Since Women Are Equal, Then Why Can't They Get Their Asses Whooped?

[Mr.LV]

The title of this thread got me laughing :bawling:

 

[LordZuko]

The idea of a 'level playing field' is in itself a logi

No, it's not. For example, the company I work for is a level playing field. They don't give a fuck what race, gender, sexual preference, age, etc... you are. They just want you to do your job. If you do it well you're rewarded. If not, you suffer consequences. Either way, the only thing that determines how far you go is how good a job you do. That's a level playing field, and I'm sure there are many other examples in the country.

Level playing field is a concept. It does not exist in nature. It doesn't exist outside the mind. In fact in order for an equal playing field to exist an inequality must be present because a governing body or powerful body superior in position and resource to enforce or impose this concept.

Without such a body people would revert to naked tribalism. Currently it's covert tribalism. You can't tell me what your company believes because you aren't in the board rooms. You can only tell me what they espouse. What they tell you to believe.

Nigga, I'm betting the shit you said doesn't even make sense to you. I already gave an example of a level playing field. There are others, especially here in a Capitalistic society where how much green you can make is often more important than anything else about you.

I'm sorry i didn't know you weren't intellectually equipped to discuss the philosophical nature of power dynamics and abstracts.

lol Your argument being stupid has nothing to do with what I'm capable to discuss. Saying something doesn't exist in nature or outside of the mind doesn't make sense when you can find real world examples of it easily enough. Again, there are plenty of companies in this very country where everyone is given a fair shot to prove their worth regardless of race, gender, etc...

Your real world examples are human constructions. Again something that doesn't exist outside of the mind.

 

[Valentinez A. Kaiser]

...So if she smacked Webster...is she allowed to get dat' work...

lol @ his shirt saying "tear it up"

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Your real world examples are human constructions. Again something that doesn't exist outside of the mind.

If you consider a business to be an abstraction that has no basis in reality, then you might as well say society itself is an abstraction making this whole discussion pointless. Most of us live in the real world though, and are treating these things as real world things that can be actively manipulated.

Yes, they are human constructions, but so are the concepts of equality or inequality. You're not actually arguing any point, you're just deflecting.

 

[zzombie]

The idea of a 'level playing field' is in itself a logi

No, it's not. For example, the company I work for is a level playing field. They don't give a fuck what race, gender, sexual preference, age, etc... you are. They just want you to do your job. If you do it well you're rewarded. If not, you suffer consequences. Either way, the only thing that determines how far you go is how good a job you do. That's a level playing field, and I'm sure there are many other examples in the country.

That just there official policy but in reality since no two people can be the same they evaluate you on your merits and distribute responsibilities according and what I'm telling you is that on average men have more desirable traits and merits

 

[LordZuko]

Your real world examples are human constructions. Again something that doesn't exist outside of the mind.

If you consider a business to be an abstraction that has no basis in reality, then you might as well say society itself is an abstraction making this whole discussion pointless. Most of us live in the real world though, and are treating these things as real world things that can be actively manipulated.

Yes, they are human constructions, but so are the concepts of equality or inequality. You're not actually arguing any point, you're just deflecting.

That is the whole point. It's not a deflection it's a statement. We are arguing over abstracts like they are universal qualities when they aren't even real.

You don't live in the real world you live in a constructed reality an artifice.

In this reality adjacent civilization we can pretend that equality is a real achievable concept that can usher in this new dawn but in practice it only shoe horns people into mediocrity.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

The idea of a 'level playing field' is in itself a logi

No, it's not. For example, the company I work for is a level playing field. They don't give a fuck what race, gender, sexual preference, age, etc... you are. They just want you to do your job. If you do it well you're rewarded. If not, you suffer consequences. Either way, the only thing that determines how far you go is how good a job you do. That's a level playing field, and I'm sure there are many other examples in the country.

That just there official policy but in reality since no two people can be the same they evaluate you on your merits and distribute responsibilities according and what I'm telling you is that on average men have more desirable traits and merits

And I'm saying "Prove it." I don't know if what you're saying is true or not, but you saying it doesn't make it so and your arguments for that conclusion haven't really supported it.

That is the whole point. It's not a deflection it's a statement. We are arguing over abstracts like they are universal qualities when they aren't even real.

You don't live in the real world you live in a constructed reality an artifice.

In this reality adjacent civilization we can pretend that equality is a real achievable concept that can usher in this new dawn but in practice it only shoe horns people into mediocrity.

No we're discussing principles and practices that can put into real action. That makes them real. You're trying to abstract them to a point where there is no point discussing them. Every race has a start. When you go watch the Olympics, you see everyone line up at the same place. That's putting everyone on an equal footing. Of course, everyone won't reach the end at the same level, but they started off on the same level. Companies are the same way. Most of them are stratified with each level having real requirements and responsibilities. You're making it seem like a level playing field is all in people's minds, however for companies of this type the rules are documented and laid out tangibly. So it's not nearly as abstract as you're suggesting.

 

[LordZuko]

I'm not abstracting anything, they are abstracts. Equality is not real. People dont start at the same level Don't end at the same level and the prime motivator for most people is to raise their level change their position relative to those around them. And then pass those advantages they acquired onto their children.

Equality is a fable told by the rich to appease the masses.

 

[zzombie]

Lonious Monk you want me to prove that men have more desirable traits??? okay

Men take more risks http://journal.sjdm.org/jdm06016.pdf risk taking is linked to success WHY??? because to the brave go the spoils and women are clearly prone to taking risks which is probably why all the most dangerous jobs are done by men

Physically men are faster, bigger, stronger i won't give you stats for that because it's common knowledge.

men also produce more geniuseshttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...en-says-scientist-Professor-Richard-Lynn.html

men are more aggressivehttps://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/psych406-7.2.pdf

so so far we have greater aggressiveness, risk taking, superior physicality and greater potential for genius..... these are all traits that when applied in a positive environment make men a better and on top of that men are better at science and math

 

[R0mp]

That's a privilege they have. We all get the better end ot the stick in some areas.

 

[Smokey Tha Bandit]

That's a privilege they have. We all get the better end ot the stick in some areas.

horseshit

 

[The Lonious Monk]

Lonious Monk you want me to prove that men have more desirable traits??? okay

Men take more risks http://journal.sjdm.org/jdm06016.pdf risk taking is linked to success WHY??? because to the brave go the spoils and women are clearly prone to taking risks which is probably why all the most dangerous jobs are done by men

Physically men are faster, bigger, stronger i won't give you stats for that because it's common knowledge.

men also produce more geniuseshttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...en-says-scientist-Professor-Richard-Lynn.html

men are more aggressivehttps://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/psych406-7.2.pdf

so so far we have greater aggressiveness, risk taking, superior physicality and greater potential for genius..... these are all traits that when applied in a positive environment make men a better and on top of that men are better at science and math

Everything you just listed has upsides and downsides though. Yes, risk taking can be a good thing. It can also work out to be a bad thing. For every dude, that's taken a risk and won big, there are probably 5 who took the same risk, crashed, and burned. You can't run a society with everyone being like that. Sometimes playing it safe is the right thing to do. If you believe that's a more feminine trait, then it would stand to reason that the world also needs the feminine way. So that doesn't make men intrinsically better under all circumstances. It just makes men better suited for some tasks or solutions.

The same goes for aggressiveness. I shouldn't have to tell you that aggression is not always the best way to address an issue. Overaggresiveness causes as many or more crises is it solves.

The problem with the argument you're making is that treats society way to simplistically. I would agree that men are better at certain things that women and women are better at certain things than men. You are making the argument that men are better by only highlighting what men excel at and then acting like those things are then end all and be all to running a healthy society. They aren't though. For example, women tend to be better communicators. Communication is pretty important to maintaining a healthy society.

My thing is I don't agree with chauvinists like yourself or feminists. You guys only look at one side and try to force that side to be the right one, when the truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

[blacktux]

Nah what dude is saying that women shouldnt realistically try to compete in the realms where men excel.

They should compete in the realms they excel.

The problem with some women is they want to step into a mans shoes, and then complain that the shoe is too big.

 

[mryounggun]

oh great... another why can't i beat up women thread.

Word. The strange thing to me is that some niggas seem obsessed with beating the shit out of women. Like it's not just that they think that it should be socially-acceptable, it seems like the fact that is ISN'T socially excepted is offensive to them.

Shit is bizarre.

 

[zzombie]

Lonious Monk you want me to prove that men have more desirable traits??? okay

Men take more risks http://journal.sjdm.org/jdm06016.pdf risk taking is linked to success WHY??? because to the brave go the spoils and women are clearly prone to taking risks which is probably why all the most dangerous jobs are done by men

Physically men are faster, bigger, stronger i won't give you stats for that because it's common knowledge.

men also produce more geniuseshttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...en-says-scientist-Professor-Richard-Lynn.html

men are more aggressivehttps://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/psych406-7.2.pdf

so so far we have greater aggressiveness, risk taking, superior physicality and greater potential for genius..... these are all traits that when applied in a positive environment make men a better and on top of that men are better at science and math

Everything you just listed has upsides and downsides though. Yes, risk taking can be a good thing. It can also work out to be a bad thing. For every dude, that's taken a risk and won big, there are probably 5 who took the same risk, crashed, and burned. You can't run a society with everyone being like that. Sometimes playing it safe is the right thing to do. If you believe that's a more feminine trait, then it would stand to reason that the world also needs the feminine way. So that doesn't make men intrinsically better under all circumstances. It just makes men better suited for some tasks or solutions.

The same goes for aggressiveness. I shouldn't have to tell you that aggression is not always the best way to address an issue. Overaggresiveness causes as many or more crises is it solves.

The problem with the argument you're making is that treats society way to simplistically. I would agree that men are better at certain things that women and women are better at certain things than men. You are making the argument that men are better by only highlighting what men excel at and then acting like those things are then end all and be all to running a healthy society. They aren't though. For example, women tend to be better communicators. Communication is pretty important to maintaining a healthy society.

My thing is I don't agree with chauvinists like yourself or feminists. You guys only look at one side and try to force that side to be the right one, when the truth is somewhere in the middle.

You asked me to prove that men have more desirable traits and while every trait can have a situational downside it is my contention that the traits found in men at greater proportions create more benefits than they do disadvantages. REMEMBER i said that men are better at the things that actually count so in other words we excel at more important shit... the things women excel at are important but they are not more important than the things that men excel at.

In modern capitalistic society if you don't take risk and are not intelligently aggressive then you won't gather more wealth than the next person and the whole goal is to be richer than the next guy. This lack of risk taking and aggressiveness is why women are less likely to ask for a rise or fight for that promotion.... therefore they get out competed by men and then feminist cry about sexism.
http://www.catalyst.org/system/file...ies_the_gender_divide_in_business_roles_2.pdf

Men/boys also excel at stem fields and obviously in the age we live in that's an advantage, most women/girls don't even want to go into stem even when the opportunity is made easy for them and when they do get into it they don't stay in it

quite frankly studies suggest that men are also more willing to suffer and live under hierarchy so of course we will do better in a highly structured society.

 

[The Lonious Monk]

You asked me to prove that men have more desirable traits and while every trait can have a situational downside it is my contention that the traits found in men at greater proportions create more benefits than they do disadvantages. REMEMBER i said that men are better at the things that actually count so in other words we excel at more important shit... the things women excel at are important but they are not more important than the things that men excel at.

In modern capitalistic society if you don't take risk and are not intelligently aggressive then you won't gather more wealth than the next person and the whole goal is to be richer than the next guy. This lack of risk taking and aggressiveness is why women are less likely to ask for a rise or fight for that promotion.... therefore they get out competed by men and then feminist cry about sexism.
http://www.catalyst.org/system/file...ies_the_gender_divide_in_business_roles_2.pdf

Men/boys also excel at stem fields and obviously in the age we live in that's an advantage, most women/girls don't even want to go into stem even when the opportunity is made easy for them and when they do get into it they don't stay in it

quite frankly studies suggest that men are also more willing to suffer and live under hierarchy so of course we will do better in a highly structured society.

I'm not saying any of that is wrong, and I can see why it would feed your beliefs. I just don't agree with much of it. You are right that modern capitalistic society probably awards more men oriented traits than woman oriented traits, but that should be expected given that men have developed the current society. Had it been more of a joint venture, society probably would have been a lot different. Would it have been better or worse? No one can really answer that question.

At best, your argument supports the idea that men are better suited to succeed in today's world. That is true, but that's not the same as saying that men are better than women as you seemed to be implying before.

 

[desertrain10]

I am not one to romanticize African history... all African societies that had women in greater power were more primitive . all the great African societies were patriarchal Mali , songhai even the Zulu.

And I don't think women are stupid just that they are not as good as men in things that actually count.

Your logic is faulty though. You believe (I think) that men have dominated society to a degree that women haven't been able to compete freely, but you're also using that as evidence that women can't compete on the same level.

.

The idea of a 'level playing field' is in itself a logi

Women are not equal but we pretend they are for the sake of societal peace.

Different is not less, it is not more and sometimes it requires additional measures in order to achieve equal treatment of both genders

Its not just for the sake of "peace" but rather the advancement of the human race lol

That said, one should hit anyone without provocation or reason, be it a man hitting a man, a man hitting a woman hitting a man, or a woman hitting a woman, plain and simple.

HEY!!!!! you are back i missed you have you gotten over the trauma of the election yet???

If we have to put additional measures in place to achieve equality for women then that means women aren't really equal it means we are lowering standards to accommodate their inferiority.

you Advance the human race by denying the truth of male female inequality??? lies equal advancement???

Fuck a trump

But I digress ...

Equal does not mean exactly the same

As I was saying different doesn't mean one sex is superior

And we’re not so different that this has to often be taken into consideration

The actual structural and cultural barriers in women face are not based on our capacity to learn, lead, reason, etc

That said, women make up at least half the population. By empowering women with access to the same opportunities, technologies and capital as men naturally that benefits us all, no?

What?

e·qual

ˈēkwəl/Submit

adjective

1.

being the same in quantity, size, degree, or value.

"add equal amounts of water and flour"

Fucking feminists

Lol

Smh

Equal is qualified by quantity, size, /or and value NOT sameness

Either you dumb af or you think I'm dumb af. But to engage you in a debate on a word you used but clearly don't understand the meaning of is me trolling myself. Nah rain drop. Drop top.

I initially said : equal does not mean exactly the same

Which it doesn't

"Same" and "equal" are not congruent terms

Equal is qualified by quantity, size, /or and value NOT sameness

What I was suggesting is that, while we all have our own weaknesses and strengthens, each of us is equal in our value as a being

And treating all ppl the same does not acknowledge their equal value as beings

For example, imagine we have 2 children. One is blind. The other is deaf. Treating these children "the same" and treating them "as equals" are two different things. Treating students the same means giving them an identical education (i.e. giving them both reading material in braille). Treating students as equals means acknowledging each one has equal value as a learner, which in turn means giving them each what they need to fulfill their value as a learner

Furthermore we are all individuals and there are very few limitations imposed on us purely by our gender, limitations are placed upon us by attitudes and beliefs that surround us. It is those attitudes and beliefs that need to change

But yea maybe you should just fall back

Your fallacy is in promoting the belief that we are all equal or possess the same value on some metaphysical level. There is no evidence for this. Any value you recognized is assigned not inherent, meaning it's arbitrary and subjective.

Your attempt to establish a difference between "same" and "equal" is hilarity. If they are not the same they are not equal. There's a word for that, difference. Things that are different can be and are naturally analyzed to determine value.

You are trying to conflate equal or equal treatment with accommodations. Accommodations are what allow the blind deaf or otherwise disabled to enjoy life on a level to some degree of similarity to their non disabled counterparts.

However physically these two groups of people are not equal not even to each other. Their value to society is not even the same. Their duties and obligations are inverted. People without disabilities are expected to contribute to their society while society is expected to serve perpetually those with maladies.

So again even the position is not the same.

As i stated before men and women have widely different expectations and obligations to society which means even on a citizen level we're not equals.

Your philosophy is trash. Basura.

Bruh

The term 'equal' can mean 'same'..... BUT 'equal' can describe having "equivalent value", despite not being "exactly the same"

Think two dollars are equal to 8 quarters, yet they are different in appearance, feel, utility, etc

And the practice of treating ppl equally does not require they be treated the same, just that you don't give only one party special treatment. As I was alluding to it can mean you treat them as equally valued beings (i.e., workers, students, etc). Reasonable accommodations DOES NOT confer special treatment. If you are in charge of teaching a blind child and deaf child a lesson and you want to give them equal access to the lesson that means accommodating both children with the necessary tools they need to learn. You give the blind child braille reading materials, for instance. And/Or the lesson may require you to use sign language for the deaf child. Not just providing both children with only braille reading materials and expecting the deaf child to succeed

And really there is no such thing as absolute value. Value is the importance that we attach to things no? So in this sense, all values are subjective

You believe a man is superior to a woman or "man's work" is more valuable to the advancement of mankind, that is their opinion.... Considering women and only women can bear children, and then are generally are the care taker of said children, a case could be made women are more valuable, superior. Both cases have their merits but there's no right or wrong answer really. Not to mention our obligations and what's expected of both men and women has changed over time and changes from culture to culture

Even money is only worth what people believe it is worth. It depends on the judgment and agreement of majority. We want to make inequality less of a reality it's possible and we have the freedom to do so. It is the next step to human progress. Besides what that means for women, I believe that requires taking into consideration the differences between boys and girls and how they can best absorb and retain information in our schools. Boys are currently falling way behind. I'm also an advocate of giving men the right to sign away their financial obligations to a child they fathered under certain circumstances.....

 

[CashmoneyDux]

oh great... another why can't i beat up women thread.

Word. The strange thing to me is that some niggas seem obsessed with beating the shit out of women. Like it's not just that they think that it should be socially-acceptable, it seems like the fact that is ISN'T socially excepted is offensive to them.

Shit is bizarre.

This narrative yall keep pushing has zero basis at least on the board. I haven't seen anyone here(except maybe zombie) say they are eager to beat up women, but simply say how is it fair if someone puts their hands on you, you cannot defend yourself because of their gender, but we are pushing for equality.

Yall must be feminists masquerading as black people bec yall stay saying diminishing arguments with jokes that have no basis

 

[mryounggun]

oh great... another why can't i beat up women thread.

Word. The strange thing to me is that some niggas seem obsessed with beating the shit out of women. Like it's not just that they think that it should be socially-acceptable, it seems like the fact that is ISN'T socially excepted is offensive to them.

Shit is bizarre.

This narrative yall keep pushing has zero basis at least on the board. I haven't seen anyone here(except maybe zombie) say they are eager to beat up women, but simply say how is it fair if someone puts their hands on you, you cannot defend yourself because of their gender, but we are pushing for equality.

Yall must be feminists masquerading as black people bec yall stay saying diminishing arguments with jokes that have no basis

I try to say exactly what I mean, B. I said that SOME niggas SEEM obsessed with beating up women. I never said everyone who disagrees with 'If a woman hits me, I'm fucking her up!' is one of these people and I never said that anyone actually said that.

I'm not a nigga who's posts you have to read between the lines to find the meaning of. The fact that this thread exists is an example of what I mentioned. Also, if you don't feel that way and you aren't saying that...then cool. *shrugs*

 

[babelipsss]

The top five threads:

1. Cops

2. Best excuse to beat women

3. White tears

4. Tariq

5. Coon identification