RE: Female Supremacy truthful?

RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

Shawn1066 -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 2:34:14 PM)
Every single human being is more than his or her genetics. People can be genetically similar--even genetically identical--for all intents and purposes and still be completely different. We're not bound by our genes. Also, you're arguing that women are superior based totally on being more gentically complex--having more genes. I believe you may have, previously, said something like... quote: ORIGINAL: Inferiorxy Quantity doesn't equal superiority. That is a rather insectoid way of thinking. quote: ORIGINAL: Inferiorxy He is in fact genetically simpler than the Female, as the Female contains far more genetic data than the male ever will. So, let me get this straight... Quanity doesn't equal superiority, but it does equal it when it supports you claims? DV's Fox

RedMagic1 -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 2:42:15 PM)
I'm workin on the 4th of July, because I went to a friend's wedding midweek, so you can have me in the conversation as much as you want. I know a little about DNA, so I doubt I'll bore you. Yes, most animals are more complex than most plants. However, this is not because animals have more genes, because, at least by some measures, they don't. Think of it like knitting. There's only a handful of stiches and techniques you can use -- say five. But elaborate patterns can emerge if you pearl half the row, then pearl every other row above, and, in general, generate a complicated pattern with those five "simple" things. It is the dynamic process that creates complexity, not the building blocks.

SaraZeal -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 2:44:25 PM)
quote: Under a microscope, Females XX chromosomes are big and diesel compared to those of males whose XY chromosomes are tiny and battered down looking. Explain AIS women please. Women who have 46,XY chromosomes. Explain also people who have 47,XXY, 47,XYY, 47,XXX, 48,XXXY, 48, XXYY and so on. The second (or third, or fourth) X will be canceled out, because it's a duplicate. So the genetic material of the second X is a barr body and simply used minimally. The only advantage it confers is genetically inheritable changes will occur less in people with XX genes, because the chances of not getting it is squared. AIS is included by this, it'sn an X-inherited genetic condition. What about people with XX gene who are SRY positive (SRY gene is normally found on the Y chromosome and leads to male sexual development pre-birth). Or a defective SRY gene, even if present, (leading to no male sexual development pre-birth). Then there is the presence or absence of Mullerian Inhibiting Hormones (or MIH) who make female internal organs regress. Some men lack MIH and have a condition called Persistent Mullerian Duct Syndrome (basically they have female internal organs, despite possibly also having male ones - and having normal external male organs). Genetics is a fun subject isn't it? I don't agree either sex is superior or 'better' than the other. It's a matter of perpective. You like being female and couldn't conceive ever being male. Well it ain't necessarily cause it's superior, or better - but that, to you, it's more comfortable.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 2:45:52 PM)
OMG Sara, that was hot.

Inferiorxy -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 3:04:34 PM)
Women with AIS have testes and XY chromosomes, and can never bear children. They are genetically a "male", not a Female.

undergroundsea -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 3:09:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MISTRESSKUMA Under a microscope, Females XX chromosomes are big and diesel compared to those of males whose XY chromosomes are tiny and battered down looking. I am curious, what exactly characterizes a battered down looking chromosome? It's a chromosome with its shoulder slouched? Cheers, Sea

undergroundsea -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 3:11:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Inferiorxy Women with AIS have testes and XY chromosomes, and can never bear children. They are genetically a "male", not a Female. I think her point was that the argument to which she responded is simplistic, incomplete, and without merit. Cheers, Sea

SaraZeal -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 3:18:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Inferiorxy Women with AIS have testes and XY chromosomes, and can never bear children. They are genetically a "male", not a Female. That's awfully insensitive of you. I have partial AIS and I know others who do, as well. I'm glad only the government and some doctors think of me as male. I take it as an insult. Not because it's "boys are yucky" or that I consider it inferior. It's just -not me-. Genetics are more complicated than you think. Enough so that no one on Earth is 100% male or 100% female, we're all variables amongst a continuum of genetic variation. Aggregating closer to the poles than not (though not so close as you might think). Declaring someone genetically male or genetically female, while ignoring the whole rest of who they are, well, that's pretty shallow, especially for an endocrinologist. Maybe they did it in that episode of House, but well, they also got shit for it from AIS activists. I look all female, and while I've always been infertile, it's got no bearing on who I am. In a few generations we will have womb and ovary implants, that adapt to the person's DNA, and produce the same they would if they had been there before - and as such, could also be used to replace malfunctioning or cancerous ones. That because I've only been partially affected, and been declared male, makes me "less" of a female, is your opinion, and if it's going to be trying to invalidate me, I prefer not to have it. I know enough people who accept me for who I am, not who they think I am or who they judge I ought to be. and yes I'm sub, but not a doormat, I feel strongly about this

undergroundsea -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 3:43:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Inferiorxy Even if you do feel the male is superior due to his ability to "spread his code", his ability to do so still ultimately depends upon a Woman (or Women) carrying his line. We should not fail to reflect upon the fact that this "code" given by males is a rather simple one. I think Shawn1066's point is that you can make an argument for superiority by providing a list of ideas which at surface favor one sex or the other, and that these points alone do not make for superiority. quote: There IS significant difference between the chromsomes, namely that the Y chromosome is smaller and contains markedly fewer genetic components than the X. Y is in fact a mutated version of X. It is a derivative of X. This statement suggests that your metric for superiority is based on a superiority of numbers. quote: If sheer numbers represented superiority, bacterium would be the pinnacle form of all life. Quantity doesn't equal superiority. That is a rather insectoid way of thinking. This statement suggests that you feel a superiority of numbers does not equal superiority. quote: The Female chromosome sequence contains far more genetic data than the male's. This statement suggests that your metric for superiority is the complexity or amount of genetic data. quote: We're not really comparing plants to mammals, are we? This statement suggests that the amount of genetic data alone does not make for superiority. quote: Not only two different systems, but it's obvious which is more advanced. What's next, comparing complex strings of chemical compounds present in inanimate objects? Let's keep on track with the conversation. This statement suggests that as we are discussing humans, we should not bring other lifeforms, which are obviously not as advanced as humans, into the picture. quote: If sheer numbers represented superiority, bacterium would be the pinnacle form of all life. Quantity doesn't equal superiority. That is a rather insectoid way of thinking. This statement suggests is is fine to bring in other lifeforms into this discussion. Have you considered a career in politics? ;-) Cheers, Sea

undergroundsea -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 3:49:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Inferiorxy Culture shows how it does favor the Female by putting the male in harm's way first. This statement suggests your metric for superiority is that culture has men take danger in favor of women. Then by your logic children of either sex, the elderly of either sex, those unwell or handicapped, and men who are unable to take on physical danger for whatever reason are also superior to men who take on the physical danger on their behalf. Yes? Culture extends the role of protector to whomever is better equipped to provide this role. Thus, a woman protects her child even if he is male. A woman who is in law enforcement or the military protects the general civilian population, including men. Cheers, Sea

LaMistressa -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 3:51:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: undergroundsea I am curious, what exactly characterizes a battered down looking chromosome? It's a chromosome with its shoulder slouched? Cheers, Sea OMG, you mean all those years my mom was bitching about my posture she was right? [;)]

undergroundsea -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 4:15:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaMistressa OMG, you mean all those years my mom was bitching about my posture she was right? [;)] A mom is always right if she can ground you. ;-) My mom is always right because she's got the smarts. Cheers, Sea

LotusSong -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 5:13:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dnomyar Aestus. 1. You still have to have the males for sperm. Without it the females are totaly useless. parthenogenesis, fear it :)

SaraZeal -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/4/2008 5:26:35 PM)
Meh, cloning, you could be the last person alive on the planet, all you'd need is a bit of genetic samples to do some DNA-engineering, and you could produce millions of people.

focalss -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/6/2008 4:53:29 PM)
The question I would like to answer is what would I like female supremacy to be. For me, I would like it to be a dominant woman I could come home to and submit to. She would make most of the decisions by agreement taking my wishes into consideration. She would make rules and have authority to discipline me, train me to serve her better and please her. Most of all it would be more accepted and I wouldn't have to be in the closet.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/6/2008 6:38:36 PM)
I believe in female supremacy in our household, because I and my colleage (also a FemDom) run our household and we are the supreme decisionmakers within its boundaries. As far as the rest of the world -- many of both genders have proven themselves idiotic and incapable of running even their own households, much less a country or a world. Give me a forthright, dedicated human, and I'll give you a good leader -- but give me a forthright, dedicated human, and I'll also show you the first throat that the masses will slit, because they can't bear the truth of their miserable, false existence. Firestorm

LuvnFemAuthority -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/7/2008 9:37:51 AM)
Quite right. I second this! Although I think we ought have equal numbers of both genders in government. quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW I believe in female supremacy in our household, because I and my colleage (also a FemDom) run our household and we are the supreme decisionmakers within its boundaries. As far as the rest of the world -- many of both genders have proven themselves idiotic and incapable of running even their own households, much less a country or a world. Give me a forthright, dedicated human, and I'll give you a good leader -- but give me a forthright, dedicated human, and I'll also show you the first throat that the masses will slit, because they can't bear the truth of their miserable, false existence. Firestorm

LuvnFemAuthority -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/7/2008 3:21:37 PM)
My question is: can we even define what the criteria is for superiority? This is where the argument would logically have to begin. Once this was settled, only then can the genders be ranked accordingly. Philosophy 101, folks.... Personally, I think it is a foolish endeavor since since neither gender's strengths could really be shown to have higher value that the others..... Oh and once and for all, goddammit, same and equal do not mean the same thing in this fucking context! Argggggg! I'll keel haul the next fool that says that. quote: ORIGINAL: Shawn1066 Every single human being is more than his or her genetics. People can be genetically similar--even genetically identical--for all intents and purposes and still be completely different. We're not bound by our genes. Also, you're arguing that women are superior based totally on being more gentically complex--having more genes. I believe you may have, previously, said something like... quote: ORIGINAL: Inferiorxy Quantity doesn't equal superiority. That is a rather insectoid way of thinking. quote: ORIGINAL: Inferiorxy He is in fact genetically simpler than the Female, as the Female contains far more genetic data than the male ever will. So, let me get this straight... Quanity doesn't equal superiority, but it does equal it when it supports you claims? DV's Fox

Ladylocks -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/7/2008 8:45:02 PM)
In my house and in our relationship I am supreme in all ways. Dainty and I both believe this. But in general I believe there is good and bad in both genders. I had a pretty low opinion of men until I met Dainty but he has restored my belief that men can be good. I don't feel I am superior to men in general.

HarryVanWinkle -> RE: Female Supremacy truthful? (7/7/2008 9:24:49 PM)
It amazes me that many can't seem to distinguish between the concepts of Supremacy and Superiority. While these too concepts are similar, and even interelated somewhat, let me take a shot at defining the difference: Female Superiority is the concept that women are inherently better, of greater worth, than men. Historically the belief that one type of human being is inherently better than another, whether the difference between the types is sexual, racial, regional, religious, or economical, has been responsible for MOST of the greatest crimes against humanity that have ever occured. I find such beliefs to be totally unacceptable. Female Supremacy is the concept that women should rule over men. As general rule, that ALL women should rule over ALL men, I oppose this concept too. I've known too many capable men and to many clueless women. On the other hand, individual relationships in which the woman is supreme are another matter. If woman A and man B feel that she should rule the relationship, if that's what works for them, I heartily approve. If man Y and woman Z find that him ruling over her works best, then that's cool too.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625