RE: Male Superiority?

RE: Male Superiority? (Full Version)

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

Message

sexyred1 -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/9/2013 10:09:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jc26 maybe I am a crazy person. and I am SUPER new to the boards so I might be totally off base. I'm a female and identify as sub. But I don't find myself inferior. BUT... When i think of male superiority I don't think of the entire race of man being superior. I do however feel that there are certain areas, aspects, professions and other factors that do make men more superior to women. For instance, I've not yet found a female doctor that I find superior to male doctors. I am sure there are more superior female doctors out there. But in a general population aspect I'd assume that the men in the field are superior. I don't think that every man is superior to every woman but I do find that in certain areas of life men are wiser and more physically capable than women. I will disagree with your statement about doctors. I have found female doctors to excel in listening skills, compassion, empathy and diagnosis.

ARIES83 -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 12:30:13 AM)
Good post. I've got that song in my head now... ...'Slip sliding away~'...

PeonForHer -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 1:27:20 AM)
FR Can anyone be 'naturally' superior or inferior, when the whole idea of superior/inferior is a human construct, and artificial (by definition), anyway?

ARIES83 -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 1:33:32 AM)
Yes.[:-]

socalsissi -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 2:12:40 AM)
i believe that there is only 1 race .. the human race, you can be anything you want but you are still human, everybody chooses to be who they want. i choose to be a sissy slave. proud to be one and i am confident that i have the same rights as a master. not to be disrespected with out consent. i choose to be a sissy doesnt give you any right to degrade humiliate disrespect with out my consent or masters consent. am i wrong in my thinking ?

theshytype -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 7:11:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NuevaVida quote: ORIGINAL: theshytype Why, even an idiot is more superior than I am when it comes to being an idiot. Ha! Sunny Quote Of The Day?? Aside from that, I agree with your most recent post, theshytype, regarding roles and status. When I speak of (lack of) superiority, I'm not talking about social status/ranks, jobs, politics, etc. I'm talking about the human factor. The human spirit, if you will. We all contribute something to humankind, by the essence of who we are. One of the most loving, beautiful and influential people in my life came from a life of poverty and hunger, and ended up giving himself to the Catholic church as a "brother." (and I'm not Catholic). He had no social status, was not revered as anything special, was not even noticed by most. But the effect he had on those who knew him created ripples that reached far and wide. And yet, he was superior to nobody, and nobody (in my opinion) is superior to him. That's a great example, NV, and a reason why I believe superiority to be immeasurable.

JeffBC -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 7:17:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: theshytype That's a great example, NV, and a reason why I believe superiority to be immeasurable. Actually, I think you were closer with your full statement. This is something that seems commonly forgotten on CM but in almost all cases adjectives like that require context. We use adjectives like dominant, submissive, truthful, honorable, etc. all the freakin time and there's no context or other explanation which makes the words near meaningless. Give me the context (measuring stick in this case) and I'll tell you who's superior. Otherwise the only thing I could think of to do is to treat "superior" as a sum total measurement of a human and while I am certainly prepared to make that judgement privately in my own head about individuals, the idea that I'd do it publicly about large groups of individuals is unlikely. Down that path lies crap like, "whites are superior to blacks". No thanks.

Phydeaux -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 7:21:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR Can anyone be 'naturally' superior or inferior, when the whole idea of superior/inferior is a human construct, and artificial (by definition), anyway? Utter politically correct "everyone must be the same and respected" claptrap. Do you not know that multiple species have dominant and submissive hierarchies? Wolves, horses, bonobo monkies to name a few...?

theshytype -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 7:55:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC Give me the context (measuring stick in this case) and I'll tell you who's superior. Otherwise the only thing I could think of to do is to treat "superior" as a sum total measurement of a human and while I am certainly prepared to make that judgement privately in my own head about individuals, the idea that I'd do it publicly about large groups of individuals is unlikely. Down that path lies crap like, "whites are superior to blacks". No thanks. Oh, I agree. I think it's easy to measure when speaking of a specific trait. I can say, with confidence, that there are some here that are superior to me in communicating their thoughts more clearly. But, it does not mean they are more superior of a person, as a whole. While I know my spouse and my own self pretty well, I don't know everything about any other person to qualify who is more superior. And, I can't place an importance on any one trait. The statement you quoted was aimed at a person as a whole.

PeonForHer -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 9:27:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Can anyone be 'naturally' superior or inferior, when the whole idea of superior/inferior is a human construct, and artificial (by definition), anyway? quote: Utter politically correct "everyone must be the same and respected" claptrap. Do you not know that multiple species have dominant and submissive hierarchies? Wolves, horses, bonobo monkies to name a few...? Wow. You see political correctness everywhere, don't you? I said nothing at all about 'respecting everyone' because we are 'all the same'. Time to put away those blinkers, Phydeaux. Mine was an observation made by David Attenborough (not a noted Commie, I should point out) in one of his nature documentaries. I think it's correct in two ways. The first is obvious: it's only ever humans who talk of superior and inferior, for the excellent reason that non-human species can't talk. The second takes some thinking about - but it seems pretty clear to me that there are those in packs that follow and those in packs that lead. Likewise there are some animals in any given pack that might have more power to get at food or mate, for instance, than others. But this still says nothing about 'superiority' and 'inferiority'.

metamorfosis -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 1:43:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 I never start threads, but someone wrote to me earlier and simply asked me if I was submissive because I believed in male superiority. It seems like many people who are into gender/racial superiority are just pretending for the sake of a humiliation fetish and not from any real belief. I don't know what to think about the ones who really believe it. I suspect that the aspirational traits they attribute to gender/race are really a question of personality. Being a submissive woman I desire to submit to a dominant man. That is because I'm straight, not because I think men are inherently superior. I also want someone who's a better person than me, but that's so I can look up to him and grow as a person, and has nothing to do with gender.

thursdays -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 1:49:01 PM)
[NM ]

ARIES83 -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 3:21:14 PM)
Peon, superiority or inferiority may be a human opinion or judgment, but the basic idea is evident in the animal kingdom. Reproductive, compeditive and environmental challenges will invariably reveal superiority and inferiority by genitic survival/success or lack thereof. JeffBC said it well... What's the context or measuring stick?

metamorfosis -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 4:29:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SlipSlidingAway It's not that I consider males superior, though. I just tend to prefer their company. With a guy, pretty much, what you see is what you get. They may be fakes or liars, especially online, but if not? There is not a lot of the petty stuff that I find when I am with other women. If a guy is angry, or disappointed, or whatever? He doesn't tend to play games about it. He may not open up, but you still tend to know where you stand with men. Not so much with the majority of women (at least the ones I know). It's just too much drama for me. I tend to tease poly guys about wanting more than one woman, simply because I think trying to keep up with just one woman could drive a man to drink. I agree. I find that men and women are different on average, and that it's possible to make accurate generalizations about men or women as a group. Those differences are why I choose to work in restaurant kitchens (with mostly men) rather than the front of the house (with mostly women). That said, it's not a question of superiority, but rather what temperament I happen to prefer.

PeonForHer -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 5:05:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ARIES83 Peon, superiority or inferiority may be a human opinion or judgment, but the basic idea is evident in the animal kingdom. Reproductive, compeditive and environmental challenges will invariably reveal superiority and inferiority by genitic survival/success or lack thereof. JeffBC said it well... What's the context or measuring stick? Exactly - what is the context or measuring stick? That's always a human opinion or judgement - so the idea isn't within the animal kingdom, it's within us.

sunshinemiss -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 5:08:32 PM)
Well, there are things men tend to do better than women generally. Three dimensional vision due to a little extra testosterone (or so it's thought), upper body strength from the way their muscles are made, more control of tears due to body chemistry. But then there are things women generally do better than men, too. We can multitask better because of more neural pathways through the corpus callosum, women tolerate pain much better than men (due to long term desensitization via menstruation), we have better immune systems because of that little extra umph from estrogen, and we live longer. Superior? No. Different? Yes.

JeffBC -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 5:20:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Exactly - what is the context or measuring stick? That's always a human opinion or judgement - so the idea isn't within the animal kingdom, it's within us. To the best of my knowledge this is incorrect. At least one species of animal I know of has a sense of "fairness" and those who violate it get socially ostracized. Clearly they also have some sort of judgement going on and they might well decide one of their peers is "inferior". Then, of course, there is always combat... you can make an argument for power being the measuring stick for pretty much everything alive much as we might wish otherwise. I think this idea of inferior/superior and having some measuring stick by which to exercise judgement is well demonstrated in the animal kingdom in a wide variety of ways.

PeonForHer -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 5:44:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Exactly - what is the context or measuring stick? That's always a human opinion or judgement - so the idea isn't within the animal kingdom, it's within us. To the best of my knowledge this is incorrect. At least one species of animal I know of has a sense of "fairness" and those who violate it get socially ostracized. Clearly they also have some sort of judgement going on and they might well decide one of their peers is "inferior". Then, of course, there is always combat... you can make an argument for power being the measuring stick for pretty much everything alive much as we might wish otherwise. I think this idea of inferior/superior and having some measuring stick by which to exercise judgement is well demonstrated in the animal kingdom in a wide variety of ways. I think you give it away by putting the word 'fairness' in quotation marks. It looks like a sense of fairness (in some but by no means all species, though, as you admit), but can we say that it actually is that? That was essentially the point David Attenborough was making, IIRC. You can certainly make a case for it all being about power in the natural world - of course - that seems so seductive a human concept. But what we tend to do, all too easily, I think, is project all sorts of ideas onto non-human nature, then 'read back' what we think we've seen there. This is why some of even the greatest thinkers have seen power and hierarchy, while others have seen cooperation. And then gone on to use what they've 'seen' to validate whatever arrangement in society they want to advance.

NuevaVida -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 6:26:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer You can certainly make a case for it all being about power in the natural world - of course - that seems so seductive a human concept. But what we tend to do, all too easily, I think, is project all sorts of ideas onto non-human nature, then 'read back' what we think we've seen there. This is why some of even the greatest thinkers have seen power and hierarchy, while others have seen cooperation. And then gone on to use what they've 'seen' to validate whatever arrangement in society they want to advance. Completely agree. Besides those conversations are talking about hierarchy and ranking, which is an entirely different subject than superiority. And anyway, superior according to whom? It's all opinion.

JeffBC -> RE: Male Superiority? (9/10/2013 6:58:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer I think you give it away by putting the word 'fairness' in quotation marks. It looks like a sense of fairness (in some but by no means all species, though, as you admit), but can we say that it actually is that? That was essentially the point David Attenborough was making, IIRC. Science is just recently coming around to the idea that humans are animals and this vast gulf that we've always perceived is nothing but hubris. I've always thought that. So I'm ill inclined to interpret things differently than they so obviously look. I see the facial expressions. I see the actions. I listen to the tones. It all seems pretty clear to me. You can always say, "but who can know the mind of an animal?" to which I say, "who can know the mind of another human?" quote: You can certainly make a case for it all being about power in the natural world - of course - that seems so seductive a human concept. Really? here's some examples from the world not human. If an asteroid hits the earth it wins. It has more power. There is no debate. there is no nothing. If a lion and an elephant get into it, the elephant wins... period. "Power" is not some made up human construct. Nor is it some sort of BDSM theory. It's a fact of life and it matters. In the end, when we got done with all the pious hand-wringing it may be all that matters. quote: But what we tend to do, all too easily, I think, is project all sorts of ideas onto non-human nature, then 'read back' what we think we've seen there. As I said above, I see that statement as nothing other than narcissistic swill.... "Oh, humans are the center of the universe" type stuff. No, we're not all that different from animals in an awful lot of ways and I choose Occam's razor rather than making up elaborate theories to explain away the obvious. Scientist gives food to one chimp but not the other and the one given food refuses to eat it along with various expressions of aggravation. Looks pretty simple to me. In the end, hierarchy is a part of cooperation not the antithesis of it. Power is undeniable.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875