|
by Zseni 01/17/2007, 5:22pm PST |
|
 |
|
 |
|
laudablepuss wrote:
Zseni wrote:
laudablepuss wrote:
YEEEEAHHHHHH wrote:
laudablepuss wrote:
Zseni wrote:
RACIST EQUIVALENCY: black man finds making a living on his own to be way too hard, moves in with white master, explains to eager press that black people are naturally the white man's whuppin' boy and nigras should stop trying to be just like white people.
The difference, of course, is that black people are far more simillar to white people than women are to men. Genetically speaking.
Whoa, that sounded like a well-founded opinion! Any evidence?
Yes, there's evidence, and no, it's not just an opinion but a well established fact. Perhaps, using just your eyes and the brain they're connected to, you can guess this would be correct anyway? Maybe you've never seen a woman or a black person before, I dunno.
The internet is an irritating place to look for this kind of stuff, but try here for starters. In fact, a male chimpanzee has more in common with a male human than either of them have with the opposite sex in their same species. Let me put it another way: when did sex arise? And when did human racial features arise? The current estimate for the latter is within the last 50,000 years. Sex in mammals (as opposed to birds and reptiles, who do things differently, again geneticaly speaking) goes back a lot longer than that.
In other words, women aren't just men with boobs and vaginas but black guys really are just guys who are black. For the most part.
But one thing is certain: women and men aren't people with boobs and/or penises. In this they are totally different from black people and white people being people who happen to be black and/or white-skinned. We know this from looking at chimpanzees.
Well, you'd be the expert on people with boobs AND penises so I'll defer to you on that particular. But for the rest, it looks like you still have sand in your hair from where you've been burrying it in the ground. Want to join us in the sunlight for awhile? Have you ever heard of gender roles? There's no analogous "racial roles", okay? So your comparisons along those lines are going to look stupid and gratuitously provacative.
Gender roles aren't written on your chromosomes. They, like all aspects of survival, are utilitarian; they exist to serve purposes, and there is nothing but habit which keeps them from changing when the one role or another becomes outdated.
They shift constantly. So too do racial roles, which, like caste systems, organize societies as well as gender roles.
You want to say, "but to some extent (and maybe in the majority of the time) gender roles are instinctive. Women are nurturers and men are warriors. They just are." Or something like that, but less eloquent. However, your judgment in this is even less scientific than mine. You assign a irrevocable biological root to a condition whose symptoms are completely expressed socially and culturally - the gender role you mean when you say "gender role" is not the one where she has a vagina and that's all. And to back up this assumption, you point me to chimps, and then say it's obvious.
But we're not chimps, and the things boy chimps and humans have in common are not banking, machine guns, preturnatual interests in physics, or torturing small animals. The scope of a man's activities is much greater than a chimp's for better or worse. But girl chimps are interested in the same things as women are, right? Attracting mates, caring for children, that sort of thing.
And this is biologically determined, not culturally, and it should be completely relevant to the natural biological state of women.
Right?
Even though the span of human activity is much more vast than the scope of any other animal's, the laws of nature apply too heavily to women. They are weighted with these natural gender roles. They are positively gravid with the consequences of gender roles. They are naturally barefoot and pregnant, just like men are naturally championship race car drivers. The irony is totally lost on most naturists of this stripe.
It's a sloppy theory that condemns half of humanity to behave "naturally" in the most animal fashion, while allowing the other to "naturally" excel at all human prodigies of engineering and art. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Slave comforted by slave mentality after finding the Right Master For The Job by Zseni 01/16/2007, 9:50pm PST 
You cannot imagine me! NT by DPS holocaust 01/17/2007, 10:42am PST
Re: Slave comforted by slave mentality after finding the Right Master For The Jo by laudablepuss 01/17/2007, 11:19am PST
Re: Slave comforted by slave mentality after finding the Right Master For The Jo by YEEEEAHHHHHH 01/17/2007, 1:47pm PST
Uh oh, Quentin Beck is skeptical. by laudablepuss 01/17/2007, 2:12pm PST
we're like two symbiotic species NT by which one is the bacteria? 01/17/2007, 2:17pm PST
Re: Uh oh, Quentin Beck is skeptical. by Zseni 01/17/2007, 3:08pm PST
Re: Uh oh, Quentin Beck is skeptical. by laudablepuss 01/17/2007, 3:32pm PST
Oh you did NOT just go there. by Zseni 01/17/2007, 5:22pm PST
Re: Oh you did NOT just go there. by laudablepuss 01/17/2007, 5:41pm PST
Re: Oh you did NOT just go there. by laudablepuss 01/17/2007, 6:17pm PST
Re: Oh you did NOT just go there. by Zseni 01/17/2007, 6:53pm PST
Re: Oh you did NOT just go there. by laudablepuss 01/17/2007, 6:57pm PST
Re: Oh you did NOT just go there. by Zseni 01/17/2007, 8:05pm PST
bio determinism referencing fate by simple google search 01/17/2007, 8:25pm PST
Okay, just read the article by laudablepuss 01/17/2007, 4:33pm PST
um, the article doesn't even mention the word slave. Where'd you get all that? NT by confused forum lurker 01/17/2007, 12:59pm PST
If only these women would move in with ME! NT by Zseni 01/17/2007, 2:59pm PST
with a man they are slaves, with me I am their cuddly protector from all things NT by Zseni 01/19/2007, 2:29pm PST
Remember how Zseni used to not post here? Yeah. by Reichsminister Doktor Goebbels 01/17/2007, 5:10pm PST
I'm shocked to find so many Creationists here. NT by Zseni 01/17/2007, 5:27pm PST
So Zseni is the female Choson? NT by Home Audience 01/17/2007, 9:09pm PST
|
|
