spoon licker...

Pages: 12
Whose burning who what? I hate how these posts keep dissapearing. I feel like I'm talking to myself.
Let's make this thread interesting and play Let's guess who Spoonlicker is!
Could be Albatross, rendering this thread a ludicrous cry for attention.
If I'm spoon licker, then George W. Bush is the best president the United States of America has ever had and will ever have. Need I say more? :/

EDIT: What if Bush was spoon licker? That'd be a laugh.

-Albatross
Last edited on
closed account (1vRz3TCk)
Henry, the mild mannered janitor? COULD BE!
Martha, the murderous sociopath? COULD BE!
I don't think it's Albatross, unless she has Multiple Personality Disorder.
Or Dissociated Personality Disorder, she would never know she was Spoon licker.
I keep forgetting she's a she X)
And we'd like to keep it that way :P I'm sure everyone here, Ably included, would not be fond of being treated differently because of their gender. Science in particular seems to have a problem with that (though much of the world does)
Well, it depends.

If the sort of treatment I'd get for being female is in the same category as "T**S OR GTFO", then I absolutely wouldn't appreciate it. If, however, the community goes a little bit out of its way to avoid sensitive issues when talking specifically to me, then yes, I don't mind it at all. ;)

As for scientific studies... well, sometimes they have their reasons for the separation of genders, especially in Psychology. It took me a while to understand it, but now it doesn't bug me as much.

So far, you've all been a nice bunch. :)

-Albatross
So far, you've all been a nice bunch. :)

Grrrrrrrrr....grrin!
Well, actually I was referring to the fact that many fields of science are still dominated by men and it's common speculation that this is in part due to how reluctant they are to accept research conducted by women.
Ah. Well. That's another story. DOWN WITH MALE CHAUVINIST SCIENTISTS! YOU LOT SHOULD KNOW BETTER!

-Albatross
I've never understood why at some point during the development of our ancestors that they started to separate roles by gender. While it may have been an easy way to decide who does what, I don't see how it came to be girly-girls vs manly-men. The whole 'becoming a man' thing seems like just another overhyped point in my developmental timeline. (birthdays are a good example...)
"at some point during the development"? I think it started out that way and gradually declined [except for periods where religions came up, but whatever]. Men have always been the warriors and hunters, women the mothers and gatherers. Maybe it's because men are better built for physical challenges. Maybe men were simply more aggressive. Maybe it's because a woman can only birth a child roughly once a year, but one man can impregnate a woman every day easily, making men more expendable and thus fit for dangerous tasks.

The fact is: there are differences between genders. There are things a man is just better suited for, just like there are things a woman can do better. It upsets me when I see women claiming to be blocked at job interviews because they're a woman. Yes, it happens, but it's far more often that the person simply isn't fit for the job. Then they bring up statistics of only 10% of managers being female. Maybe that's sexism, or maybe it's just that the qualities required for managarial tasks are just more often found in men.

A few months back I read an article on a conference that received complaints it never invited female guestspeakers. Turns out, they did their best to invite female speakers, a) there weren't that many women in the field, and b) most of them refused.

It's very easy to hide behind gender discrimination [and I'm certain it's still a big issue in our society], but more often than not it can be attributed to the differences between genders. Full equality is retarded. Equal rights, of course, is not.
There was no evidence of gender separation until a certain point.
And when exactly was that then?
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.
Pages: 12