Login    Register
User Information
Username:
Password:
We are a free and open
community, all are welcome.
Click here to Register
Sponsored
Who is online

In total there are 63 users online :: 3 registered, 0 hidden and 60 guests


Most users ever online was 155 on Mon Aug 15, 2016 1:40 am

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes

The Team
Administrators
Global Moderators
global_moderators.png CS

"Offtopic-posts-topic" NSFW

All non-spudgun related discussion goes here such as projects, theories, serious questions, etc. All "off-topic" posts (aka useless posting, determined by moderators) will be removed.
Sponsored 
  • Author
    Message

Unread postAuthor: Insomniac » Wed Nov 14, 2012 12:58 am

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:Do you think that in a society of women the field of engineering would even exist?



Without shoe-horning myself too deep into this debate... I imagine that in a society of women (suppose you could remove the need for a man to reproduce) you'd end up with a considerably different social atmosphere which would slowly evolve away from raising young girls to be interested in the sort of things young girls are 'supposed' to be interested in. And from that, I imagine engineering would be born. The fact is that while women have as much of an opportunity in a given field as a man does, as a society we haven't grown out of the practice of raising children with the idea that they should take an interest in certain ideas over others, based on their gender.

And a couple of other points JSR made that I feel like mentioning...

With the whole idea of 'A girl punches you, do you punch back'? I'd argue that the right way to respond would be with the same level of force you'd use on a male of equal physical strength to the woman. Despite the fact I'm pretty skinny myself, if a male who was obviously physically weaker than myself hit me, I'd try to use some restraint. I would want to avoid using force on someone unable to properly defend themselves.

Also, in regards to hiring a woman of childbearing age...

Like it or not, women get pregnant and we don't. Is it fair? Nope. But this is one of those instances where some inequality will always exist. If a male in a relationship wants a child, he won't suffer any huge impact in regards to his job. A woman will, and some allowance has to be made for that, even if others are forced to pick up the slack.


Can't we just treat everyone as equal, and judge them on an individual basis? If a woman is using her sex to gain an unfair advantage, then do what can be done to prevent it. Until that point, maybe we should treat people as 'people' and not jump to assumptions.



It's almost a case of 'correlation does not imply causation'. Gender roles have been pretty concrete for most of human history, and now there's a bit of a push to end that. I'm sure plenty of women are trying to get the best of both worlds, and gain new rights while keeping old benefits... But I'd argue that this is more likely because of how society's taught us, than by nature of them being a woman.



Anyway, I now I've said that I probably won't continue this debate... Looks like Crowley and yourself have said all there is to be said. I'm really just finding ways to procrastinate and not study for my finals.
  • 0

I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.
Right now I'm having amnesia and deja vu at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.

Add me on msn!!! insomniac-55@hotmail.com
User avatar
Insomniac
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: Australia
Country: Australia (au)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:54 am

Faith in humanity temporarily restored:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/1 ... hite-Power
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:59 am

Insomniac wrote:And from that, I imagine engineering would be born. The fact is that while women have as much of an opportunity in a given field as a man does, as a society we haven't grown out of the practice of raising children with the idea that they should take an interest in certain ideas over others, based on their gender.


I honestly don't see that happening unless the genes get altered over time.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... -toys.html

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... evolution/

None of the above is conclusive but it would seem to me that there is a biological predisposition in males to be more curious about the world and its manipulation than women, who are more concerned with social interaction and personal issues.

Again, I'm not saying men are better than women - but there are differences, and they complement eachother. You can't have a society entirely composed of men either. There are biological reasons why for example men are more willing to take risks, and it can all be explained in evolutionary terms. A man driven to experiment would not have children for very long unless there was the mother involved to inject some care :)

With the whole idea of 'A girl punches you, do you punch back'? I'd argue that the right way to respond would be with the same level of force you'd use on a male of equal physical strength to the woman. Despite the fact I'm pretty skinny myself, if a male who was obviously physically weaker than myself hit me, I'd try to use some restraint. I would want to avoid using force on someone unable to properly defend themselves.


I'm not suggesting that if a girl slaps you, she should be punched in the face. On the other hand, give her a firm push away from you and if it goes to court, you'll see whose side the judge will take.

Restraint is important, but you should not allow someone physcially weaker to lash out at you with impunity just because if you decided to, you could inflict more harm. There must be consequences, and the right to provoke should not be protected.

Like it or not, women get pregnant and we don't. Is it fair? Nope. But this is one of those instances where some inequality will always exist. If a male in a relationship wants a child, he won't suffer any huge impact in regards to his job. A woman will, and some allowance has to be made for that, even if others are forced to pick up the slack.


Again, that ill deserved sense of entitlement. Pregnancy is a choice, and the consequences of that choice should not be foisted upon the rest of society. Would you work a couple of hours overtime unpaid every day because your colleague was pregnant? Or find yourself doing most of the work because even though she is present, she can't perform the tasks required of her? What if you ran a small business with say three employees and one of them got pregnant? It's easy to pontificate from outside these situations.

Can't we just treat everyone as equal, and judge them on an individual basis? If a woman is using her sex to gain an unfair advantage, then do what can be done to prevent it. Until that point, maybe we should treat people as 'people' and not jump to assumptions.


Most definitely, and being treated equally implies no special preference. The protection of women a priori is what is being argued against, an assumption made before the individual can be evaluated.

It's almost a case of 'correlation does not imply causation'. Gender roles have been pretty concrete for most of human history, and now there's a bit of a push to end that. I'm sure plenty of women are trying to get the best of both worlds, and gain new rights while keeping old benefits... But I'd argue that this is more likely because of how society's taught us, than by nature of them being a woman.


Let's not commit the genetic fallacy, regardless of whether it's nature or nurture, that doesn't excuse anything. You can't say "Oh, that kid was right to carry out that school shooting because of all the violence in the media" with a straight face.

I realise I might come across as rather bitter from these rants, I guess I'm angry that I was fed lies in my youth. I was raised to believe that women were sugar and spice and all things nice, and gazed in awe at their splendor which I was unworthy to behold. A very thin veneer that turned out to be, that would not stand up to close scrutiny, and I can't help feeling my life would have been very different had I known what I do now earlier on. It's not something that can be argued though, you have to live through it, and I suppose that's the main source of the difference in opinions here.
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:07 am

was raised to believe that women were sugar and spice and all things nice, and gazed in awe at their splendor which I was unworthy to behold. A very thin veneer that turned out to be, that would not stand up to close scrutiny, and I can't help feeling my life would have been very different had I known what I do now earlier on.
Ah so this has just been a vindictive rant all along? :D

I wasn't raised in a way that portrayed women in a positive or negative light, although I know that my dad would be on your team in this debate. 5-years-ago me would probably have been on your team also :P
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:12 am

MrCrowley wrote:Ah so this has just been a vindictive rant all along? :D


Yep, you should have realised that spudfiles for me is generally an extended low budget therapy session ;P

I wasn't raised in a way that portrayed women in a positive or negative light.


I disagree, from the outside it most certainly looks like you have a positive bias in their favour, and if you are unaware of it then they've done a good job...

I know that my dad would be on your team in this debate.


He married your mum, what do you expect ;)

5-years-ago me would probably have been on your team also :P


10-years-from-now you will be back I'm sure :D
  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:40 am

I disagree, from the outside it most certainly looks like you have a positive bias in their favour, and if you are unaware of it then they've done a good job...
My family were quite neutral when I was growing up, we never discussed religion, politics, social issues or whatever until I found them on my own and began to mention them. My parents are probably more right leaning than me and more or less irreligious. And as I already said, my dad would definitely be on your team. Don't think I've even discussed women's rights with them, but I know my dad's position from the comments he makes. I probably would have had a similar view up until the last year or so of high school.

I've had negative experiences with feminism too. I was booted of a blog forum because half the members and the admin started becoming all feminist very quickly and if you disagreed with them, no matter the argument, you were called a misogynist. I ended up using the word 'weird' in a way that they didn't think was appropriate. I apologised a few times before being banned by the admin who said I should have apologised and I replied quoting the previous posts in which I did. I've always been a smart ass :D
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

Unread postAuthor: Zeus » Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:38 am

I was raised much as Jack, without a father for the most part, and by a feminist. But instead of becoming a pussywhipped boy, I figured out what a man's role is. After treating a couple of girls like princesses, and being trampled, I learned pretty quickly.

Thing is, you can get a great girl if you take the lead, but if you fold, they'll be a complete [female doggy].
  • 0

/sarcasm, /hyperbole
User avatar
Zeus
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:34 pm
Location: 'Straya, C*nt
Reputation: 2

Sponsored

Sponsor
 


Unread postAuthor: Insomniac » Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:13 am

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:Snippity Snip


Agreed on most points. There's still two that I don't agree with, however. (Damnit, being sucked into internet debate! :? )

I'll agree that there's likely a genetic reason why the average female would gravitate away from science/math/engineering. But this is only a generalisation... I know for a fact there are some female students kicking my ass in my current engineering degree. Would there be a lower priority on engineering in a female-dominated society? Probably. But there's enough female scientists, mathematicians and engineers around to make me think the difference wouldn't be night and day. There's enough diversity between individuals to ensure that gender alone can't decide the fate of an entire branch of knowledge.


As for the 'pregnancy is a choice' thing, well yes, you're right. You don't generally get pregnant without it being deliberate or you being careless. But I think we can safely say that most pregnancies are the result of a couple, consisting of a male and female partner, deciding to raise children. In this case the woman must go through the whole inconvenience of pregnancy and birth, while the male... well, the male goes about his day as usual. Maybe he does a bit more to help out the woman, but he doesn't face a damaged career or the prospect of losing his job. And he may want kids just as much as the woman, and after nine months he will have them. Along with his job.

In general I think I agree that there shouldn't be a sense of 'entitlement', taking advantage of every single inequality you can find... but in a case like this I think that if something can be done to minimise the impact on the woman's career, it's the right thing to do. I realise that in something like the case of a small business, this may not be practical... Logistics are logistics and you can't make work vanish. But in the case of larger companies when the slack can be taken up, why shouldn't we?

Having children is an event which basically shapes your life from that point on. It's not like the woman is saying 'Alright guys, I just felt like a little holiday with pay so y'all can see me in nine months'. It's not an act done for the purpose of leave or benefits (at least, it shouldn't be!). Having children is a normal human behaviour, and is the biological goal of our species.

That got a bit long-winded, but I guess my point is that generally, pregnancy is for the benefit of both the mother and the father. Yet the mother is the only one who is forced to be in a condition upon which they can't work effectively.


Perhaps you'd agree to a system where a certain number of unpaid overtime hours have to be met before or after pregnancy, so it becomes less of a free ride and more like a way of ensuring you have a job to come back to when you're fit to work again?
  • 0

I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.
Right now I'm having amnesia and deja vu at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.

Add me on msn!!! insomniac-55@hotmail.com
User avatar
Insomniac
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: Australia
Country: Australia (au)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:53 am

was raised to believe that women were sugar and spice and all things nice, and gazed in awe at their splendor which I was unworthy to behold. A very thin veneer that turned out to be, that would not stand up to close scrutiny, and I can't help feeling my life would have been very different had I known what I do now earlier on.
Story of my life too
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Unread postAuthor: jackssmirkingrevenge » Wed Nov 14, 2012 9:30 am

MrCrowley wrote:My family were quite neutral when I was growing up, we never discussed religion, politics, social issues or whatever until I found them on my own and began to mention them.


I would say the influence would come more from school than family.

I've had negative experiences with feminism too. I was booted of a blog forum


If that was your worst experience, that would go some way to explaining your tolerance :)

I was raised much as Jack, without a father for the most part, and by a feminist. But instead of becoming a pussywhipped boy, I figured out what a man's role is. After treating a couple of girls like princesses, and being trampled, I learned pretty quickly.


Amen.

But there's enough female scientists, mathematicians and engineers around to make me think the difference wouldn't be night and day. There's enough diversity between individuals to ensure that gender alone can't decide the fate of an entire branch of knowledge.


I am not saying there aren't any competent female scientists, my direct superior in Spain for example has two doctorates and knows more organic chemistry than I could fit into my head over a thousand lifetimes, and as such I respect her. The point though is that she received her education developed by men in an institution built by men.

What makes me question if the field of science as we know it today would have evolved at all in its present state though is the fact that in our history, it has been an almost entirely male field. Could there have been a female Gallileo or Newton who was airbrushed from history for being a woman? I doubt it, and I doubt that you could argue that it was because they were subjugated by their menfolk either.

I think that if something can be done to minimise the impact on the woman's career, it's the right thing to do. I realise that in something like the case of a small business, this may not be practical... Logistics are logistics and you can't make work vanish. But in the case of larger companies when the slack can be taken up, why shouldn't we?


I think the disagreement here is that I think that having your cake and eating it is a bit much. I will admire a woman who can have children and maintain a career, but not one who has done so trampling over her colleagues.

Having children is an event which basically shapes your life from that point on. It's not like the woman is saying 'Alright guys, I just felt like a little holiday with pay so y'all can see me in nine months'. It's not an act done for the purpose of leave or benefits (at least, it shouldn't be!). Having children is a normal human behaviour, and is the biological goal of our species.


I have no problem with people having children, but I do have a problem if it is at my expense. Don't give me the future generations argument, the universe is gradually slowing down and will eventually collapse inwardly on itself, according to the laws of entropy when all its thermal and mechanical functions fail, thus rendering all human endeavors ultimately pointless :)

Imagine I really, really love spudguns (not too hard ;)). Imagine I had to take 6 months off work paid leave because I was working on this particularly awesome spudgun project, and after that period I would rush away from my desk or arrive late/leave early at least once a week because of something or other I had to do on this really, really awesome spudgun project, leaving you to pick up the slack.

Would you tolerate having a colleague like me? Oh god, imagine if I had to show you photos of my project every fuçking day, and bring it to work sometimes to dribble all over your laboratory. What an asshole.

Why would a woman having a child be any different? It's a personal project, which you are more than free to pursue, but in the same way I would not dream of inconveniencing you because of my personal ambitions, I expect to be treated the same way.

I guess it depends on where you're standing, if you're a husband to a pregnant wife then I would be very surprised if you'd take my view. It doesn't make it any less rational though.

That got a bit long-winded, but I guess my point is that generally, pregnancy is for the benefit of both the mother and the father. Yet the mother is the only one who is forced to be in a condition upon which they can't work effectively.


If you want to have children, make sure you can afford the time and resources to raise them. Don't expect the world to bend over backwards for you just because you're doing something which literally billions and billions of people have done before you since the birth of the species.

  • 0

User avatar
jackssmirkingrevenge
Donating Member
Donating Member
 
Posts: 24225
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:28 pm
Country: Holy See (Vatican City State) (va)
Reputation: 66

Unread postAuthor: jakethebeast » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:01 am

Hehe, funny thing is that i was raised so that i would think both men and women are equal.

Still somehow i do respect women much more than men, i find it easier to trust a women than a men. Think about it guys, what our woman has to put up against when they spend their life with a spudder :D

Or a guy like me, during the past year i have been many times in a close-to-death scenario, still somehow i have with only few scars... Maybe the closest have been few motorcycle accidents, first time happened like 13 months ago when i was driving over 100 km/h when suddenly the rear wheel lose grip and sent me sliding on the asphalt for good 100 meters, after that i noticed that it was only inches from my head to a road sing...

Second time a small rock got stuck between the front brake disk and pad and you might figure out what happened then, again at speed of over 100 km/h. And both times, i didn't get a single bruise...

And still my GF is with me, though i'm a reckless idiot
  • 0

Est Sularus Oth Mithas
User avatar
jakethebeast
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2010 4:20 pm
Location: Jakes cave
Country: Finland (fi)
Reputation: 11

Unread postAuthor: Insomniac » Wed Nov 14, 2012 10:19 am

Jack, I dread the day when I'm stuck in the company of an overly proud parent of either gender. It sounds horrific.

Perhaps I can continue your spudgun analogy, but twist it in my direction.

I really love spudguns, but as biology would have it, only women can produce them, no exceptions. If I want one, I only have to enter a stable spudgun-building relationship with a lady, and she'll make it for me. Which is great, because it leaves me free to do other stuff.

I don't like the idea of a free ride either. The way I'm seeing it, however, is that a husband gets a 'free ride' through his wife's pregnancy, when it comes to employment. Unless she gets sick or something, he's not greatly inconvenienced. Women are trapped into the process of pregnancy in a way men are not, if we assume a given couple wants children.

But anyway, I should probably stop replying to this. I'm currently cramming for an electronics exam so this isn't really helping my future self.

And you're also right that making a baby doesn't require talent. I've seen far more talentless morons with kids than I care to count.
  • 0

I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.
Right now I'm having amnesia and deja vu at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.

Add me on msn!!! insomniac-55@hotmail.com
User avatar
Insomniac
Major General
Major General
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: Australia
Country: Australia (au)
Reputation: 0

Unread postAuthor: POLAND_SPUD » Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:16 am

Lol female inventors or scientists ?? I know some women who are good at maths, electronics and stuff but they are like a cow with two heads -> you put it in a cage and show in a circus - they are that rare

plus most of them are rather ugly - so yeah you can have an interesting discussion with them but that's all

which gets us to conclusion no 1 -> women are #### toys and you better treat them that way

Amen
  • 0

Children are the future

unless we stop them now
User avatar
POLAND_SPUD
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5405
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 4:43 pm
Country: Israel (il)
Reputation: 10

Unread postAuthor: velocity3x » Wed Nov 14, 2012 2:37 pm

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:What makes me question if the field of science as we know it today would have evolved at all in its present state though is the fact that in our history, it has been an almost entirely male field.


If women dominated the sciences, the world would have empty labs.....with really beautiful curtains. Of course, a man would have to hang them.
  • 0

User avatar
velocity3x
Brigadier General
Brigadier General
 
Posts: 827
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Yuma, Arizona
Country: United States (us)
Reputation: 7

Unread postAuthor: MrCrowley » Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:05 pm

I would say the influence would come more from school than family.
As I said, I shared your views up until the last year of high school. That's about when I started having an interest in science outside of school and spudguns and I realised I had to critically analyse my main worldviews so that they made sense, weren't contradictory, and relied more on evidence.

I used to be a lot more right wing (socially and economically) than I currently am; probably influenced by my parents. I also used to argue everything and anything but I used more argumentative technique than actual fact or evidence to 'win'. So that's when I realised I should actually start to learn the stuff I argue about rather than rely on memory, experiences, and info from newspapers, television, etc.

That being said, any influence definitely didn't come from my teachers. I probably only ever had one or two good teachers in my education that I could respect and both were male. The rest, I despised or pitied.
In school, we don't get taught women's rights. I did social studies and history but we only ever did wars, revolutions and the civil rights movement.
Socially, I burned a few bridges with girls in my high school years. I would've been pissed off with girls most of my time at high school :D

If that was your worst experience, that would go some way to explaining your tolerance
My worst experience with feminism, not feminist women. Hell, that's more or less my only experience with feminism as a movement. I'm talking about something different from a bitchy girl, I've had plenty of experiences with that.

If women dominated the sciences, the world would have empty labs.....with really beautiful curtains. Of course, a man would have to hang them.
I really do think you guys underestimate the capability of some women. Sure, when you look on TV or in magazines you constantly see the type of women you wish would suddenly accelerate to escape velocity and leave the f*cking planet but there are also plenty of capable women behind the scenes who really have their sh|t together and don't share many of the generalisations discussed on this forum.

While women don't dominate the sciences on a whole, they may do on a smaller scale. Plenty of women run labs at universities and in the private sector. They may also dominate a department's senior staff or graduate list.

I don't think it's fair to grab the typical type of woman who watches E! and use them to generalise how a women-dominated science would turn out. The women scientists I know don't give a crap about curtains or E!, they don't have the time in their lives to give a crap about that stuff. I imagine there are plenty of male demographics that would do equally as bad as some women when running a lab.

Image
  • 0

User avatar
MrCrowley
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10207
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:42 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Country: New Zealand (nz)
Reputation: 4

PreviousNext

Return to Non-Spudgun Related Discussion

Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]

Reputation System ©'