Can we dispense with the nonsense that women can do anything men can do already?

QP! said:
Not totally accurate. Yes at one point PoC and women would have been banned from 'men's sports' in certain countries, but not all. But Mens Sports have, for the most part, been an open league where if any women could make the cut, they would be allowed to compete.

Womens sport, in most countries evolved to give women a place to compete with peers based on their biological sex, in an attempt to give them a fair playing field.


The above is the reason why i have always said that the Trans Woman debate entirely misses the point. Had those that original created 'Womans Sport' known that at a point in the future the word 'Woman' would be isolated to gender and not biological sex, then the original league creation would have been defined by a term for biological sex as that was ALWAYS the division they intended.

Which means those on the left trying to argue trans women should get to compete versus biological women, as they too are 'women' are trying to take a semantic advantage to get them in when that was NEVER the intent of the leagues creation.

I am a proud lefty but this debate is one too many lefties get wrong.
Click to expand...
I didn't know this. Guess it doesn't apply to kids' sports. IIRC girls had to fight to be able to play softball, football or soccer with boys.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it's still an irrelevant comparison...............the percentage of women who are stronger than 90% of men is ridiculously small. for example, the swedish womens soccer team losing to a team of 15 year old boys.............or a team of average men beating a professional womens soccer team. There are jobs out there so physically demanding that nearly all women can't, or won't, do them. There is a reason why most women STILL do the same jobs that most women did before the sexual revolution.
Click to expand...
You're talking about jobs that have physical strength as a requirement. What about those that don't? Why are there so few women CEOs in Fortune 500 companies, for instance?
 
FastLane said:
Really? Do you have a link. I have seen video of a female place kicker on a boys high school football team. If women were in general on the same competitive level we would have seen trans biological females competing with the boys teams.
Click to expand...
I couldn't find any Pittsburgh high school that had girls on the football teams.
 
christiefan915 said:
You're talking about jobs that have physical strength as a requirement. What about those that don't? Why are there so few women CEOs in Fortune 500 companies, for instance?
Click to expand...
right off the bat, and it's one thing that I would credit women for, is that they are too emotional. Unlike men, who can remove emotion out of decision to cut 10% of their labor and not worry about the families of those 10%, most women would not be able to remove their emotion or empathy from that decision. they would care too much about the families of that 10%
 
SmarterthanYou said:
right off the bat, and it's one thing that I would credit women for, is that they are too emotional. Unlike men, who can remove emotion out of decision to cut 10% of their labor and not worry about the families of those 10%, most women would not be able to remove their emotion or empathy from that decision. they would care too much about the families of that 10%
Click to expand...
You can't answer why there are so few women CEOs in the Fortune 500? Or why many countries have elected women as leaders but the US has not?

If you think women as a whole are too emotional for those jobs, you're just nuts. IIRC people have said that Hillary, for example, comes across as somebody cold and uncaring.
 
christiefan915 said:
You can't answer why there are so few women CEOs in the Fortune 500? Or why many countries have elected women as leaders but the US has not?

If you think women as a whole are too emotional for those jobs, you're just nuts. IIRC people have said that Hillary, for example, comes across as somebody cold and uncaring.
Click to expand...
I think I just gave you one part of the answer above. the same applies for leadership positions.

there are always exceptions to the rule.............that applies everywhere.
 
FastLane said:
If men had to have the babies humanity would have died out by now.
Click to expand...
Having babies can't be that painful. Peop
Damocles said:
There is value to what they bring to law enforcement, even if they aren't the extremely small percentage that are stronger than most men. I should make sure that if I speak in a thread like this that my opinions are fully covered so I don't appear to be in agreement.

Women often cannot do everything that men can do, but that does not mean they do not bring value to the job. Most men will never reach the level of understanding that she could bring to the table. If your only tool is strength, then every response will be to "Hulk Smash" it into submission. Men and women are both valuable on that job.

That being said. If a dude cried like that from one punch... I don't know if he'd survive in that job.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%. What I posted is not to say that women do not bring value. They obviously do. But, there isn't a person around who when trapped in a burning building wouldn't want someone looking like Jack Reacher showing up to carry them out than Carrie Underwood
 
Teflon Don said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1943348002636108221
View: https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1943348002636108221


Clearly they can't. They are not physically or emotionally capable of handling these types of stressful situations.

But for some reason the modern day feminist movement has tricked everyone into believing that on the whole, women are equally physically as capable as men. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Not only can this woman not take a punch, but look how she overreacts.

Now to be fare, I would suspect that many of the estrogen laden males on JPP would act just as she is acting so......
Click to expand...
Would anyone seriously want this officer as a partner? Picture the chaos if things were still going down, and she had to back up her teammate.

I’ve taken a hit so hard it smashed my nose sideways, pointing at my left ear. Not to brag, but I didn’t feel a thing until I’d thoroughly 'subdued' the loser that sucker punched me. Getting it realigned wasn’t exactly a party, but I manned up, no crying, watery eyes don't count, LOL.
 
The top team in the WNBA could not beat an average boys HS team. Men also have more brains - that's why we have female only chess leagues and math olympiads and even poker tournaments! Even in intellectual sports women are inferior.

There is no GIANT CONSPIRACY holding down the weaker sex. They have been failures throughout history because they are so inferior.
 
Jade Dragon said:
The problem is that if women can't do everything a man can do, you incels think or even call them inferior. Women are far from inferior.
Click to expand...
they are physically inferior. But here is the thing about reality......men AND women do different things much better than the opposite sex can. It is why men and women are NECESSARY, despite the feminist lie about women not needing men. we both need each other to fill the voids that one can't do themselves. That doesn't make women inferior, in general, just different.....because we are different from each other.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Yes. His unsubstantiated claim that "modern day feminist movement has tricked everyone into believing that on the whole, women are equally physically as capable as men. " That's just limp-dicked geezer dementia posting. The kicker is that the Twitter link says nothing about it....and it's British.

I feel sorry that JPP Geezers like Teflon Don are lonely and lack the social skills to have a female companion, but their own hate is what is stopping them from having a healthy relationship with a woman.
Click to expand...

 
One night, many years ago, we were all overserved and someone got the brilliant idea to make a bet as to who could pee the highest point on the wall that surrounded our casita.
We men pitched in our $$, and suddenly one of the ladies threw in her $$. As we readied ourselves, she declared one of her rules was, "no Hands".
After the laughter subsided, she had all the cash in hand before we even got our peckers out.
God, the good old days were great times
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it's still an irrelevant comparison...............the percentage of women who are stronger than 90% of men is ridiculously small. for example, the swedish womens soccer team losing to a team of 15 year old boys.............or a team of average men beating a professional womens soccer team. There are jobs out there so physically demanding that nearly all women can't, or won't, do them. There is a reason why most women STILL do the same jobs that most women did before the sexual revolution.
Click to expand...
No it is not irrelevant.

You do not get to say that women being weaker to most men does not matter when most men are weaker than the top men.

That is you arbitrarily setting a line.

If 90% of men are far less strong and thus competent that the top 10% for physical tasks why would we want those 90% of men to then do those jobs. Saying 'because they are stronger than women' is not an answer.

If what you care about is 'physical strength only' then only the 10% of men qualify.

if you care about more than that, then you cannot focus the discussion only on physical strength and in which case women will rank higher most men in many areas, especially when it comes to using their brain. See my post about them crushing us men in all education areas.
 
christiefan915 said:
I didn't know this. Guess it doesn't apply to kids' sports. IIRC girls had to fight to be able to play softball, football or soccer with boys.
Click to expand...
I started playing soccer at age 4 and we had a few top girls playing on our boys team until i hit about age 8.

Why? Because the girls were top skilled and thus wanted better competition and they did not suffer size disadvantage at those ages.

There were some people who complain 'this is a boys team', but it was widely ignored saying 'they could make the team' , because they could.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
right off the bat, and it's one thing that I would credit women for, is that they are too emotional. Unlike men, who can remove emotion out of decision to cut 10% of their labor and not worry about the families of those 10%, most women would not be able to remove their emotion or empathy from that decision. they would care too much about the families of that 10%
Click to expand...

How about measuring by 'strength of character' and 'morals', which i think are key to leadership?

What we have seen as Trump broke law after law and threatened Congress and others is it is almost ALWAYS women who are willing to stand their ground and not cow to the bully tactics, no matter the personal or career cost.

what men have shown, from the top CEO's to Congress and other is we are absolutely weak in the face of any threat and would sell out our country and friends and family to save our own asses.

Look how many magat Congress people are now massively damaging their voters with the big stupid bill by taking away all the supports they rely upon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top