RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life..

RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (Full Version)

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

Message

zenny -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 7:06:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MISTRESSKUMA quote: ORIGINAL: zenny Oh yes, you may want to start looking into peer reviewed journals if you want to get taken seriously by anyone other than the layman (and many won't either). OMG, I can't believe there isn't much counter argument in here except some for some dusty old links predating my birth, thanks hardbod. Boys, don't get your jocks in a knot but this is biology 101. It is obvious the female is the basic template by default because she is the one to grow and make the baby and the male is only needed for his fertilizer to provide a little more genetic material. Why did you quote me? I didn't refute anything she said. I'm sure her links show exactly what she said. Some of what has been said is common knowledge. I did however point out the error in her methodology and just a few reasons as to why it is such an error. Besides, for an argument such as this one would need a construct of what's "better". Also, you may want to take that bio 101 class again. An embryo's sex is either XX or XY at fertilization (yes, i know those are not the only possibilities). Now, if you want to say that embryo's look the same until it grows its genitals (or doesn't), then yes, you would be correct. We as a species aren't very dimorphic in the womb. In fact, we're not very dimorphic until we hit puberty. quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I'm not into post modernism . . . . I wouldn't recommend going pomo either, Zenny - but, god, we do need to inject some radical doubt into certain branches of science. It's still so steeped in authoritarianism. Pomo? I can't claim to have heard that term before. Care to explain it? Also, what do you mean radical doubt and authoritarianism?

Observer20 -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 7:09:47 PM)
Why is it that femdoms always have to make websites putting down men? I realized that female supremacy isn't about women being better, its about men being worse, XYinferior I feel sorry for you because some woman somewhere along the line, taught you to hate yourself. I noticed goreans get a lot of flack on these boards, they aren't nearly as hateful as some of these so-called female supremacists who post here.

ShaktiSama -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 7:29:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 There's an entire section of the CollarMe message boards dedicated to them. It's called the Gor section. As I have pointed out many, many times. LaTigresse wisely points out that most people who have an opinion on this subject have already debated it many times. My personal take on female supremacy is that it is very much analogous to Gor. The fact that Gor gets an entire forum of its own on this board, while female supremacy has to be "debated" in an occasional thread, certainly tells us something. Male dominance is incredibly naturalized in our culture, and affirmed along multiple channels: female dominance is only very marginally accepted even by people who practice it. My personal take on the Female Supremacy fantasy is that I find it insulting as a woman. A flimsy tissue of rhetoric cribbed from Hitler and David Duke with a few nouns changed does not really answer to any of my fantasies of power, nor does it gratify my ego. I do not need to diminish or despise men in general to dominate men in my personal life. And really, if I was given enormous political, economic and social power, I would have better things to do than ponce around in high heels and a feminazi uniform playing Queen of Outer Space.

PeonForHer -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 7:29:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I'm not into post modernism . . . . I wouldn't recommend going pomo either, Zenny - but, god, we do need to inject some radical doubt into certain branches of science. It's still so steeped in authoritarianism. Zenny - I'm not sure, but are you confusing me with XY or others? The above is the only comment I've made to you here. Pomo? I can't claim to have heard that term before. Care to explain it? Also, what do you mean radical doubt and authoritarianism? Pomo=postmodern/postmodernist. I thought it was common slang. Radical doubt - I mean, questioning objectivity rigorously in light of political, social, psychological, etc, etc, influences. I don't by any means suggest chucking out the possibility of objectivity - but we need to be a whole more careful that this is what we're getting when it's claimed to be such. Authoritarianism: this cuts two ways. A habit of mind of 1) Those scientists who believe that they can be objective when, at times, they clearly aren't being that and 2) Those who believe in said scientists as 'authorities' - and who believe that their word is beyond question.

zenny -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 7:51:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I'm not into post modernism . . . . I wouldn't recommend going pomo either, Zenny - but, god, we do need to inject some radical doubt into certain branches of science. It's still so steeped in authoritarianism. Zenny - I'm not sure, but are you confusing me with XY or others? The above is the only comment I've made to you here. Pomo? I can't claim to have heard that term before. Care to explain it? Also, what do you mean radical doubt and authoritarianism? Pomo=postmodern/postmodernist. I thought it was common slang. Radical doubt - I mean, questioning objectivity rigorously in light of political, social, psychological, etc, etc, influences. I don't by any means suggest chucking out the possibility of objectivity - but we need to be a whole more careful that this is what we're getting when it's claimed to be such. Authoritarianism: this cuts two ways. A habit of mind of 1) Those scientists who believe that they can be objective when, at times, they clearly aren't being that and 2) Those who believe in said scientists as 'authorities' - and who believe that their word is beyond question. Not at all, my words concerning you were under the quote of your post. Those above it were only concerning mistress bear. Thanks, I had wondered if that's what pomo meant. As to radical doubt in those terms, not at all. Science, imo, needs to be free of social and political influences. It's also not too hard to figure out when the separation isn't being maintained. The problem comes with news stations and magazines reporting crap studies and people coming to believe them without thinking about it or looking into it for themselves. Ethics can be maintained without such things. For the authoritarian part, yes, there are times when it can be hard to maintain objectivity. Thus the peer review process (along with IRBs and other measures) and repitition of experiements. As for peer reviewed research, yes, they pretty much are authorities in their very specialized respective field. Again comes the peer review process and repition to knock out crap research and findings. Sure, they can still be questioned by the average person, and I'm sure some can even find huge flaws with particular experiements. Thus comes the waitting game where findings will come out that will show the flaw and its impact on the particular theory or application it was testing.

PeonForHer -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 7:59:12 PM)
Without the peer review process we're pretty damned sunk. That's true of all the sciences including the 'soft' sciences like my own (political science). But it can be hard to separate social and political influences from science. Hard enough, anyway, for social science sections in university libraries to have shelf after shelf of books on that subject!

hardbodysub -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 8:04:06 PM)
quote: OMG, I can't believe there isn't much counter argument in here except some for some dusty old links predating my birth First, it's appropriate that you "can't believe" it, because it's obviously not true. Anyone reading the thread with an even marginally objective mind would see that. Second, if you're only 9 years old, you're not supposed to be here, you know.

XYisInferior -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 8:13:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Number of genes is irrelevant to complexity. Interaction between genes is the reason for complexity. There are many organisms that are far simpler than a human being that have many more genes than a human being. It is fundamental misunderstandings like this that demonstrate you deserve no scientific respect. While what you say isn't untrue, it's a bit of a cop out as a response to the post, red. We're discussing comparisons to human male and Female, not other organisms, last I checked. Active vs. non-active genes between XX and Xy and the respective immune response advantages in XX cell division has been mentioned a few times already, in fact. I'd like to know what you have to say about the rest of the points presented, anyway.

Lockit -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 8:14:12 PM)
Tell that to David Bainbridge who compared us with mice....

hardbodysub -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 8:14:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Based upon my communication with the women that you are talking about, they would rather chew glass than explain themselves, yet again, on this topic. I've read plenty of these threads and plenty of posts by some really awesome women that have their own special version of female supremacy. I get it, I understand how they think of it and how it works for them in their world. I even agree with some of it. I also know that they don't feel they need to shove it down the throats of the world at large. It is simply their thing, in their life. Sort of a take it or leave it. Most women that are really secure in themselves don't feel they need to convert every Tom, Dick or Harriet. They just want to focus on doing their own thing and being happy and fullfilled doing it. I also understand why they are sick to death of discussing the subject. Funny, I've never run into any of them. The only ones I've come across jump at any chance to try to ram their quasi-theological pseudo-science down everyone's throats.

XYisInferior -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 8:31:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama The fact that Gor gets an entire forum of its own on this board, while female supremacy has to be "debated" in an occasional thread, certainly tells us something. Male dominance is incredibly naturalized in our culture, and affirmed along multiple channels: female dominance is only very marginally accepted even by people who practice it. A very good point. Not surprisingly, I have a hard time agreeing with the rest of your slant on Female Supremacy. Likening it to Gor and the Nazi regime is rhetorically neat, but not very accurate at all. One is based on a fantasy novel, the other patriarchal socialism and totalitarianism. It's important to keep in mind that many Female Supremacists aren't about hating men or trying to take over the world in a gynocentric coup d’état. I have yet to see a matriarchal Taliban equivalent in our world, and doubt I will.

zenny -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 8:52:02 PM)
XYifInferior, I will again say that you should at the least look up confirmation bias. PeonForHer, was a pleasure. Adieu.

hardbodysub -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 9:01:39 PM)
quote: More updated data indicates that if SRY, the male determinnig gene, does not intervene during a critical window in development, the cells will default to the ovarian pathway. That's not new, and it doesn't matter. Until that window comes, it's undifferentiated. Your interpretation isn't something that can't be disputed.

hardbodysub -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 9:02:46 PM)
quote: confirmation bias. You hit the nail on the head with this one.

XYisInferior -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 9:05:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hardbodysub Funny, I've never run into any of them. The only ones I've come across jump at any chance to try to ram their quasi-theological pseudo-science down everyone's throats. And yet you've not spoken to a great deal of verifiable research spoken of in this thread that isn't pseudo-science at all.

XYisInferior -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 9:07:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hardbodysub quote: confirmation bias. You hit the nail on the head with this one. It's obvious by now you have just as much to prove as you think I do. :)

stella41b -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 9:07:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: XYisInferior And I find it curious that you have yet to argue past hurling insults and guesses. Anyway, speaking of facts and assessment, in review: The Female has two XX chromsomes, the male has one X chromosome and a smaller Y. The XX more than 1,000 genes and 160 million base pairs of DNA. The Y chromosome - 78 genes, 23 million DNA subunits. Over an extensive period of time, the Y chromosome has been slowly degrading. http://health.dailynewscentral.com/content/view/517/0 http://www.learner.org/courses/biology/archive/images/1933_d.html In nearly all cases, Mitochondrial DNA (cellular organelles that manufacture and process most of the energy that our cells need to function) are passed matrilineally. http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/chromosome=MT http://www.dna-worldwide.com/ancestry-testing/female-ancestry/ Genetic diseases on average aflfict males more than Females, and baby boys are one-and-a-half to two times more likely to die at birth than girls. http://www.mda.org/publications/gen_inhr.html http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/birthdefects/monitor/vol9-2.shtm http://www.usnews.com/blogs/on-men/2008/6/13/7-reasons-men-die-first.html http://www2.canada.com/windsorstar/news/story.html?id=fffbfc6d-38c4-463b-8b8a-6f2d367b1c5f *Females mature and develope faster than boys.* http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2504460&page=2 http://www.aap.org/publiced/BR_Teen_Puberty.htm The hub for emotion and memory in Females is generally larger than in males. Parts of the frontal lobe, which houses decision-making and problem-solving functions, are proportionally larger in Females, as is the limbic cortex, which regulates emotions. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=women-have-a-better-memory-for-faces-and-words Females overall have higher lifespans than males. http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/news/life_expectancy_varies_between_men_and_women.htm http://www.who.int/docstore/world-health-day/en/pages1999/whd99_4.html http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/1998/10.01/WhyWomenLiveLon.html Men commit a substantially greater amount of violent crime than Women. Of the total number of homicide victims in a 2004 study, 78 percent were male and 22 percent were female. A breakdown of the data by gender showed that 90.1 percent of the offenders were male and 9.9 percent were female. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/murder.html Overall, Females show better memory retention than males, and boys are clasified as learning disabled at twice the rate of girls. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=women-have-a-better-memory-for-faces-and-words http://www.springerlink.com/content/4evpvabpqdjjxvnm/ http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-07-22-memory_x.htm Of course, there's plenty of factual and empirical observations supporting the collective social and maternal importance of Females, too. But nevermind that for now. I'm curious to know what a scientist has to say about the above statements. If you don't nessessarily feel like refuting them, then I can only conclude you just don't like the subject in general. By the way, here are some supporitng books worthy of a gander for more information. Nothing refuting the holocaust. I promise. :) http://books.google.com/books?id=FotYiUB_hRMC http://books.google.com/books?id=RwprLxxpMV4C http://books.google.com/books?id=_jumAAAAIAAJ http://books.google.com/books?id=6xyPPPDo0KkC http://books.google.com/books?id=vfrecNNLAsEC Oh, and Females Are Mosaics is a good read, too. I'm sorry, but I find all this to be complete utter codswallop. My main objection to all these arguments is that, as a transgendered female with some degree of intersexuality (secondary female physical characteristics) and learning more about my own condition a biologically pure human female and a biologically pure human male is about as rare as someone like me in the general population. The truth is that everyone is primarily one gender or the other in accordance with what is encoded in their genes. Most people carry traits however of the opposing gender in some small way. Ever wonder why some women grow facial hair, for example? Sure, men and women are different, but many of those differences come from social conditioning and anthropology. I have done my research, which comes from over twenty six years of not being really sure of who I am as a person until I learned to accept the truth, I am a freak of human nature. You can cite all the Internet sources you like. I don't need them, for I am living proof of my own argument. The simple fact that some people are transgendered only goes to show that gender in humans is far more complex than most of us realize or can even imagine.

XYisInferior -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 9:13:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b You can cite all the Internet sources you like. I don't need them, for I am living proof of my own argument. The simple fact that some people are transgendered only goes to show that gender in humans is far more complex than most of us realize or can even imagine. Never meant to offend you with this discussion, Stella, though I'm not really sure how your research on identifying yourself disputes the aforementioned articles. Thanks for re-quoting the links, btw.

hardbodysub -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 9:23:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: XYisInferior quote: ORIGINAL: hardbodysub quote: confirmation bias. You hit the nail on the head with this one. It's obvious by now you have just as much to prove as you think I do. :) Not even close, pal, not even close. I'm just amazed at your persistence in light of the inadequacy of your arguments. Confirmation bias is exactly the issue.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Experiences of female superiority in real life.. (2/19/2009 9:38:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: XYisInferior quote: ORIGINAL: RedMagic1 Number of genes is irrelevant to complexity. Interaction between genes is the reason for complexity. There are many organisms that are far simpler than a human being that have many more genes than a human being. It is fundamental misunderstandings like this that demonstrate you deserve no scientific respect. While what you say isn't untrue, it's a bit of a cop out as a response to the post, red. We're discussing comparisons to human male and Female, not other organisms, last I checked. Active vs. non-active genes between XX and Xy and the respective immune response advantages in XX cell division has been mentioned a few times already, in fact. I'd like to know what you have to say about the rest of the points presented, anyway. What I said is the kernel of your misunderstanding. The frontier of computational biology right now is an attempt to map genomic interactions -- which is a project much more difficult than "merely" mapping the genome itself. Whether the male or female of the species is "more complex" by this measure is up in the air. In point after point, you base yourself in a static view of life and development. However, living beings are dynamic and interactive. Your "theories" are not. And besides, more complex doesn't equal better. I won't post again on this thread. I'm glad to see so many people contributing sensibly, but I think the thread is casting a pall over the board. I know you'll respond to me, because you're a last-word kinda guy... and I can live with that!

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.1416016