RE: Men less evolved?

RE: Men less evolved? (Full Version)

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

Message

Sekhemet -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 10:37:34 AM)
NICE try - do yer research there's a REASON there's sperm banks and NOT egg banks. And it aint cause eggs freeze so well, and eggs are so cheap and easy to get OR simple to mess with; you get ONE egg a month, and you have to go IN after it, and you better HOPE you dont screw it up cause thats a VERY expensive error ... sperm cripee billions an hour - Yeah men ARE superior at WASTING reproductive energy, at rape, at agression and at destroying the enviornment. DONT SPOUT! DO - RESEARCH!!!!! LOL People being parrots cause its PC - suck. Reality is ... the world is not equal. You think it is then cool - get a sex change and come see Me in 20 yrs. Eggs - spoil. They don't keep ... chuckles Men and their wee wigglies are a dime a million, and fast refills. Literally ... And hey if you love cock that's cool ... We have dildos of MANY varieties. XxoxX ---------------------------------------------- EH LUCI - the flaming spammer post-a-holic who had a single digit post count 12 hours ago and is now heading to 50 posts - and so is proving is pointless to talk with beyond this: You whine men men men How long have Women been able to vote? How long have WOMEN even been being educated? How long has "equality been being attempted, and failing for? *WHY?* How long have WOMEN got to pick who they married, and actually say NO when not interested? How many men screw off on their kids and give them nothing but a family name with no meaning - since time began? How long has divorce at a FEMALE'S request been goin on, or legal for? Who came up with the idea of abortion ... OH WAIT THAT WAS A GUY WASNT IT?? men ... are predictable if nothing else. THAT is the ONLY good part of men, predictability - a boy will hapilly commit a rape AND a murder with nothing but a cock - HOW COOL! How many Women are rapists? Why do men get away with this DAILY but a Woman is hung on suspicion of it alone? Need court cases, or is reality setting in yet? If ya need some case examples try doing yer research more and spouting less. Why do men NOT understand the word NO - and why if We are equal do they pull what YOU are doing - If We are equal, why the song and dance and FEAR Luci ... We aren't equal. NOT even CLOSE. We use less, make it go farther, need less sleep, less food, and get less approval for having done it. We don't even get respect let alone demand it, and We are the glue that hold your joke of a patriarchal society together. Without US, you'd kill each other off LONG before you ever cloned a sheep, let alone a human. And for the record - you people REALLY need to read up more on cloning and the rest - Just because they cloned a sheep ONCE (who kinda made it, and had 400 mutant siblings who died in less than 3 weeks) and failed miserably 10 000 x - does NOT mean a human a) could be done - b) would be viable or c) is realistic. But I suppose My FEMALE cousin the GENETIC ENGINEER ... is totally LOST too, its only HER world - right Luci. laughs (side note the boy picks a girl's nick and takes fits on Women ... how sweet!) Heck they can't even clone a DOG let alone a HUMAN ... DO try to stay current and aware kids. In 1970 a Woman STILL had to have a husband's permission to change her hair style ... THIS is equal too???? WHEN did you ever have to have OUR permission to shave off a beard, or grow one for that matter? Give us what YOU got - for as LONG as you've had the reins, and then see where it stands ... right now you are pulling a HIGHLY infantile male auto-response to the fact - yer fried - You beat up the kitty so long the kitty got pissed off and is aot to come back at you - THIS is not equality this is WE have had enough of exactly what this thread has become. Gender power struggles, and its not going to get easier, unless this adressed and dealt with RATIONALLY this one will become a world wide issue. Deal with it cause yer attitude ain't helping yer cause, and if what I am saying was NOT true I'm betting you'd be laughin' not ranting. WOMEN RULE - And men are just too stupid to see it and too pig headed to admit it when they know it's true ... Peer pressure is amazing, and if you didn't scare so many of your own boys - they'd talk with and tell you too, but they arent about to speak up only to be attacked ... MEN after all; are NOT used to that treatment, they are used to being listened to with dignity and respect, not flown off at for being less than agreeable. Women ... rule. Patriarchy - is dead. Get married - women takes guys name this is ok - but if a MAN wants to take his WIFE's name ... its paperwork and fees and hassles beyond - is this fair and equal too???? SOME places won't even let the boys DO IT ... that fair and equal Women are FORCED and males just - can't, or have to pay through the nose TO??? Seems fairly lopsided to Me - I mean if its devil may care so long as the paper is there - then don't make it automatic on one side and hoops on the other and claim equality. Real people are smarter than their dogs ... Why do we name babies after MEN ... do you know this one?? lol do yer research cause it aint for lineage purposes - so figure it out, with yer big education and oh so clever boy brains. Babies should be named after MOMs lineage ... we KNOW the pussy it fell out of without question, who the dad is an everchanging debate - which dad? Genetic, financial, or emotional?? Seems boys just are not enough of a package to do all 3 for the childs lifetime - are they - HELL they cant even be civil enough for Women to remain MARRIED to them for 10 yrs anymore. So go ahead keep touting your pecker ... it hangs out of you and can be easilly removed for a reason ... GOD did that, and HE is a GUY in your patriarchal world ... and GOD knows you can live just fine without it ... really. WOMEN ... ROCK ... Go ahead, cut off My "balls" for speaking the obvious, your maturity ... is showing. XxoxX

subohioboy -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 11:30:01 AM)
NO TO BE CLASSIFIED AS THE SAME SPECIES THE MALES AND THE FEMALES HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PRODUCE VIABLE OFFSPRING, IF WOMEN WERE MORE EVOLVED THAN MALES, THAN WE WOULD NOT PRODUCE VIABLE OFFSPRING. VIABLE OFFSPRING MEANS THAT THEY CAN REPRODUCE. Seriously did you guys pay attention in school at all? Ever heard of X and Y chromosomes people? Eggs start out with 2 X chromosomes. However, male sperm determines what the sex is. Each sperm only carries one type of chromosome. Slightly more Y's, the chromosome which produces males, are produced. Once the Y chromosome hits the egg the baby is male. Men do not start out as women until male hormones are added. As to the women are more evolved question that is simply not the case. As a species we have to evolve at the same rate to produce viable offspring. If 2 beings can not create viable offspring than they are not of the same species (donkeys are different since they are artificially created). Some of these posts make me cringe since they are so misinformed. Perhaps school funding needs to be tripled so we don't get even more ignorant people in the future. It is my experience that professors make charged statements like this to facilitate (wait I forgot some of you won't be able to understand that word) discussion.

houseboy49 -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 11:33:32 AM)
I believe that women are better than men. Try this experiment. Watch couples. I think you will find that 9 out of 10 times the women are better behaved, better groomed, more adept at social situations, more responsible, etc.

subohioboy -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 11:36:29 AM)
By the way Sekhemet we could clone Homo sapiens (doubt most of the ignorant people on here know that means) however, all technologically advanced nation-states (that means the government over a certain grouping of people) have outlawed cloning humans. We have however cloned embryos up to a few weeks old. DO YOUR RESEARCH Sekhemet. Now that is also illegal. This actually plays into the whole stem cell research issue since people were trying to clone them for stem cells… you know creating life and killing it to help someone. However just to say I am pro most type of stem cell research just not that kind.

subohioboy -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 11:44:59 AM)
houseboy, I think your whole try at the scientific method fails miserably. What is your null hypothesis? What groups will you study? What type of inferential statistics will you use? How much homogeneity will your samples have? Will you cluster to get a more representative sample or just randomly select? How many places and where will you watch the couples? Which type of observation will you utilize? Come on people the point is well this is the way my friends and I are doesn't cut it. You associate with people who have like traits. Therefore the couples you watch will 1 be from the same area as you and 2 most likely be similar to yourself. Just because it is your experience does not mean you can infer that there is a statistically significant difference between how evolved male and females are. Here is one for you women have different hormones although they are present to a lesser degree in men and vice versa. Wow damn me and my science. I am not trying to be a jerk here. I just want you to actually make an argument based on sound scientific principles.

Red82 -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 11:45:03 AM)
Wow, this thread kinda disentegrated into one huge flaming thread didnt it? My posistion. I dont feel either or more evolved than the other. Both genders have evolved into their own roles. The idea of that genders are somehow evolutionary lesser, than the other, leaves the argument to expand to other things, such as race and so on. Submissive by nature, attracted to Dominant by nature...evolution does not play a hand in it for me.

Red82 -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 11:46:46 AM)
I really dont see the need for the gender bashing going on in here. Frankly if i was a Mod, i would just lock the thread down, considering it has drifted so far from the OP and now has just resulted in a pissing contest.

subohioboy -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 11:52:46 AM)
One last thing Sekhemet women often act in the same mannerisms as males. Margret Thatcher went to war over barely habitable islands in the waters of Argentina for "national pride" Do not misunderstand me yes Men in the past (and depending on where you live still do) have been "in charge." However, just because that’s the way it was before, does not mean that people (including the numerous women who fought against allowing women to vote) still think women are somehow less intelligent than men.

subohioboy -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 11:57:54 AM)
Point is evolution wise men and women are equally evolved. People are just using the post to spread misinformation about how men or woment are better than one another. We are equal. If not we would be different species from one another.

LaTigresse -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 12:09:37 PM)
Granted, I haven't any interest in the male of the species but if you are a young submissive male looking for a dominant woman................. I question your judgment and your attitude. I am gonna guess you are not scoring any points with any potential interested parties. Just me, I could be wrong......buuuuuuuuuuutttt...I doubt it.

stockingluvr54 -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 12:16:42 PM)
Wow! Gone for a couple of hours and this one sure heated up...lol Well boys....don't think we have to worry about Luci scooping up any of our ladies away in the near future....lmao! Sekhemet.....don't hold back! <grin>

Suzykeu -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 12:35:42 PM)
Both men and women have their positives and negatives. Biologicly we're the same species so evolution doesn't matter. Historicly though, most of the negative things happend under the leadership of men but they also got us through a lot of tough times a less agressive mentality wouldn't have. And while the few women leaders do quite admirably (compared on the percent of good rulers by gender) i think that might be because in a male-dominated society for a woman to become the ruler they naturally have to be the best. As more women gain power you'll start to see more bad women leaders. As for behavior, i don't know. Genetics causes suscptibility or predispotion to certian things like anger or agression, but it's also shown that environment matters a great deal as well and we don't know what the ratio is. i was taught from a young age that women were superior to men and it's a lot of work for me to remember that it's not necessarily so.

LadyEllen -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 1:16:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: barcodeBoi When I was at university I had a female lecturer that argued that men are simply less evolved than women. If you think it through it actually makes a lot of sense and has become one the founding principles of why I serve. Men are more aggressive, more driven by animal desires like lust, and physically less evolved (hairier etc). In short men are just not suitable in many ways for the modern age which is why I have come to believe that women should be dominate. The only reason it has traditionally been the other way around is because in many cases men have been physically stronger. This is simply wrong. Anyway, I was wondering if others share this thinking or if I am mislead? Shall we try to get this thread back on topic? (yes, I know, I had my fun with the less than Lucid Ian, too!) I think if one is going to measure the degree of evolution, then its vital to first establish what the environment is against which evolution should be achieved. In the case of our species as a whole, it would seem that for many environments we have, we are well evolved, and that where we have not evolved for a certain environment, our technical ability takes our species past the need for evolution. As others have indicated, it is not possible in terms of such evolution to discern between male and female of our species, as if one sex should miraculously have evolved and left the other behind, both sexes would die out, lacking partners with whom to reproduce. What the lecturer in the OP may have been indicating I feel, is that the social environment in which our species functions has changed, and that the change has favoured skills and abilities more often found in the female - indeed as these changes having been brought about by the emancipation of women and the feminist movement, this is hardly any surprise! It is not then, that women have evolved past men, but that the environment has changed to one to which women are generally better suited. The male meanwhile, may appear less evolved in such a socially altered environment, if for whatever reasons he remains in a mindset which reflects the former social environment, and which is therefore outmoded. What is most interesting though I find, is that whilst women in general often express a preference for men to evolve and adapt to the new social environment - become more sensitive and less "cave man" in short, women still seem to prefer their men to be men, and for them not to adapt too much! E

PenetratingGaze -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 1:45:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Suzykeu Historicly though, most of the negative things happend under the leadership of men but they also got us through a lot of tough times a less agressive mentality wouldn't have. And while the few women leaders do quite admirably (compared on the percent of good rulers by gender) i think that might be because in a male-dominated society for a woman to become the ruler they naturally have to be the best. As more women gain power you'll start to see more bad women leaders. Suzy, that reminds me of a joke I heard back in the 80s. Comedian: A woman should be president because no woman leader has ever gotten her country into war. (huge applause from women in the audience) Except for Margaret Thatcher...(general agreement) oh, and Golda Mier, Indira Gandi, Elizabeth the 1st, Queen Victoria, Boadicca, Helen of Troy, and every woman who has ever held any sort of power (laughter from men, glowering glares of unmitigated hatred from women.) Neither gender is more evolved in any way, just set up differently - Lady Ellen and others are quite right in pointing out that neither sex can advance biologically without bringing the other up also-or we become two distinct species and thus die out.

aidan -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 2:08:03 PM)
whew...Finally read through all six pages of this thread, bad grammar, spelling and syntax all. Lot of info to absorb and a lot to respond to. If so many females do believe that males are inferior, my question is why deal with us? There is a sizeable and open lesbian community in most of the western world, and the technology exists to allow two females to have a child either without sexual intercourse with a male, or even to cut the male out all together with some handy manipulating of bone marrow or a viable egg. Why lower your standards? Why not break off and go your own way? Speaking of such technologies, I've had this kind of discussion with a few female students and experts, and while yes, it's possible to cut out the male aspect of the species, I wonder if it's a wise decision. Obviously I have the bias of BEING male myself, and no creature in existence is keen for it's own extinction, but I do think there are some objective arguments to be made. Nature designed a bilateral system of reproduction for complex multi-cellular animals. That can't be a sheer coincidence. How long would it take for humans, producing entirely artificial, all-female specimens, to eventually degrade and corrupt the genetic code? Think of the effects that inbreeding can have on a bloodline. Further more, you're removing a large venue of companionship that seems to be coded into us on some deep level by removing half of the sex population (sex here meaning the scientific, biological definition). That can't be good for the species psychologically. Are there genetic differences between the sexes? Yes, of course. I don't think this makes us inferior or superior to each other in any meaningful capacity, from a general stand-point. What's significant is our psychology, that is to say how our environment interacts with our genetic dispositions, and a healthy does of will, how we choose to react. More important than what we are is what we choose to be. I had more I wanted to write, but alas, I've become a bit scrambled. Hopefully it'll come back to me. Always good to see a rousing intellectual debate! Kudos to all, even the few who've...ahem lost their cool a bit. The fire of passion and all, I understand. Happens to the best of us. ;-)

LadyEllen -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 2:11:41 PM)
Time for jokes? You know why it is that men are happy to live with women's lib, and to have women running the world these days? Well, men concluded that they really had made a mess of things over the last few millennia, and things needed sorting out. And who better they thought, to clean up after them, than women? E

MistressNoName -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 2:24:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: barcodeBoi When I was at university I had a female lecturer that argued that men are simply less evolved than women. If you think it through it actually makes a lot of sense and has become one the founding principles of why I serve. Men are more aggressive, more driven by animal desires like lust, and physically less evolved (hairier etc). In short men are just not suitable in many ways for the modern age which is why I have come to believe that women should be dominate. The only reason it has traditionally been the other way around is because in many cases men have been physically stronger. This is simply wrong. Anyway, I was wondering if others share this thinking or if I am mislead? Good for all of you who have the patience to get through all those pages. To OP: In case it has not been mentioned yet, I watched a documentary/program once that suggested that the brains of men and women have evolved somewhat differently and that was offered as a possible explanation for the difference in how men and women relate and view the world...ie: w/ women tending to be more expressive emotionally. It's not so much a chicken and egg debate as it is a neurological one...if I can recall the resource...which is unlikely since I saw this program many years ago, I will post it. I hesitate to talk about what the differences were b/c I just do not remember all of the terminology used. But it had to do with the particular wiring of brain synapses...and the connections between the left and right hemispheres. It was an interesting program. MNN

aidan -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 2:25:43 PM)
Ok, funny as those posts are (and they are! I am giggling), and as much as I do hate to be Buzz McKillington, that does remind me of my last point: Matriarchal tribal societies went to war, fought with each other. There are a lot of female professional fighters out there who are downright savage. Female execs who are just as ruthless and greedy as their male counterparts. Narcissim is prevelant among males and females. Power thirsts for more power, and will strive to get it, no matter who holds it. This is part of human nature. Violence, aggression, conflict, these are just part of our species, across the board. We clawed our way out of the forests and caves not because we were the strongest, or the fastest, or the largest, or had the sharper fangs and claws, perhaps not even because were smartest, but because we were the most cunning, the most ruthless - let's face it - the most bat-shit insane animals in the jungle, and we weren't going to stand for anything less than global dominion. Now that very thing which has brought us so high could be our undoing. But our other gift, our ability to look inward and to choose, can save us. We can never get rid of our madness, but we can harness it, redirect it, use it to our advantage. Squabbling over whether it's Mommy or Daddy's fault isn't going to help anything. A bit snarky at the end, but I'm hungry. Supper time here in North Carolina, I think.

SweetDommes -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 2:26:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subohioboy NO TO BE CLASSIFIED AS THE SAME SPECIES THE MALES AND THE FEMALES HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PRODUCE VIABLE OFFSPRING, IF WOMEN WERE MORE EVOLVED THAN MALES, THAN WE WOULD NOT PRODUCE VIABLE OFFSPRING. VIABLE OFFSPRING MEANS THAT THEY CAN REPRODUCE. Seriously did you guys pay attention in school at all? Ever heard of X and Y chromosomes people? Eggs start out with 2 X chromosomes. However, male sperm determines what the sex is. Each sperm only carries one type of chromosome. Slightly more Y's, the chromosome which produces males, are produced. Once the Y chromosome hits the egg the baby is male. Men do not start out as women until male hormones are added. As to the women are more evolved question that is simply not the case. As a species we have to evolve at the same rate to produce viable offspring. If 2 beings can not create viable offspring than they are not of the same species (donkeys are different since they are artificially created). Some of these posts make me cringe since they are so misinformed. Perhaps school funding needs to be tripled so we don't get even more ignorant people in the future. It is my experience that professors make charged statements like this to facilitate (wait I forgot some of you won't be able to understand that word) discussion. And how closely did you pay attention in school??? Eggs do NOT start out with two X chromosomes unless there was a problem when the eggs were dividing. Eggs have one - count it, *ONE* X chromosome, and whatever chromosome the father contributes typically determines the gender of the offspring. Oh, and I'm relatively certain that you meant mules, not donkeys ...

DianeB269 -> RE: Men less evolved? (4/30/2007 2:35:28 PM)
Holy Shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I went out for a few hours and I see that this thread isn't gonna die anytime soon. Diane

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125