(February 15, 2021 at 5:37 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: You also realize that in warzones civilian women tend to suffer far more than men and are faced a whole host of unique problems in that senerio

More women die on the "home front" because more men are taken away from the home front to serve in the army.

There's is research on aggression and statistics on violence. We know men and women differ on this front. Whatever limited inferences can be made from spears and skulls is subservient to this data.

Yeah, sure, completely irrelevant that the oldest known human matriarch of a continental empire was...demonstrably... a warmonger. What possible effect could it have on ideas that women are just..like...more peaceful and shit..man.

The consequence of historical patriarchy, in this, was denying females inherent lethality and bloodthirstiness. Their fundamental human amenability to conflict. #feminism

The best part, is that this danger was so manifestly present that even as we dissuaded females from combat, we invented an entire category for their lethal sexuality and especially how they could use that to defeat our approved male soldiers. What we know is that men and women -within a culture- differ on the psychological aspect of violence. It's conditioned behavior.

We're born with sunken eyes and thick bones, but that's not what makes us killers. It's completely absurd to just stumble into some bumblefuck argument about how women are more peaceful than men in a thread about gender inequality. You'd have to be smoking crack. If you don't think that women pick fights in equal measure to men, I could only direct you to your nearest female.

(February 15, 2021 at 10:07 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:

(February 15, 2021 at 5:37 pm)SUNGULA Wrote: You also realize that in warzones civilian women tend to suffer far more than men and are faced a whole host of unique problems in that senerio

More women die on the "home front" because more men are taken away from the home front to serve in the army.

And?

(February 15, 2021 at 10:52 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: What we know is that men and women -within a culture- differ on the psychological aspect of violence.

I wrote three sentences; and you drew four paragraphs worth of conclusions. That's problematic.

We could probably write a book on how hilariously wrongheaded the notion that men instigate wars in some way that women don't or wouldn't is. That, John, is problematic.

(February 16, 2021 at 6:00 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: We could probably write a book on how hilariously wrongheaded the notion that men instigate wars in some way that women don't or wouldn't is. That, John, is problematic.

If women ruled the world there would be no wars.


Just countries that don't talk to each other.

(February 16, 2021 at 6:15 am)The Valkyrie Wrote:

(February 16, 2021 at 6:00 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: We could probably write a book on how hilariously wrongheaded the notion that men instigate wars in some way that women don't or wouldn't is.  That, John, is problematic.

If women ruled the world there would be no wars.


Just countries that don't talk to each other.

Or engage in some pretty intense negotiations every 28 days.

Boru

(February 16, 2021 at 6:19 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(February 16, 2021 at 6:15 am)The Valkyrie Wrote: If women ruled the world there would be no wars.


Just countries that don't talk to each other.

Or engage in some pretty intense negotiations every 28 days.

Boru

Probably a million good jokes on this one, but, again, the notion that females are unwarlike or unsuited is the reason that they've been seen to be and maintained to be inferior in this regard. It's never been true.

It's not as if no woman has ever sent one army of men to slowly cut another army of men to pieces close enough to smell the other guys lunch while they do it.