Heh... I caught myself about to spew off some typically chauvinistic BS in reaction to a couple posts that kinda bordered on sexist against men. After having reviewed my statement I've cleaned it up and decided to actually present a logical point:
On average across the species, a man is better adapted to handling physical labor and things involving spatial perception, thanks to an evolutionary history of being the one doing the 'Hunter' stuff, such as bringing in meat, fighting off other tribes. Conversely, women are better adapted toward organization and linguistics because they evolved with the role of 'Gatherer', which involved the logistical end of things, raising children, finding edible plants, planning communal tasks, etc.
The whole balance of the thing got corrupted by the misogynistic crap spewed forth by certain of the world's major religions in the past few thousand years, belittling female contributions to society and equating their frailer physique with general inferiority, thus cutting them out of the loop to the point where they were cloistered up and only allowed to put their skills to use running a house.
What I'm trying to say, in essence, is that all of the above is well and good, but a person can do what they damn well please, as long as they, specifically, have the ability and inclination to do so. Averages don't apply to a sample-group of one, and about the only things one gender can do that the other is 100% incapable of are reproduction-related. Female mechanics are just as valid as male nurses.
On average across the species, a man is better adapted to handling physical labor and things involving spatial perception, thanks to an evolutionary history of being the one doing the 'Hunter' stuff, such as bringing in meat, fighting off other tribes. Conversely, women are better adapted toward organization and linguistics because they evolved with the role of 'Gatherer', which involved the logistical end of things, raising children, finding edible plants, planning communal tasks, etc.
The whole balance of the thing got corrupted by the misogynistic crap spewed forth by certain of the world's major religions in the past few thousand years, belittling female contributions to society and equating their frailer physique with general inferiority, thus cutting them out of the loop to the point where they were cloistered up and only allowed to put their skills to use running a house.
What I'm trying to say, in essence, is that all of the above is well and good, but a person can do what they damn well please, as long as they, specifically, have the ability and inclination to do so. Averages don't apply to a sample-group of one, and about the only things one gender can do that the other is 100% incapable of are reproduction-related. Female mechanics are just as valid as male nurses.




Comment