Women are from Earth Men are from Eternity

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by Marce

I'm sorry kamalkat
But show me your facts?
What you wrote in your first post and subsequent posts seems a lot like opinion to me and stereotyping

Not all men can "see the universe" and not all women are "content" with shopping.
I mean honestly, what a huge generalization
You come across as incredibly close minded

I can't believe this was posted in the spirituality, consciousness and awarenss section

there is no truth, only subjective interpretations of the world
aren't we all one? why does this distinction between male and female have to be made?

It is hard to say what is stereotype.These days it is stereotype to say that there are no differences in sexes when there are.It is politically correct to say as welll.
YOu read some of the reeports.
report from BBC
quote last para)
Men also have another reason for feeling upbeat about their genetic lot. New Scientist reports that although men are more likely to be mentally retarded, they are also more likely to be geniuses.

Although the average IQ of men and women is equal, men are more frequently found at both extremes of intelligence.

This is because, if you have very good intelligence genes on your X chromosome, it pays not to have them muffled by more average genes on another X chromosome
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Female chromosome has X factor


Then read european union report please see page 15 which clearly establishes the problkem we have as women start more than men in degree courses but are reduced to mere 10% at highest level.

http://ec.europa.eu/research/science...t_final_en.pdf

This is a long thread but you will be surprised to see what we have been debating about in this thread, as to things like motherhood is it a creative function of woman or a mere body fuinction like going to toilet.I suggest you read the thread as much as you can and you will see lot of facts are contested here.

[benJAMMIN]

Originally Posted by zeitgeist

Remember that Eckhart Tolle predicted that women will beat us men in the unfolding spiritual quest. Men are the drive and the intellect, women are the heart and the cosmic dance; join both forces and you will conquer the universe.

Zeitgeist

'Manly' and 'Feminine' things are not just limited to the respective genders. For example, dancing and showing emotions was and still is considered a feminine thing. It's about combining your masculine and feminine traits, becoming a whole person (and not struggling with yourself) that makes you a true power.

Everything ties to opposties. Ying and Yang, Light and Dark, Sun and Moon, Male and Female, Masculine and Feminine. Neither is more important, and both are compulsory, together they make a powerful force.

The problem is that I personally see the genders trying to fight eachother as if it's a war. It's NOT. Yes, some men are hurtful to women, as are women to men, but doesn't mean we should attack whole genders (radical feminists, for example.)

If we worked together, our world would be so much better.

[Indiana]

Kamal, here is another link pertaining to why female genius has not had the prominence of male genius; because throughout history brilliant women have not only been suppressed, and had their ideas credited to men, but even been killed for daring to shine.

Khaled Diab: Gail Trimble is not the first intelligent woman to face prejudice | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by benJAMMIN

'Manly' and 'Feminine' things are not just limited to the respective genders. For example, dancing and showing emotions was and still is considered a feminine thing. It's about combining your masculine and feminine traits, becoming a whole person (and not struggling with yourself) that makes you a true power.

Everything ties to opposties. Ying and Yang, Light and Dark, Sun and Moon, Male and Female, Masculine and Feminine. Neither is more important, and both are compulsory, together they make a powerful force.

The problem is that I personally see the genders trying to fight eachother as if it's a war. It's NOT. Yes, some men are hurtful to women, as are women to men, but doesn't mean we should attack whole genders (radical feminists, for example.)

If we worked together, our world would be so much better.

I agree with you whatever you said.Isn't it pretty simple that we have difference every cell is having a difference of Y chromosome.So what is the big deal.
If men have isolated X chromosome so it is a fact we can not change it. Ifr women have protection of double X chromosome which protects them from many dieases including mental retardation then what is the big deal that we also have some men of rare genious and mental retardation due to thius isolated chormosome.
When it is above 135 IQ men out number women by big difference same is the case when we reach at highest level of education proffessor women are less these are facts.
Why not accept these facts and move on.

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Kamal, here is another link pertaining to why female genius has not had the prominence of male genius; because throughout history brilliant women have not only been suppressed, and had their ideas credited to men, but even been killed for daring to shine.

Khaled Diab: Gail Trimble is not the first intelligent woman to face prejudice | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

It is interesting read but same story.I am refering to the 2003 report of European Union.The countries are well advanced and developed we are not looking at isolated instances here but generalized trends.Which speak for themselves.
I think if it was middle east or some third world countries we could say the woman are suppressed there but to say so in 21st centuray does not make much sense.
We need to do is accept the facts and then make sense of these. There are many intellegent woman who have acheived remarkable things, but have the nature endowed them with that world chnaging genious is the question.WE also need to see why the trends are the way they are.
May be there is merit in acccepting the trends and looking life that way. May be woman in general have that materialist desire which is keeping the world Economy go if it was for men we would have no real fashion and we would be only inventing new flavours of beer.
I think huge credit needs to be given to women for driving our economy they are not only the life force but driving force which pushes men to acheive even more and more.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

It is interesting read but same story.I am refering to the 2003 report of European Union.The countries are well advanced and developed we are not looking at isolated instances here but generalized trends.Which speak for themselves.
I think if it was middle east or some third world countries we could say the woman are suppressed there but to say so in 21st centuray does not make much sense.
We need to do is accept the facts and then make sense of these. There are many intellegent woman who have acheived remarkable things, but have the nature endowed them with that world chnaging genious is the question.WE also need to see why the trends are the way they are.
May be there is merit in acccepting the trends and looking life that way. May be woman in general have that materialist desire which is keeping the world Economy go if it was for men we would have no real fashion and we would be only inventing new flavours of beer.
I think huge credit needs to be given to women for driving our economy they are not only the life force but driving force which pushes men to acheive even more and more.

That's a rather long report and I don't have time to read it all now, but it seems to be about exploring the various reasons (of which there are many) influencing gender imbalance in the science/tech sector in certain countries/companies.

1. Given that the report acknowledges that there are quite a few reasons women are not fairly represented in the sector (including that women are still generally primary caregivers - a role you insist should be in their nature to take on), is it really surprising that there is still an imbalance?

2. Feminism started to become mainstream in the 1970s. You really think that several thousand years of gender discrimination is just going to be overcome in a generation?

3. You say 'we are not looking at isolated incidences but generalised trends' but the report itself acknowledges that the trends in the particular countries it has looked at are NOT generalised throughout Europe to the same degree at all, and that national culture has a huge impact on the results. Does this not make your claim incongruent?

4. How does gender imbalance in the science and tech sector relate to women's 'ability to see eternity'?

[inri]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

[COLOR="Navy"][B]I dont need a lecture from anyone as to how to present a logical point of view.

I really don't think I'm the only one here having difficulty following your 'logic.'

When facts speak for themselves you dont need logic.

If something is 'a fact' it will be supported by logic. If it cannot be supported by logical argument, then it remains an 'opinion'.... Do you really not understand this??

Like you want to ignore the facts presented by European Union report involving many multinational companies and countries with a stale report of 70's by one single individual and you think that is logical thing to do.

I completely acknowledged that this report does indicate that in some countries, a disparity exists in terms of gender representation within certain areas and positions of science and technology. The report however does NOT provide any concrete REASON for this....the very purpose of this report is to assess this divergence between men and women for the reason of remedying this situation.

The report also states that this divergence between genders in these occupations does not occur in all countries, which (the report says) seems to indicate that this phenomena is affected by culture.

I do find it kind of funny (in light of your stance in this debate) that you don't even seem to fully understand the thrust of the report you've provided to prove your point. This report was not written with the intent to 'prove' that men are more capable than women in these areas, it was written for the purpose of changing the disparity in gender numbers....a very different stance from the one you are taking.

You seem intent upon taking these facts from this report and forming your own conclusions as to WHY they occur and then calling these conclusions of yours 'facts'....when really they are nothing more than your opinion.

You think we should not look at nature for guidance as to what we are originally designed to do.

No I do not. I believe we should look within our psyche for guidance as to what we should do throughout the course of our physical life. The belief that our biological nature defines our purpose and path in life is an opinion....a value judgment....not a fact.

The idea that a woman 'should' bear children simply because her body is capable of doing so, is merely a belief. There is simply no way to prove this to be factual or true...it is a personal value judgment.

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by inri

I really don't think I'm the only one here having difficulty following your 'logic.'




If something is 'a fact' it will be supported by logic. If it cannot be supported by logical argument, then it remains an 'opinion'.... Do you really not understand this??




I completely acknowledged that this report does indicate that in some countries, a disparity exists in terms of gender representation within certain areas and positions of science and technology. The report however does NOT provide any concrete REASON for this....the very purpose of this report is to assess this divergence between men and women for the reason of remedying this situation.

The report also states that this divergence between genders in these occupations does not occur in all countries, which (the report says) seems to indicate that this phenomena is affected by culture.

I do find it kind of funny (in light of your stance in this debate) that you don't even seem to fully understand the thrust of the report you've provided to prove your point. This report was not written with the intent to 'prove' that men are more capable than women in these areas, it was written for the purpose of changing the disparity in gender numbers....a very different stance from the one you are taking.

You seem intent upon taking these facts from this report and forming your own conclusions as to WHY they occur and then calling these conclusions of yours 'facts'....when really they are nothing more than your opinion.



No I do not. I believe we should look within our psyche for guidance as to what we should do throughout the course of our physical life. The belief that our biological nature defines our purpose and path in life is an opinion....a value judgment....not a fact.

The idea that a woman 'should' bear children simply because her body is capable of doing so, is merely a belief. There is simply no way to prove this to be factual or true...it is a personal value judgment.

So you think we need logic to supports facts.Why facts become facts in the first place??? It is because they have already passed the test of all logic if it was required.
You remind me of what sigmund freud (father of modern psychology) said about woman.
He said "One question that has never been answered and as yet I have been unable to answer despite my search for more than 30 years in the faminine souls is What does a woman want?"
No one is advocating what woman should or should not do.I am for all freedom, but you can not turn your face away from facts.
A woman may choose not to be mother that is fine but same woman can not deny the fact that nature has designed woman to be mother and she is making a choice against nature.What is wrong with that? YOu do what you like but can not run away from facts and truth.

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by Indiana

That's a rather long report and I don't have time to read it all now, but it seems to be about exploring the various reasons (of which there are many) influencing gender imbalance in the science/tech sector in certain countries/companies.

1. Given that the report acknowledges that there are quite a few reasons women are not fairly represented in the sector (including that women are still generally primary caregivers - a role you insist should be in their nature to take on), is it really surprising that there is still an imbalance?

I dont insist that the role is in their nature to take on. I simply want an acceptance of what nature has designed for woman because once we accept facts as they are ,then we can go to the next question.Modern woman can not and should never ever be confined to the role of caregiver alone.She should be able to take on any challenging roles as possibly she can.

2. Feminism started to become mainstream in the 1970s. You really think that several thousand years of gender discrimination is just going to be overcome in a generation?

It is a valid point but changes has been coming for over a century.I agree it will take time for us to fully access the role of gender independent of environment. But in the meantime we have got some scientific facts Like isolated X chromosome in male compared to pair in women which is reponsible for both mental retardation and geniuses in men.Also Y chromosome has evolved 30 times then rest of human genome .It may also bring some new scientific facts.

3. You say 'we are not looking at isolated incidences but generalised trends' but the report itself acknowledges that the trends in the particular countries it has looked at are NOT generalised throughout Europe to the same degree at all, and that national culture has a huge impact on the results. Does this not make your claim incongruent?

It does to a degree and that is why it gives us the direction which rest of the countries should take, but even in those countries still there are significant differences.When I say generalised trend I meant in the given data e.g 53% woman and 47% started at the courses but at the top end it was only 10% woman and 90 % men in the given sample of data.[QUOTE]
4. How does gender imbalance in the science and tech sector relate to women's 'ability to see eternity'?[/QUOTE]
Very Good question.I will make an attempt to convey myself.I belive that science and Tech sector is not for every one.In general these are more difficult than other subjects because of requirement of sort of understanding it requires.It applies to both men and women.
But further a degree of madness and perfection to come out with something new which changes the perspective for rest of us.That Genius is rare.Similarly if a spirit when travels the distance that it encompasses all here and in cosmos and still hold the balance of mind and can see some eternal scheme in everything around us.It is not just accident we are here , we are for a purpose.Then that spirit has to go through a similar madness and see the perfection.It also has to be scientific else it would have fallen apart.
I think woman can achieve almost anything but they are not given this mad like quest to look for answers which some men have done in the history.Less interest in general in science and Technology is indicative of bent of mind and also social conditioning but we will have to wait when some woman will come with some rare life changing contribution.
I think men have in there design something which takes them outwards (but 99.999% men are in deep sleep) woman have different psychology.
[/QUOTE]

[inri]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

[COLOR="Navy"][B]So you think we need logic to supports facts.Why facts become facts in the first place??? It is because they have already passed the test of all logic if it was required.

A basic 'scientific fact' is one that is objective and verifiable through observation. And yes....Kamal....LOGIC is involved in making verifications through objective observation and thus determining something to be factual. Logic as defined: method of human thought that involves thinking in a lineaer, step-by-step manner..."

You remind me of what sigmund freud (father of modern psychology) said about woman.
He said "One question that has never been answered and as yet I have been unable to answer despite my search for more than 30 years in the faminine souls is What does a woman want?"

Well, for one, Most women I know want to be addressed and acknowledged as a unique individual NOT merely as a group member and stereotype of a particular gender.

A woman may choose not to be mother that is fine but same woman can not deny the fact that nature has designed woman to be mother and she is making a choice against nature.What is wrong with that?

I don't see it as 'going against' nature. She is merely utilizing other aspects of her nature (those involving intellect and thinking ability) to CHOOSE a course of action or inaction. I believe that a woman who negated her inner urgings would be going against a higher level of her nature.

If there is no negative consequence to making such a choice 'against nature' then whether or not a woman is going against nature when she chooses not to bear children, really becomes a mute point. On the other hand, a woman who chooses to ignore her inner urgings and intellect and bears a child despite her lack of desire to do so, WILL undoubtedly suffer certain consequences.

When you focus SOLELY upon a woman's physical ability to bear children, you deny all of the other aspects of her 'nature.' Did nature not also design all men and women with an ability to think and process information? Seems to me that above and beyond our physical/genetic predispositions EACH one of us is designed as an individual. As such, each one of us has a design that is unique to his/her own person. This is why we all have different personalities, different likes and dislikes, differing goals and passions in terms of that which we choose to pursue.



Why is it that you want to hold physical/genetic predisposition above all else? compared to our varied attributes and abilities. biological 'nature' pales in comparison.

When we give too much credence to our physical nature, we deny the aspects of self that differentiate us from animals of lower cognitive ability.

YOu do what you like but can not run away from facts and truth.

It is you Kamal who continues to run away from facts and truth. Facts such as the lists of women that have been provided to attest to prove that women have made substantial accomplishments historically...the FACT that women have been repressed and oppressed historically and that this undoubtedly will have an effect....the FACT that it is a woman who is on record for having the highest IQ....the FACT that joelr introduced regarding the Mary Everest Boole, who appears to have the highest ability to perceive higher dimenensions;

QUOTE joelr "The greatest known ability to perceive higher dimensional space (4-D, 5-D) was a woman named Mary Everest Boole who had no formal training. When her models were analyzed by trained mathematicians and proved correct under mathematical analysis her knowledge was able to further us along in the field of higher dimension geometry.
That means a woman was the 1 person to be able to visualize something much much closer to eternity and profoundly more complex than how other humans can visualize."

You continue to ignore these facts that are brought up in favor of your biased personal opinions.

Kind of ironic doncha think that a guy comes onto this forum to put forth his assertion that men in general are more capable of eternal thought and quest than women and every single woman who has argued against him has been able to run circles around him in terms of ability to utilize logic?

As I've said before Kamal...each time you post, you add more evidence in refutation of your own argument.

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by inri

A basic 'scientific fact' is one that is objective and verifiable through observation. And yes....Kamal....LOGIC is involved in making verifications through objective observation and thus determining something to be factual. Logic as defined: method of human thought that involves thinking in a lineaer, step-by-step manner..."

Well, for one, Most women I know want to be addressed and acknowledged as a unique individual NOT merely as a group member and stereotype of a particular gender.
I don't see it as 'going against' nature. She is merely utilizing other aspects of her nature (those involving intellect and thinking ability) to CHOOSE a course of action or inaction. I believe that a woman who negated her inner urgings would be going against a higher level of her nature.

BUt every month uterus cries for something that is NOT going against the nature.See YOur logic?? what you are saying all harmonal changes in body prepaqring uterus for fertilisation and that is not NATURAL. For the sake of some laughable higher level of nature.

If there is no negative consequence to making such a choice 'against nature' then whether or not a woman is going against nature when she chooses not to bear children, really becomes a mute point. On the other hand, a woman who chooses to ignore her inner urgings and intellect and bears a child despite her lack of desire to do so, WILL undoubtedly suffer certain consequences.

When you focus SOLELY upon a woman's physical ability to bear children, you deny all of the other aspects of her 'nature.' Did nature not also design all men and women with an ability to think and process information? Seems to me that above and beyond our physical/genetic predispositions EACH one of us is designed as an individual. As such, each one of us has a design that is unique to his/her own person. This is why we all have different personalities, different likes and dislikes, differing goals and passions in terms of that which we choose to pursue.

Your problem is that you are not ready to accept that nature has designed woman to be mother. I dont think this fact need any proof more than what everyone already knows. I have already said to you umpteen number of times I am for all freedom.Everyone including woman should be free to do what they like BUT YOU CAN NOT IGNORE NATURAL FACTS.

Why is it that you want to hold physical/genetic predisposition above all else? compared to our varied attributes and abilities. biological 'nature' pales in comparison.

When we give too much credence to our physical nature, we deny the aspects of self that differentiate us from animals of lower cognitive ability.



It is you Kamal who continues to run away from facts and truth. Facts such as the lists of women that have been provided to attest to prove that women have made substantial accomplishments historically...the FACT that women have been repressed and oppressed historically and that this undoubtedly will have an effect....the FACT that it is a woman who is on record for having the highest IQ....the FACT that joelr introduced regarding the Mary Everest Boole, who appears to have the highest ability to perceive higher dimenensions;

QUOTE joelr "The greatest known ability to perceive higher dimensional space (4-D, 5-D) was a woman named Mary Everest Boole who had no formal training. When her models were analyzed by trained mathematicians and proved correct under mathematical analysis her knowledge was able to further us along in the field of higher dimension geometry.
That means a woman was the 1 person to be able to visualize something much much closer to eternity and profoundly more complex than how other humans can visualize."

You continue to ignore these facts that are brought up in favor of your biased personal opinions.

Kind of ironic doncha think that a guy comes onto this forum to put forth his assertion that men in general are more capable of eternal thought and quest than women and every single woman who has argued against him has been able to run circles around him in terms of ability to utilize logic?

As I've said before Kamal...each time you post, you add more evidence in refutation of your own argument.[/QUOTE]
Your deterioration in logic, language ,use of cliche all are suggesting one thing that you have lost the logic, and can not contest facts which are presented to you.
You rely on some isolated instances to prove your points you completely ignore facts which are affecting masses.You ignore scientific facts and scientific studies done by reputed organisations (like European Union) you come up with example of one female did this and that at some place and conclude woman are genius or capable of reaching same level of thought when facts suggest otherwise.
YOur logics are childish and you merely use high sounding language to impress upon your points where there is no substance.
All time I have spent in convincing you on some basic fundamental facts could be utilized better you still ask
"Why is it that you want to hold physical/genetic predisposition above all else? compared to our varied attributes and abilities. biological 'nature' pales in comparison."
That shows your mental make up ,what is in your mind or others mind is all making of mind or our own creation BUT I know physical/genetic predisposition is surely real.Try to think without language, can you?? You can not? This all language is man made in say last 10 thousand years.But your ancestors were there, and they created more beings like you and me so that you and me are here today chating in this forum.
There are few things that are REAL and other just making of mind, you need to learn that basic difference.When you will understand that difference you will not contest why importance is to be given to fundamental things given to us as part of design by nature.
No amount of mental evolvement (or so called evolvement) to some elusive higher level can substitutute for the factual genetic composition which we have been gifted by nature.Therefore you may continue to claim some higher level of consciousness but the fact is woman has been designed by nature for THE basic purpose of nature which is propagation of generation.
It is not restricted to humans it encompasses all species and plants and trees and every living thing.This is the fundamental law of nature PROPAGATION OF GENERATIONS.

[inri]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

BUt every month uterus cries for something that is NOT going against the nature.

Cries?!! A woman's uterus 'cries'? Wow...talk about emotionalizing a subject!...lol....and supposedly women are the emotional ones...?

See YOur logic?? what you are saying all harmonal changes in body prepaqring uterus for fertilisation and that is not NATURAL. For the sake of some laughable higher level of nature.

I've not said that the ability to become pregnant is not PART of a woman's biological nature. The problem here is that you want to make it the ONLY aspect of importance in terms of a woman's nature. A woman is so much more than a uterus...and yes, I DO consider a woman's ability to think and choose to be above the abilities of her physical body in terms of where the weight of consideration should be given when making life choices.

[COLOR="Navy"][B] Your problem is that you are not ready to accept that nature has designed woman to be mother.

I accept that nature has designed this as a possibility...however, nature has also designed women to have a brain, to think, to feel and to have specific, personal leanings towards certain interests....not all of which pertain to child bearing or rearing. In short, nature has designed women with the ability to CHOOSE whether or not they will become a mother....scientific progress (some of it made by women) has supported this choice (through birth control methods) and it is a choice that has quite literally given women the freedom to become anything that they choose to become.

I dont think this fact need any proof more than what everyone already knows. I have already said to you umpteen number of times I am for all freedom.Everyone including woman should be free to do what they like BUT YOU CAN NOT IGNORE NATURAL FACTS.

You say all women should be free to act in any way they please, but you continue to allude to a specific 'truth' that all should live by. My question is: IF all accepted your version of this truth, what would the benefit be? Why are you so intent upon having others acknowledge and agree with Kamal's version of 'truth' on this issue?

[COLOR="Navy"][B]Your deterioration in logic, language ,use of cliche all are suggesting one thing that you have lost the logic, and can not contest facts which are presented to you.

ON the contrary Kamal...your 'facts' are pretty easy to contest. Could you provide and example of where exactly I've deteriorated in my language or my use of cliche?

You rely on some isolated instances to prove your points you completely ignore facts which are affecting masses.

LOL...so when someone provides evidence to you you brush it aside as an 'isolated instance'....Sorry Kamal...but when you started this discussion, you made a very wide sweeping generalization.....even an isolated instance therefore dis-proves your assertion that "No woman will ever reach the level created by a man"....you did say this....didn't you?

The fact is Kamal...these women are NOT isolated incidences.......the only thing that is diminished in terms of numbers is the incidence of historical reporting of their accomplishments.

You ignore scientific facts and scientific studies done by reputed organisations (like European Union)

I've not ignored this study. I've referenced it many times here. This study gives evidence that men and women are not evenly represented with certain sectors of science and technology. The study though, does not give a reason for this, although it does clearly state that his phenomena does not occur in all countries or all cultures, suggesting that such a thing affected by a a man/woman's culture.

you come up with example of one female did this and that at some place and conclude woman are genius or capable of reaching same level of thought when facts suggest otherwise.

I've come up with more than one female that has achieved profound accomplishments that have positively affected humanity. Clearly then..."some" women ARE capable of being genuises and/or reaching the same level of thought as men....can't you see this The truth is though, that the way you framed your argument, all anyone really has to do it come up with ONE woman who proves that a woman IS capable of this type of expanded thinking and your premise has been proven wrong.

Here's a tip: next time you're intent on starting a debate, Don't make your premise one of absolutes....very, very difficult to prove. When you say ALL men and ALL women....you've defeated yourself from the very start.

All time I have spent in convincing you on some basic fundamental facts could be utilized better

Are you not in control of your own actions...Surely you are not trying to blame me for the fact that you choose to continue to spend time here debating?...now THAT would be 'childish'.

Therefore you may continue to claim some higher level of consciousness but the fact is woman has been designed by nature for THE basic purpose of nature which is propagation of generation.

Why then does a woman have a mind, personality, ability for higher thought processes? Are the aspects of mind not also part of a human's 'nature'?

Is it not our ability as humans to think and reason that sets us apart from other animals? Do you deny that this ability is ALSO part of our nature? Why should a person's physical ability/nature be upheld in importance over their mental/intellectual ability/nature?

It is not restricted to humans it encompasses all species and plants and trees and every living thing.This is the fundamental law of nature PROPAGATION OF GENERATIONS.

yeah, sure...except human women are capable of thinking and reasoning...we are much more than biological recepticals to house fetuses....we have personalities, passions, interests....that many times are not in alignment with our body's capabilities to bear children.

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by inri

Cries?!! A woman's uterus 'cries'? Wow...talk about emotionalizing a subject!...lol....and supposedly women are the emotional ones...?



I've not said that the ability to become pregnant is not PART of a woman's biological nature. The problem here is that you want to make it the ONLY aspect of importance in terms of a woman's nature. A woman is so much more than a uterus...and yes, I DO consider a woman's ability to think and choose to be above the abilities of her physical body in terms of where the weight of consideration should be given when making life choices.



I accept that nature has designed this as a possibility...however, nature has also designed women to have a brain, to think, to feel and to have specific, personal leanings towards certain interests....not all of which pertain to child bearing or rearing. In short, nature has designed women with the ability to CHOOSE whether or not they will become a mother....scientific progress (some of it made by women) has supported this choice (through birth control methods) and it is a choice that has quite literally given women the freedom to become anything that they choose to become.



You say all women should be free to act in any way they please, but you continue to allude to a specific 'truth' that all should live by. My question is: IF all accepted your version of this truth, what would the benefit be? Why are you so intent upon having others acknowledge and agree with Kamal's version of 'truth' on this issue?





ON the contrary Kamal...your 'facts' are pretty easy to contest. Could you provide and example of where exactly I've deteriorated in my language or my use of cliche?



LOL...so when someone provides evidence to you you brush it aside as an 'isolated instance'....Sorry Kamal...but when you started this discussion, you made a very wide sweeping generalization.....even an isolated instance therefore dis-proves your assertion that "No woman will ever reach the level created by a man"....you did say this....didn't you?

The fact is Kamal...these women are NOT isolated incidences.......the only thing that is diminished in terms of numbers is the incidence of historical reporting of their accomplishments.




I've not ignored this study. I've referenced it many times here. This study gives evidence that men and women are not evenly represented with certain sectors of science and technology. The study though, does not give a reason for this, although it does clearly state that his phenomena does not occur in all countries or all cultures, suggesting that such a thing affected by a a man/woman's culture.



I've come up with more than one female that has achieved profound accomplishments that have positively affected humanity. Clearly then..."some" women ARE capable of being genuises and/or reaching the same level of thought as men....can't you see this The truth is though, that the way you framed your argument, all anyone really has to do it come up with ONE woman who proves that a woman IS capable of this type of expanded thinking and your premise has been proven wrong.

Here's a tip: next time you're intent on starting a debate, Don't make your premise one of absolutes....very, very difficult to prove. When you say ALL men and ALL women....you've defeated yourself from the very start.



Are you not in control of your own actions...Surely you are not trying to blame me for the fact that you choose to continue to spend time here debating?...now THAT would be 'childish'.




Why then does a woman have a mind, personality, ability for higher thought processes? Are the aspects of mind not also part of a human's 'nature'?

Is it not our ability as humans to think and reason that sets us apart from other animals? Do you deny that this ability is ALSO part of our nature? Why should a person's physical ability/nature be upheld in importance over their mental/intellectual ability/nature?



yeah, sure...except human women are capable of thinking and reasoning...we are much more than biological recepticals to house fetuses....we have personalities, passions, interests....that many times are not in alignment with our body's capabilities to bear children.

I had a good laugh at what you have said and I have to say that you are simply brilliantly Insane.May cosmotic system bless you.
BTW I agree to all you have to say.I have nothing more to add.You are simply brilliant.You know everything.You are God.You are above everything else INRI.I mean it, but in your world.The world you live in

[inri]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

I had a good laugh at what you have said and I have to say that you are simply brilliantly Insane.May cosmotic system bless you.
BTW I agree to all you have to say.I have nothing more to add.You are simply brilliant.You know everything.You are God.You are above everything else INRI.I mean it, but in your world.The world you live in

You're clearly angry. Generally when someone resorts to insults and rudeness within a debate it's because they realize their argument has been proven wrong. Angry of not Kamal...insults are unnecessary...it's really unfortunate that you've let your anger get the best of you here......& here I thought we were having fun.

Rather than merely calling me insane and sarcastically putting me down, why not attempt to expain HOW my argument here is insane? How is it insane of me to point out that women DO exists who have somehow broken free of their All encompassing physical 'nature' to achieve greatness in terms of scientific accomplishments?

You see Kamal...your argument was flawed right from the initial premise you put forward. When you said, "Women are from Earth, Men are from Eternity" You grouped ALL men and ALL women into two distinct groups and made a sweeping generalization about each group....you completely ignored the fact that each group is made up of unique individuals.

Your flawed logic can be illustrated by substituting eye color for specific gender traits. Let's say your premise had said: Women have blue eyes, men have brown eyes. The moment that someone presented evidence that a woman with brown eyes does actually exist, your premise has been proven to be wrong.

In the case of your argument, (using 'from earth' and 'from eternity') the moment evidence of a woman who HAS reached 'eternal thought and accomplishment' can be produced, your argument falls flat. As many of us HAVE provided such evidence, over and over again, you have fallen far short of proving your opinion to be a universal truth.

Next, for your assertion that a woman's biological nature is the reason for women not being able to accomplish (or reach eternity) on the same level as men. If women exist who do not have a strong maternal instinct, or who do, yet who also have a strong drive to think, achieve and accomplish into areas of science and technology, then these women serve as PROOF that the biological nature you speak of, is not ALL Encompassing. If it were, ALL women would want nothing more than to bear children and would be content to place all of their thoughts and focus upon this. WE know this is not the case.

If physical biological nature is so important and so encompassing, why would it not affect the psyche/intellect/mind of ALL women, thereby ensuring that all women would naturally be emotionally driven to WANT to bear children?

IF biological nature is so important and so dictates a man/woman's ability for IQ and accomplishment, how do you explain the woman who holds the highest IQ on record? How do you explain the countless women who historically have made incredible achievements and accomplishments that have benefitted human-kind? Are they merely freaks of nature or anomalies? If so, how do you explain a 'freak of nature.'...isn't 'nature' perfect?

They very fact that these women exist....PROVES that the biological ability to bear children does NOT determine her intellectual/emotional make-up. If it is not all encompassing, then we can hardly say that this nature is in any way 'defining' in the sense that you believe it to be.

And please Kamal...if you do not understand my words here, please have the courage to say so (and I can explain it differently or in more simple terms) instead of merely resorting to calling me names and using sarcasm.

I'm all for allowing everyone to hold their own views on opinions on all aspects of life. However, Regarding issues and debates of a philosophical nature, guidelines DO exist for the proper application of reason and logic....and the one thing I am passionate about is arriving at a belief or an opinion through the use of sound reasoning. Sorry, Kamal, but the truth is.... all that you've proven here is that you are not very good at debating.

and...as I've said before, you've been out debated and out-reasoned by every single woman here who has posted. (Which is absolute poetic irony when we consider that you came to this forum to PROVE that men are more capable of higher thought than women).

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by inri

You're clearly angry. Generally when someone resorts to insults and rudeness within a debate it's because they realize their argument has been proven wrong. Angry of not Kamal...insults are unnecessary...it's really unfortunate that you've let your anger get the best of you here......& here I thought we were having fun.

Rather than merely calling me insane and sarcastically putting me down, why not attempt to expain HOW my argument here is insane? How is it insane of me to point out that women DO exists who have somehow broken free of their All encompassing physical 'nature' to achieve greatness in terms of scientific accomplishments?

You see Kamal...your argument was flawed right from the initial premise you put forward. When you said, "Women are from Earth, Men are from Eternity" You grouped ALL men and ALL women into two distinct groups and made a sweeping generalization about each group....you completely ignored the fact that each group is made up of unique individuals.

Your flawed logic can be illustrated by substituting eye color for specific gender traits. Let's say your premise had said: Women have blue eyes, men have brown eyes. The moment that someone presented evidence that a woman with brown eyes does actually exist, your premise has been proven to be wrong.

In the case of your argument, (using 'from earth' and 'from eternity') the moment evidence of a woman who HAS reached 'eternal thought and accomplishment' can be produced, your argument falls flat. As many of us HAVE provided such evidence, over and over again, you have fallen far short of proving your opinion to be a universal truth.

Next, for your assertion that a woman's biological nature is the reason for women not being able to accomplish (or reach eternity) on the same level as men. If women exist who do not have a strong maternal instinct, or who do, yet who also have a strong drive to think, achieve and accomplish into areas of science and technology, then these women serve as PROOF that the biological nature you speak of, is not ALL Encompassing. If it were, ALL women would want nothing more than to bear children and would be content to place all of their thoughts and focus upon this. WE know this is not the case.

If physical biological nature is so important and so encompassing, why would it not affect the psyche/intellect/mind of ALL women, thereby ensuring that all women would naturally be emotionally driven to WANT to bear children?

IF biological nature is so important and so dictates a man/woman's ability for IQ and accomplishment, how do you explain the woman who holds the highest IQ on record? How do you explain the countless women who historically have made incredible achievements and accomplishments that have benefitted human-kind? Are they merely freaks of nature or anomalies? If so, how do you explain a 'freak of nature.'...isn't 'nature' perfect?

They very fact that these women exist....PROVES that the biological ability to bear children does NOT determine her intellectual/emotional make-up. If it is not all encompassing, then we can hardly say that this nature is in any way 'defining' in the sense that you believe it to be.

And please Kamal...if you do not understand my words here, please have the courage to say so (and I can explain it differently or in more simple terms) instead of merely resorting to calling me names and using sarcasm.

I'm all for allowing everyone to hold their own views on opinions on all aspects of life. However, Regarding issues and debates of a philosophical nature, guidelines DO exist for the proper application of reason and logic....and the one thing I am passionate about is arriving at a belief or an opinion through the use of sound reasoning. Sorry, Kamal, but the truth is.... all that you've proven here is that you are not very good at debating.

and...as I've said before, you've been out debated and out-reasoned by every single woman here who has posted. (Which is absolute poetic irony when we consider that you came to this forum to PROVE that men are more capable of higher thought than women).

I am not here for debating but sharing my beliefs.
Woman have in their nature and design to nurture and propagate more generation.If they will be true to their design they will see the real comfort in this material body.
This material body has faminine soul locked in if the body harmoninses with the soul and embraces the whole truth and lives in harmony the real comfort and bliss can be experienced by faminine soul and life can be lived as per the purpose.
However man has spirit locked in which cries to leave out and look for outward path.Since most men are in deep sleep and they do not realise they are trapped in this material body and are not conscious of what there purpose is in life they stay in this material world.Once a spirit has harmonised with the eternal truth then it knows its purpose and can live life in harmony and leaves this body with a FORWARD force which carries them to where they belong.

[inri]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

I am not here for debating but sharing my beliefs.

lol...what did you think...? you'd start a thread that essentially paints all women as mere biological baby making machines and we'd all heartily agree with you and pat you on the back?? For someone who had no intention of debating, you've certainly put in a fair amount of time defending your beliefs....not to mention, attempting to pass them off as 'universal truth.'

Woman have in their nature and design to nurture and propagate more generation.If they will be true to their design they will see the real comfort in this material body.
This material body has faminine soul locked in if the body harmoninses with the soul and embraces the whole truth and lives in harmony the real comfort and bliss can be experienced by faminine soul and life can be lived as per the purpose.
However man has spirit locked in which cries to leave out and look for outward path.Since most men are in deep sleep and they do not realise they are trapped in this material body and are not conscious of what there purpose is in life they stay in this material world.Once a spirit has harmonised with the eternal truth then it knows its purpose and can live life in harmony and leaves this body with a FORWARD force which carries them to where they belong.

Well...Kamal...thanks for sharing....Some interesting, yet very limiting ideas there about gender....we clearly do not share the same belief system and I'm quite sure that you'll be hard pressed to find many other women (or men) here who share it. If you happen to find yourself incarnated as a woman in your next life, DO make sure you keep that uterus workin' overtime!

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by inri

lol...what did you think...? you'd start a thread that essentially paints all women as mere biological baby making machines and we'd all heartily agree with you and pat you on the back?? For someone who had no intention of debating, you've certainly put in a fair amount of time defending your beliefs....not to mention, attempting to pass them off as 'universal truth.'




Well...Kamal...thanks for sharing....Some interesting, yet very limiting ideas there about gender....we clearly do not share the same belief system and I'm quite sure that you'll be hard pressed to find many other women (or men) here who share it. If you happen to find yourself incarnated as a woman in your next life, DO make sure you keep that uterus workin' overtime!

You simply dont care about truth or getting any new information in your heads.YOu only care about arguing.YOu should use the letter "I" in place of "we" you are as you claim an individual and unique respect it that way and enjoy life.Cheers!!

[inri]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

[COLOR="Blue"][B]You simply dont care about truth

au contraire.....when engaged in debating (something that I'm absolutely passionate about) I care very much about 'truth'...as in arriving at properly constructed/ logical arguments through systematic reasoning....But, another person's version of 'truth' that severely limits the perception of myself and all other women...Nah...I don't have much interest in or use for that kind of 'truth'.

or getting any new information in your heads.

Once again Kamal...the information and belief system you hold is not NEW.

It is the same mind-set that has existed historically regarding the place and role of women, and it the same mind-set that has been responsible for the subjugation and oppression of women the world over. It is a position held by many religions. Islamic doctrine for one, says that a woman is designed for the propogation of the species; that women's minds and intellect fall short of that of a man (mainly due to their over-emotionality) and these beliefs are responsible for the fact that women in countries ruled by sharia law receive less inheritance than men, are required two 'witness' in court in two's as one woman's testimony is not considered valid (due to her emotional nature)...and to be 'cared' for by the men in her family.

Did you really think that in starting such a thread topic, you'd be 'educating' women as to NEW ideas about their true purpose? If so, you have lived a very sheltered existence and/or are very naive. Most women I know have grown up with full knowledge about these stereotypical/limiting views...and most women I know...fully reject them.

YOu only care about arguing.

do you really expect me to say I agree with you when I absolutely do not??

Have a look back at all your posts Kamal...you haven't exactly been agreeable to the view point of others here yourself...you've engaged in this debate with a zeal equal to my own from what I can see....heck...you started it!

YOu should use the letter "I" in place of "we" you are as you claim an individual and unique respect it that way and enjoy life.Cheers!!

Fair enough, however....I do think that other women here have indicated their agreement with my point of view on this. (The numerous private messages re: the content of this thread I've received, also attest to this).

BTW....I used 'we' in my last paragraph to refer to you and I..as in 'we' do not uphold the same 'truth.'


The fact is Kamal, that you can believe in these limiting stereotypes regarding the roles of women as much as you like.... reality is, you are a man. As such, over-concerning yourself with the beliefs and actions of women to such an extent is likely going to prove frustrating.

The point of power each of us has access to (if we're to remain non-violent, non-forceful) is limited to self. Therefore, if you truly believe that adherence to defined gender roles is of utmost importance, it's likely very wise of you to conform to those roles you deem as being 'masculine.'

Beyond that.........your opinion is just that....your opinion. Women as the autonomous, intelligent individuals they are, will continue to make choices and accept belief systems which are in line with their own individual higher good.

[Indiana]

If there's one thing we can agree men (white men, at that) invented, it's the vague, hard-to-define and changeable concept of 'IQ', a categorisation system in which (surprise, surprise) white men generally come out on top.

I'm out of this thread. Not because I admit women 'can't see eternity', but because I actually think I can, and that's where this thread appears to be headed. Good luck, y'all.

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by inri

au contraire.....when engaged in debating (something that I'm absolutely passionate about) I care very much about 'truth'...as in arriving at properly constructed/ logical arguments through systematic reasoning....But, another person's version of 'truth' that severely limits the perception of myself and all other women...Nah...I don't have much interest in or use for that kind of 'truth'.



Once again Kamal...the information and belief system you hold is not NEW.

It is the same mind-set that has existed historically regarding the place and role of women, and it the same mind-set that has been responsible for the subjugation and oppression of women the world over. It is a position held by many religions. Islamic doctrine for one, says that a woman is designed for the propogation of the species; that women's minds and intellect fall short of that of a man (mainly due to their over-emotionality) and these beliefs are responsible for the fact that women in countries ruled by sharia law receive less inheritance than men, are required two 'witness' in court in two's as one woman's testimony is not considered valid (due to her emotional nature)...and to be 'cared' for by the men in her family.

Did you really think that in starting such a thread topic, you'd be 'educating' women as to NEW ideas about their true purpose? If so, you have lived a very sheltered existence and/or are very naive. Most women I know have grown up with full knowledge about these stereotypical/limiting views...and most women I know...fully reject them.




do you really expect me to say I agree with you when I absolutely do not??

Have a look back at all your posts Kamal...you haven't exactly been agreeable to the view point of others here yourself...you've engaged in this debate with a zeal equal to my own from what I can see....heck...you started it!




Fair enough, however....I do think that other women here have indicated their agreement with my point of view on this. (The numerous private messages re: the content of this thread I've received, also attest to this).

BTW....I used 'we' in my last paragraph to refer to you and I..as in 'we' do not uphold the same 'truth.'


The fact is Kamal, that you can believe in these limiting stereotypes regarding the roles of women as much as you like.... reality is, you are a man. As such, over-concerning yourself with the beliefs and actions of women to such an extent is likely going to prove frustrating.

The point of power each of us has access to (if we're to remain non-violent, non-forceful) is limited to self. Therefore, if you truly believe that adherence to defined gender roles is of utmost importance, it's likely very wise of you to conform to those roles you deem as being 'masculine.'

Beyond that.........your opinion is just that....your opinion. Women as the autonomous, intelligent individuals they are, will continue to make choices and accept belief systems which are in line with their own individual higher good.

I dont know where from Islam has come into this discussion.Why you are bringing Islam.
I have repeatedly said and can say again.I AM FOR ABSOLUTE FREEDOM FOR ALL.
Just because I remind women that the nature has designed woman to be mother and propagate generation, which is true for all species, it does not mean I want woman to wear a burqa and folloow Islamic Shriat laws.This is your import and does reflect your mind set.
My goal is everyone should enjoy life to the fullest and the way they want.
But you can not lie to yourself and create some higher purpose for woman and ignore nature totally.
I hope this should clarify you that I am not a Islamic Mullah.

[moonrambler]

What are men supposed to be doing, on a biological basis? Aren't they supposed to be creating as many offspring as possible with as many women as possible? If they don't do that, aren't they missing some essential aspect of their manhood?

Seems like most men have maybe two to four children with typically one or two women. That's not living up to their potential at all.

[inri]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

I dont know where from Islam has come into this discussion.Why you are bringing Islam.
I have repeatedly said and can say again.I AM FOR ABSOLUTE FREEDOM FOR ALL.
Just because I remind women that the nature has designed woman to be mother and propagate generation, which is true for all species, it does not mean I want woman to wear a burqa and folloow Islamic Shriat laws.This is your import and does reflect your mind set.
My goal is everyone should enjoy life to the fullest and the way they want.
But you can not lie to yourself and create some higher purpose for woman and ignore nature totally.
I hope this should clarify you that I am not a Islamic Mullah.

No Kamal...you've misunderstood me. My intent was not to say that you yourself are a muslim...I think you actually made it clear fairly early on that you were not. I am simply trying to point out that your version of 'truth' regarding the role of women is not a NEW one...that it is a perspective that has played out throughout human history and one that is embraced within many limiting mind-sets and religions.

[kamalkat]

ok, that is fine love

[wstein]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

HI,
We perceive world with current understanding and give new meaning to what was always around us.
There is deep seated quest in man to reach out for more and know more. Starting from Plato, Aristotle then to Galileo, Newton, Einstein and many more.

Whereas we see all the cosmatics, Jewellery shops, high heals, range of clothing, lingerie which keep women occupied and busy. Woman too can reach long distance may be close to eternity but only where a man can take them.
A man can perceive eternity but may not be able to give that experience to others including woman. Some experiences can only be experienced and words can not explain or bring any closer.
Finally I am not a MCP but interested in ultimate truth.

I hope you are planning to spend a lot of time seeking the truth as you don't seem to be very close. I am only responding in hopes that your statement of 'interested in ultimate truth' is real.

Using superficial physical observation to say anything about eternity is far off the mark.

There is no evidence that anyone you mention above, came anywhere near perceiving eternity. If you are going to make a potential gender based observation, at least try to put forth some names connected with perceiving eternity.

I would say that eternity is mostly a spiritual matter. As most men and women are spiritual beings, the form of their physical bodies is irrelevant.

[kamalkat]

Originally Posted by wstein

I hope you are planning to spend a lot of time seeking the truth as you don't seem to be very close. I am only responding in hopes that your statement of 'interested in ultimate truth' is real.

Using superficial physical observation to say anything about eternity is far off the mark.

There is no evidence that anyone you mention above, came anywhere near perceiving eternity. If you are going to make a potential gender based observation, at least try to put forth some names connected with perceiving eternity.

I would say that eternity is mostly a spiritual matter. As most men and women are spiritual beings, the form of their physical bodies is irrelevant.

What is spritual and what is not is a subjective matter, We all are physical being and I am assuming anyone who does not call himself/herself an atheist relates the sprituality to that part of being which accepts the presence of some external force which is outside us and we can experience it in some way.
This also brings in the assumption that this life is not the end of all we have there is something more.More than this life and when we die it is not end of everything.But mind you whena mosquito dies we generally (barring some cultures) assume it is end of everything for that mosquito,But no we are special living creature and have some special role to play in this universe.
When I say eternity it basically means the evolvement of mind to a level which can perceive the entire cosmos, where the beliefs are aligined in sucha way that all actions are cosmic actions not merely for worldy requirements alone.
Cheers!.

[SkylightMT]

Originally Posted by kamalkat

Whereas we see all the cosmatics, Jewellery shops, high heals, range of clothing, lingerie which keep women occupied and busy.Woman too can reach long distance may be close to eternity but only where a man can take them.
A man can perceive eternity but may not be able to give that experience to others including woman. Some experiences can only be experienced and words can not explain or bring any closer.
Finally I am not a MCP but interested in ultimate truth.

Women can spell; men cannot.

[mejamie]

kamalkat, here are my problems with your views:

1- You assume women are more materialistic than men because they like to shop for make up, clothes and jewelry. Useless electronic gadgets, sports cars and violent video games are also material things that are largely consumed by men but you make no mention of that. Women and men are interested in different material things.

Secondly, you completely ignore the fact that people shop for certain things because society tells them to. Men are expected to be interested in the things I mentioned above as proof of their virility and heterosexuality. Women are constantly bombarded in magazines, tv shows and movies with images of beauty and youth. Society expects them to always be beautiful, ageless and slim so women focus more on these things than men because they are in part, being told to.

2- If you believe that women are incomplete if they don't have children then you must automatically believe that men are incomplete as well if they don't have children since both men and women are necessary for conception. And what do you make of women who cannot have children because they are sterile or have some type of illness that would make pregnancy life-threatening? Are these women doomed to live life as incomplete human beings?

3- You make the faulty assumption that eternity has to do with intellect and thoughts. Consciousness, which is what you truely are, has nothing to do with the thoughts or beliefs floating around in your head. Consciousness is awareness of those thoughts. It's Beingness. Nobody will see infinity with a "mad like quest". Infinity is not a place to be reached. It is right here, right now, in the present moment. A person sitting at home, meditating is much closer to infinity or eternity than Einstein or Newton ever were. Thoughts are extremely limited so it makes absolutely no difference whether there have been more genius men than women. Genius IQs are no closer to eternity than non-genius IQs because consciousness has nothing to do with intellectual capacity.

As a man, I've always found women to be closer to our true nature. Author Eckhart Tolle says that women are less mind-indentified than men. Men are more rigidly encapsulated than women and so are more likely to think that solutions to life's problems reside in the thinking process. Women on the other hand are more intuitive, less rigid and more accepting of life's fluidity. Men's brains are more extreme, women's brains are more balanced which is a GREAT thing. Einstein was a man but so was Hitler. Most pedophiles, murderers, rapists and corrupt government officials are men. People who start wars are men which makes women's obsession with make up and jewelry pretty tame by comparaison lol.

Kamalkat, read Eckhart Tolle's book A New Earth if you want to know where true eternity resides.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by mejamie

As a man, I've always found women to be closer to our true nature. Author Eckhart Tolle says that women are less mind-indentified than men. Men are more rigidly encapsulated than women and so are more likely to think that solutions to life's problems reside in the thinking process. Women on the other hand are more intuitive, less rigid and more accepting of life's fluidity. Men's brains are more extreme, women's brains are more balanced which is a GREAT thing. Einstein was a man but so was Hitler. Most pedophiles, murderers, rapists and corrupt government officials are men. People who start wars are men which makes women's obsession with make up and jewelry pretty tame by comparaison lol.

Lightworkers and Eternity

I love it when people only mention the negative characteristics about a sex (which aren't even shared by most of its members, but are uncommon). Restores my hope in humanity.

[mejamie]

Originally Posted by Elrond

I love it when people only mention the negative characteristics about a sex (which aren't even shared by most of its members, but are uncommon). Restores my hope in humanity.

You said so yourself that men have more extreme brains and are more likely than women to be homeless, incarcerated and retarded. I'm saying the same thing. Most men are not pedophiles or murderers but those who are, usually happen to be men. I also agree with you that there are more male geniuses than women but that it has nothing to do with the ability to see eternity.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by mejamie

You said so yourself that men have more extreme brains and are more likely than women to be homeless, incarcerated and retarded. I'm saying the same thing. Most men are not pedophiles or murderers but those who are, usually happen to be men. I also agree with you that there are more male geniuses than women but that it has nothing to do with the ability to see eternity.

I also mentioned that it also leads to genius. And I said it in the context of the question of whether men maybe are more likely to be exceptional (either in a positive or a negative sense). You said it in the context of women being *better* or *higher* than men spiritually, where you mention all the alleged female traits as good (or better) and the alleged male traits as bad (or worse). My vantage point was mentioning imprisonment to explain a wide distribution of "talents", your vantage point in mentioning murderers was arguing for women being better than men (or "closer to our true nature", which sounds pretty damn close to "better"). BIG difference.