battle of the sexists!

ElectricFetus

ElectricFetus

Sanity going, going, gone
Valued Senior Member
I was watching “Science of the Sexes” on discovery channel and was appalled by what I saw! Yes it is true that most stereotypes about man and women have biological biases, but the show unanimously described how these stereotypes are UNIVERSAL and any man or women that did not fit this things to a T is suffering from a hormonal or genetic disorder! This is simply not true! Most of us can say that we fit most of the behavioral characteristics of are sex but we all also have characteristic of the opposite sex! None of us fit the stereotypical man or women ideal that psuedo-science media programs like this would like you to believe. Not all men are inefficient, very focused, uncommunicative, non-empathetic, unemotional jerks and not all women are emotional, multitasking unfocused, empathetic, non-risk taking… ect, ect, ect. Like all media programs this takes scientific theories and studies, removes all the exceptions and inconclusiveness and proclaims everything facts to be followed by!

In conclusion I feel that a new form of sexism is growing; not like the previous one in which men were superior and women inferior, but a new form of gross generalization that all men and women fit into specific thought patterns that will determine the rest of there lives! This new sexism is almost as bad as the last one in that it still does not look at the ability of the individual but instead determines there worth (now just in categories and not in general) by looking at what is between there lags and what sex hormones pulse through their veins.

People are more then there sex hormones! There are 22 other chromosomes, thousand of other hormones in are bodies and we are all raised differently. We need to look at all people as individuals and not try to measure them off of generalizations of their sex, race and religion. Any attempt to do so is a step backward in my opinion.

By the way I have a little question for you all: why are there males and females? Why are we not all hermaphrodites?
 
Fetus:

I saw the program, too, and kind of laughed at exactly what you described. They showed a lot of anecdotal information that might be valid and presented it as hard cold fact. But, these channels do that all the time. I guess it makes for easier programming than explaining that there might be some statistical preference for a certain trait, and that not all people will behave acording to these "discoveries". It's a lot easier to say "Men are..." than "Some scientists believe that this data implies most men will have a stronger preferene for..."

Anyway, I think this kind of stuff has been around a long time. Personally, I prefer the NOVA programs on science-- they do a much better job of presenting scientific theories and data. Oops, did I just praise PBS? What was I thinking...?
 
John I will forgive you on that ;) by the way why do you think there are man and women and not just Pats (Its or hermaphrodites)?

And don't say what PumpK. said becasue there are much more evolved animals then worms that are hermaphroditic. For example there is that lesbian lizard what's its name...
 
Reagrding why there are 2 sexes as opposed to hermaphrodites, I'm really not sure-- haven't given it much thought nor do I recall reading about it.

It might just be an accident of evolution, but I'm guessing there is a survival advantage in most cases for 2 seperate sexes since that is the overwhelming norm, at least in "higher" plants and animals. Could it be that genetic diversity suffers somewhat with hermaphrodites since it increases the possibility of inbreeding, i.e., with yourself (kind of gives new meaning to the term "go f*ck yourself"). It's proably aslo more energy efficient to have just one set of sex organs. Just in that sense alone, you could ask why would there be any ADVANTAGE to being hermaphroditic?

I have seen theories, and you've probably seen them too, that males are heading toward extinction, or at leat the Y chromosome is. Seems it's been getting smaller and smaller as time goes by. I'd guess, though, that an equilibrium will be reached since sexual reproduction has been shown to be so much superior in the long run than the asexual kind.
 
why there are 'men' and 'woman'

my name is Laine and i know exactly why we are either men or woman God made men 'adam' and adam needed a compainion, so God made Eve, He also created her for a mate to reproduce so that we could fill the Earth. frankly if we were all the same we might have a little trouble reproducing!
And if you think we evolved into humans than your smokin sum :m:. If we evolved into humans than why aren't babies moneys when they are born!
 
Hi Laine,

And if you think we evolved into humans than your smokin sum . If we evolved into humans than why aren't babies moneys when they are born!
Click to expand...

To answer your question,

Our species evolved from primates, not monkeys (there is a huge difference). Our children are not monkeys because we are not monkeys. Our genes are very similar to monkeys and primates and older humans, but they do have distinct differences. Evolution turned us into what we are, our brains grew in size and complexity from using our fingers (among other factors). When we started to stand a few million years ago, I'm not sure as to the date, it may have been either three or six, but anyway, when we did, our fingers didn't have to hold up our weight anymore, and they grew more dexteric. Because of this our brains evolved to accomodate the extra functions required to maneuver the most powerful tools nature could give us.

When we became omnivores and ate meat as well as vegetables, our species multiplied rapidly and our brain size and intelligence grew once more.

Check out this page, it has as many human ancestors as we have found, and you can learn a little about each of them. There are pictures of the skulls. Note how they all look somewhat like ours, how the older ones look more like apes, and how the newer ones look more human.

Also note that other species of later humans, like Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalis, could not only speak but practice religion, love, and strategize. Why did god create at least three human races capable of these wonderful things when he only needed one?

He didn't. I can only concede that if god created anything, he created life. But if you look at the facts, Laine, and not the fables of an old book, the facts that men and women have labored upon for hundreds of years, then you will find that the bible is false. Your ancestors were once tree dwellers, before that they were rodents, and before that they were microscopic cells, just like everything else. As were mine. We don't give birth to any of them because we are human, and humans give birth to humans only. Have you seen a cat give birth to a dog?
 
I believe in Selfish Genetics... not mythical Deities!

According to Selfish Genetic theory hermaphrodites are not a stable breeding strategy in a competitive environments. Lets go back in time with are early pre-fishlike ancestors: back then we were all hermaphrodites, but unlike worms and simpler life forms it was very easy to find a mate. A mutation formed changing a hermaphrodite into a male; as a male this critter could have far more children because it only inseminated and did not waste time and energy making children. With survival of the fittest the result was that this male breed over-whelmed the population, so every one was male and there was almost nothing to breed with, but a few hermaphrodites were left: these hermaphrodites became female as a result of the lack of female-like mates and the huge selection of males to choose from. In the end both males and females equaled each other out: the males could have many more children but they had to compete and the females could only have a limited number of children but they had no competition.

In conclusion: in a competitive environment hermaphrodites are unstable and will easily evolve into male and female as a more stable state. This has been proven in computer simulations and since evolution is about achieving more stability this is the most compelling theory out there

By the way Laine: God created Adam and Eve right?, but God did not create Adam and Steve (homosexuals)? Yet God did create Adam, Eve and Pat! Yes 1 out every 2000 babies are born with both male and female genitalia! So if God never intended for there to be homosexuals then why does he make Intersex children???
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
By the way I have a little question for you all: why are there males and females? Why are we not all hermaphrodites?
Click to expand...
Sexual reproduction allows for more variation than asexual reproduction (Crossing over of the chromosomes). Thus, once established, it allows greater variations within the species.

So if all our sexist stereotypes are in fact 100% true, are we to believe that our racist ones are too? And all those jokes about the french/poles/blondes/irish/insert-fave-group-to-slander-here must be true too then.
 
I think all of the reasons mentioned that we are men and women instead of hermaphrodites are true. If we were hermaphrodites then we would reproduce with ourselves and our offspring would be genetically identical and we would not have variety except for mutants. If we did not reproduce with each other we wouldn't have the same people that we have today and the world would be so different.

I think males and females are totally equal. Some females are more emotional, but the same goes for men. Some men may be stronger, but some women are stronger also. We are all equal, no matter what sex we are. It's just plain stupid to think a person will be a certain way just because of their sex. I'm sort of what people would consider 'boyish.' I like to fight, I like Dragonball Z, I dress in jeans and T-shirts and don't care too much about being unstylish or messy. I know a boy and he is so nice, he cares about people, he likes ballroom dancing, he's a hopeless romantic, and he is interested in flower arrangements. And no, he's not a homosexual. Most people are nothing like stereotypical men or women.
I think someday people will get past those stupid stereotypes and focus on what life is really about, FUN!
 
It wourld be truely amazing if men and women were "equal". By that I mean, with no inborn differences. Of course we know that men are, on average, physically larger and stronger. If you look at our closest relatives, the great apes, they all exhibit considerable behavioral differences between the sexes. On the face of it, I'd say the burden of proof is on those who think there are no differences, since male/female behavioral differences are the norm among mammals.
 
Welcome SpearDracona

John,

Nope wrong! you forgot to say "on average..." and "the majority..." Not everyone fits a stereotype!
 
Fetus:

Man, you are brutal! I did write "on average" at the beginning. Do I have to put it in every sentence? Can you cut me a little slack on that one...?

Anyway, I think you get my point, on average.
 
Sorry did not see it there before :D

Yes there are usually differences in behavior between men and women, but the problem is when people claim all have these differences and if you don't fit the norm then your... what... GAY? Every on is not totally normal that is a fact.
 
Agreed. I'd really like it if, when scientists talk about things like gender differences in bahavior, they would quantify it by discussing the distribution-- how broad it is and how much of an overlap exists. Show me the 2 distribution curves. Maybe that's too much to expect from the Discovery Channel or even PBS, but sometimes the technical journals are just too much in depth for my interest.
 
That would be good to see
How much over lap is there?
Is there areas on one or both of the distribution which the other does not cover over? = If there is then that would me that there would be people of one sex that are better (or worse) at something that no member of the opposite sex shares.
 
Generally speaking:


The differences in men and women are very close on average. BUT, that is not enough of an explination because men are much more variable than women! At the very high end, men outnumber women as high as 14 to 1 (for the top 1% on certain IQ tests for example). But men outnumber women just as much at the low end. Men are predominately alone in some types of mental retardation and developmental disorders. This leads to findings of men outscoring women on some tests (such as SAT-M) because only the high skill group is being tested. The greater variation among men has very good evolutionary reasons (greater competition, ect)


There are certain areas where the distribution does not even overlap in most studies. For example, womens tactile (touch) sensation is much more sensitive than men. Studies have shown that the most sensitive man is still below the least sensitive women. Some spatial abilities are very large (in favour of men), although the distributions do have some overlap.

The point that those shows try to get across is that hormonal disorders can shift people into scores of the opposite sex. This is not sexist, just generally true.


Lets keep in mind here that people have been talking about perfect triangles for thousands of years. There is no perfect triangle in reality. Why aren't you complaining about that? It is an idealization- we accept that. Men are larger than women (20% larger). This is a statistical idealization- get over it!
 
I’m sorry but I worry about the side effects on society from such poor use of statistics
 
Originally posted by WellCookedFetus
I’m sorry but I worry about the side effects on society from such poor use of statistics
Click to expand...


I worry about the side effects on society from ignoring such statistics. As was pointed out in the popular book Brain Sex:


"The problem is that it is the apostles of sexual sameness who set the agenda; they would enact the laws and ban the sexist books in a vain attempt to divert children from their natural sexual identities. But the idea that we are all born with a clean slate of a mind, a tabula rasa ready for society to print its message upon, is a totalitarians dream. And if, after all, we are what we are because of our biology, is it not as monstrous and hopeless a task to eliminate our differences as it was to create a master race? There is a disturbing whiff of sexual fascism in the premises and presciptions of those who would advocate sexual neutrality." (pp. 128-129)
 
You can't band publications! All I’m saying is that people are different individual more so then they are racially or sexually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top