That about sums it up.
>>Of course, we all possess a certain amount of masculinity and femininity
>>within us. Yet it is plain (to me at least) that the amount of masculinity
>>in women is very small, and that they are almost entirely feminine. (I
>>grant there may be exceptions.) Men are also very feminine, but there is
>>enough masculinity inside them to make a significance difference to their
>>personalities and lives. The presence of this extra smidgeon of masculinity
>>is the primary reason why men are the ones who create, sustain and influence
>>civilization, create the new technologies and artistic masterpieces, and
>>continue to dominate and rule in most areas of society to this very day.
This person is saying:
yellow = blue.
The fool. This paragraph demonstrates choosing to define of "masculinity" and "femininity" in your own favor. Both are slippery words, which could be interpreted a number of ways. However, if you go with these definitions, you CANNOT say, "Women are feminine, and men are masculine". What rubbish.
In order for 'women are feminine, and men are masculine' to be true, that must mean, "women act like women, and men act like men", [just as turtles behave like turtles] but only an idiot would state the obvious like that.
>>Because of their relative lack of masculinity, women in general are at a
>>huge disadvantage when it comes to philosophy and spirituality. It is not
>>their not fault, it is the way Nature (i.e. evolution, genetics, upbringing,
>>etc) has made them. But if we truly want to help women achieve their full
>>potential and attain "cognitive excellence", then we have to *recognize*
>>their current plight and work out ways of changing the situation. It
>>doesn't do them, or us men, any good to deny the reality that is staring us
>>in the face and to pretend that women are the equal of men. Because
>>they're not.
Does anyone else remember this scene from the movie "Malcom X"? Young Malcom, who gets the best grades in his class, tells his teacher he wants to grow up to be an attorney. The teacher tells him this is impossible, and he cannot be a lawyer, and must choose another, more humble and suitable profession. Malcom asks, "Why? Why? Why?" The teacher then lauches into a condescending speech, such as.."Because you're black, Malcom. You're a smart little boy and we all like you, but that's the the way you are, and were made, and there is no denying it. Don't fight against it, that is your place. Only white folks can be lawyers. You're good with your hands. Why don't you be a carpenter? Everyone loves carpenters. Jesus was a carpenter, you know."
What a coinkydink. I always got straight A's in grade school and was considerably smarter ("at least to me") than the boys in my class, and yet I have been discrimnated against by teachers my entire life, being reproached for "asking too many questions".
Is it surprising that sometime this century, this type of thinking was completely 'acceptable' about blacks, and many 'negroes' were convinced this was true about themselves, and thus were complacent? It is no wonder that as the year 2000 approaches, this kind of thinking is *still* common, only for women. Men like this are trying to persuade us that as women, we are somehow less than human, and should give in and accept "Nature".
Well, the other day I went through pure Hell at work because the evil "Got Milk?" campaign chose to position itself directly across from my place of employment for a day, on the other side of the room. This caused much chaos and stupidity, and was not a source of amusement, but of great aggravation for me. Their gimmick was, "Have your picture taken with a milk moustache now and get a free t-shirt, and possibly be in an issue of Sports Illustrated!"
I could easily go off on a tangent about what the concept of *fame* does to people, and how ridiculous and sickening it is. I will spare you. I just don't understand why everyone else seems to have this basic need to validate themselves by being seen by as many other people as possible, and why the chance for Fame causes such a mob-like frenzy.
They were giving out free posters of some Superbowl star quaterback I couldn't care less about, and Uber-model, Tyra Banks. He was decked out in his football uniform and proudly carrying a helmet. She was wearing (or not wearing, rather) a tiny bikini, and the supposed wholesome pro-Milk ad looked more like a Playboy poster.
I was visibly upset, and remarked to my female co-worker the source of my distress. "They are using the celebrity of these two indiviuals to promote their product. People look up to them, and want to idolize and imitate them."
"So," she said, not understanding, "they use celebrities all the time in commercials. Their point is to make money, and they need famous people."
I said, "They are praising and glorifying the athletic skills of the famous football player, and using the naked flesh and attractiveness of Tyra to sell her body." {Meaning, they are equating both as 'talents', and implying that the only valuable resource women have is their sex, not mental or physical skill.]
And NO ONE in the whole damn place, of the zillion people that crowded there, seemed to notice this either. And I tried to explain clearly why I was offended, but no one understood, and made it seem like I was complaining and being a pessimist.
She replied, "So what?"
Screw you men, it honestly seems like I have a more difficult battle of fighting sexism from my own gender. ;-(((
>>I realize that lists of this kind are supposed to refute the claim that
>>there have been no women geniuses in history, but, funnily enough, it
>>actually does the opposite. It reaffirms the view that the most
>>extraordinary of women are still vastly inferior to the most extraordinary
>>of men. The truly great scientific figures of history, for example -
>>Copernicus, Newton, Darwin, Einstein, etc - were great because they achieved
>>a major conceptual breakthrough which revolutionized the way humanity viewed
>>the world. Their greatness stems from the fact that their achievements were
>>essentially abstract, philosophical and over-reaching in nature. In
>>comparison, things like the discovery of radium and endorphins pale into
>>insignificance.
Do you know where the 'rule of thumb' comes from? Well, not all that long ago, several decades ago, when it was still 'legal' on paper to batter your wife, some place in the U.S. had a law stating that it was perfectly legal to beat a woman, but only if the stick you use is the width of your thumb, or less. Let's say you were a typical female in pre-recent times. Most likely, if you weren't being beaten and 'put in place' daily by your husband, then you were being sold off, or abducted and raped during civil strife or just for the hell of it, or else you were usually pregnant and raising children, while doing _all_ the housework and cooking 'duties' because you weren't _allowed_ to have schooling (much less the ability to read and write) or a career.
Why don't you try carrying out lab experiments and finding a cure for cancer while all that abuse is going on, Beakman? If you gave a completely uneducated, illiterate, and isolated individual man a piece of chalk, do you think they would instantly discover the Theory of Relativity? Miracles like that don't happen, but obviously, -somehow-, one primitive monkey did manage to use a computer and get on the Internet.
Love,
'Controversial Negro'
ps: Why is it that Sexism is singled out as a topic for memetic discussion, yet when there is sexism by the members of the list itself, no one notices it?
Halber Mensch!