate in this example, doesnèt translate into intelligence or morality, IMO.

Edited by sierraleone, 11 July 2003 - 03:31 PM.

[QueenTiye]

sierraleone, on Jul 11 2003, 12:22 AM, said:

Secondly, you said usually men have the most intelligence and morallity, and usually men have the least. While you did not say men have more intelligence or morallity than women, you say that is how it is usually.

What he actually said was usually when you find the extremes in morality or intelligence, these are men, and when you find the extremes in depravity or stupidity - these are also men.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing.  Just restating his sentence.

Editing to add: the controversial part (in my opinion) is this:

Quote

Thus, the best contributors to life and society are men, and so are the worst parasites and criminals and slackers.

In the positive - it's an unfair statement - as it assumes that the kinds of contributions men normally make are better than the kinds of contributions women normally make.  In the negative - it contradicts the earlier theory - in which it was stated that men and women are both capable of their respective kinds of evil... and it once again makes a perhaps unfair comparison between the types of evil men commit and the types of evil women commit...


QT

Edited by QueenTiye, 11 July 2003 - 03:47 PM.

[bandit]

As i stated before, using the typ of reasoning that Delvo seems to be using, one might just as well say that women are more intelligent, as they often find ways of attacking without becoming physically violent.
I rigorously disagree with his comments both that women are less capable of intelligent thought, or proned to be so, and that women are better citezens, and better people on the whole.
they are people, the same as i am. no more, no less.

[Delvo]

bandit, on Jul 10 2003, 10:39 PM, said:

I rigorously disagree with his comments both that women are less capable of intelligent thought, or proned to be so, and that women are better citezens, and better people on the whole.

And I rigorously disagree with your assertion that the Easter Bunny's bombing of that school in the Czech Republic is responsible for the decline in Hyundai's sales.

[ArmourMe]

the'Hawk, on Jul 11 2003, 03:02 AM, said:

Delvo, on Jul 10 2003, 09:54 PM, said:

the best contributors to life and society are men

Of course a patriarchal society is going to have its best contributors be male, Delvo.

See, 'hawk?  We need you around to say things so beautifully

Delvo - go out and read "Emotional Intelligence" and expand your concept of what "intelligence" might be.

As a woman I'm raising 2 children full time.  I have to use more creativity and intelligence and long ranging thinking than any other job I've ever HEARD of in order to do this.  I dare you to think that this job doesn't demand the BEST of any parent who puts their heart & soul into doing a good job.

My masters degree program was NOTHING to childrearing.  The father of these children is a top notch sofware engineer capable of understanding math most people would never take if they had to, let alone play with just for fun.  This man regularly tells me he's incredibly greatful he doesn't have MY job.  Its that tough.

There are many different kinds of intelligence.  Most of them are not even aknoledged by western thinking.  Hell, western thinking is still trying to figure out how to quantify "common sense".......what shortsighteness.  NOT EVERY THING CAN BE MEASURED.

ArmourMe, raising 2 sons who's brilliant IQ type intelligence is being well ballanced by emotional intelligence & awareness so that they'll actually know WHO THEY ARE and HOW TO BE HAPPY  as well as HOW TO HAVE GOOD RELATIONSHIPS

[sierraleone]

^ That too   Why did I not think of that?!    Very well said ArmourMe

[QueenTiye]

There's a reason Delvo is being sarcastic (though I wish he wouldn't be. )

Everyone is reacting to words he didn't say.  He didn't say that men are more intelligent than women, and he didn't say that men are more moral than women.  If we interpreted his statements as saying that, we would have to simultaneously assert that he said that men are more imbecilic than women, and more immoral than women.

Repeating my earlier post - what he said was that when you have extremes on either side - you are most likely looking at a male.  

Now - the point about different kinds of intelligences is a valid one.  I don't know if Delvo wants to make the same assertion about emotional intelligence (that the extremes of emotional intelligence are male) - and I don't know if he wants to assert that the people who are most extremely emotionally intelligent contribute less (or less valuably) to society.  And if he wants to assert that, then I want to know why that would be.  It may well be that having evolved from a patriarchal society, we undervalued these other kinds of intelligences, to the point that we haven't yet given ourselves a chance to really see what kind of contribution these kinds of intelligences CAN make!

So, I'll hope that he shows up to address those points...

QT

[sierraleone]

Why do I feel this overlaps with the Mind Games thread *and* the Reality vs. Fantasy thread? *is confuzzled* Must be sleep deprivation!

Ièm going to quote something I said in the Mind Games thread, maybe someone else can see where my mind is going  

Quote

I think Boys start off as verbal, and things heat up from there. But I also think we also probably donèt pay as much attention to boys verbally hurting boys. ¨They are only words¨¨Just ignorn them¨ And a million other comments basically telling boys just to tough it up when they are being hurt, emotionally or physically  Boys are taught from an early age to disconnect from their feelings and or cover their feelings with anger. Anger and aggression is always an appropiate response... if it isnèt down right suppression of their emotions. Showing your ¨weak¨ feelings is bad.... I feel sorry for my brother, I am glad I wasnèt a boy, no offense to guys.

Girls are taught that fighting isnèt a girl thing to do... though thats changing. The number of girl gangs, and teenage violence done by girls is one the rise (for better or worse.... its almost to be expected though, with the changing role of women, and them being equal to men, and allowed to be physical or smart or whatever they want to be ). But girls needed a way to fight back somehow, when they were suppose to follow a certain model of feminity, which probably lead to manipulations and such, because its harder to prove, and isnèt out in the open so much.

First of all, I know he was saying those at the either end of the spectrum were most likely to be male. Which is demeaning to men and women. It is still saying, on average, you will find men who are more smart, more moral, and less smart, and less moral (or some combination there of I assume as well) than women. At least, the way I have been imgaing it, is they have an inverse, or flattened bell curve, while women just have a normal one, in regards to intelligence and morality. I think through history, women have had to hide, or camlophlage their ¨bad¨behavour more. And their intelligence as well. Or have it suppressed completely.

Quote

It may well be that having evolved from a patriarchal society, we undervalued these other kinds of intelligences

Or have not given those who have it, but are not male, the chance to express it. Or let men who have ¨other kinds of intelligence¨ the chance to express theirs or give credence to it. Or, see things only contributed by those in power as valueable, and therefore see things contributed as valueable contributed only by those in power (ie, in this case, male). Even if men contribute the most ¨intelligent¨thoughts, and ¨moral¨behavour, and the least, its cause is not neccessarily an inherent difference in men and women, IMNSHO. Theres too many variables to make the kind of statement Delvo made, IMO.