Topic: Women are too emotional to be leaders and would start wars because of emotion
Anonymous A started this discussion 2 weeks ago #136,573
Wait, every war in human history has been started by a man? Um...oh. I see.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 9 minutes later[^] [v] #1,449,593
If you tried those cases, the men would almost always be convicted of premeditated murder, not any sort of "crime of passion".
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 8 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,644
@OP
> Wait, every war in human history has been started by a man? Um...oh. I see.
Well not all of them, but the vast majority. Can’t forget Queen Victoria.
> Wait, every war in human history has been started by a man? Um...oh. I see.
Well not all of them, but the vast majority. Can’t forget Queen Victoria.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 16 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,646
Patriarchy is interesting though because people just assume that it’s natural, but chimpanzees are patriarchal and bonobos are matriarchal, and we’re about equally close to both of them genetically.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,647
It’s also kind of funny, chimpanzees and bonobos diverged because they were living on opposite sides of the Congo river. So essentially, they were living in almost exactly the same habitat just separated by a river and somehow one group evolved to be matriarchal and the other group evolved to be patriarchal just from living on opposite sides of a river in the same jungle.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc quadruple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,648
Apparently it’s actually somewhat of a mystery if chimpanzees had matriarchal ancestors or if bonobos had patriarchal ancestors and which one humans evolved from because fossils don’t preserve any information about social status.
Anonymous B replied with this 2 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,656
@1,449,646 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
So now do you disagree with patriarchy? What happened to "god made it this way"?
So now do you disagree with patriarchy? What happened to "god made it this way"?
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 50 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,657
Anonymous B replied with this 2 weeks ago, 3 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,704
@previous (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
Male only leadership is patriarchy, and you said Jesus set it up that way so it's OK to have a "tradition" of male only leaders.
Male only leadership is patriarchy, and you said Jesus set it up that way so it's OK to have a "tradition" of male only leaders.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,707
@previous (B)
That’s a false representation of what I said. I didn’t say Jesus set it up that way, I said the apostles were men and that’s the justification for why priests are men because their inherit their role as church leaders from the apostles. I never said I think women shouldn’t have leadership roles in the church. It was a positive statement not a normative one.
That’s a false representation of what I said. I didn’t say Jesus set it up that way, I said the apostles were men and that’s the justification for why priests are men because their inherit their role as church leaders from the apostles. I never said I think women shouldn’t have leadership roles in the church. It was a positive statement not a normative one.
Anonymous B replied with this 2 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,708
@previous (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> That’s a false representation of what I said. I didn’t say Jesus set it up that way, I said the apostles were men and that’s the justification for why priests are men because their inherit their role as church leaders from the apostles.
And who chose the first apostles...?
> I never said I think women shouldn’t have leadership roles in the church. It was a positive statement not a normative one.
You agree with it, though. You would say you didn't if that were the case.
If you are fine with a policy of excluding women from leadership you shouldn't act like you've got the moral high ground.
> That’s a false representation of what I said. I didn’t say Jesus set it up that way, I said the apostles were men and that’s the justification for why priests are men because their inherit their role as church leaders from the apostles.
And who chose the first apostles...?
> I never said I think women shouldn’t have leadership roles in the church. It was a positive statement not a normative one.
You agree with it, though. You would say you didn't if that were the case.
If you are fine with a policy of excluding women from leadership you shouldn't act like you've got the moral high ground.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc replied with this 2 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,709
@previous (B)
I don’t believe in excluding women from leadership in government. Catholicism is my religion. You're trying to say that me being Catholic requires me to believe something that my religion doesn’t require me to believe.
I don’t believe in excluding women from leadership in government. Catholicism is my religion. You're trying to say that me being Catholic requires me to believe something that my religion doesn’t require me to believe.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,710
I’ve actually voted for women. There is no contradiction between that and my religion.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,711
And the whole thing about men and women having different roles but being equal in importance, you can understand this with or without a religious lens. Without a religious lens, you can see that objectively men and women have different bodies. Most of the differences come down to the fact that women can give birth and men can’t, so our bodies are adjusted differently. That doesn’t mean that women are inferior beings to men because women have less muscle mass and it doesn’t mean that men are inferior to women because men can’t give birth. We each have our role for continuing the existence of our species. Neither role is inferior. That doesn’t require me to believe that women are less intelligent than men or anything like that. Women have a lot of good ideas and I care about what they think about things.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc quadruple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,712
Of course, it is technically true that men have larger brains on average than women. Except, the reason why is kind of stupid. Men are taller on average than women and women tend to be shorter than men, but height doesn’t correlate with intelligence. In terms of brain to body size ratios, men and women are exactly the same, so there’s no biological basis for any difference in intelligence between men or women. So it’s not purely an ethical thing it’s also that it’s just factually incorrect to assert that men and women have a difference in intelligence.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc quintuple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,713
The same thing happens when you compare different racial groups, shorter people have smaller brains and in the past European racists tried to use that as a biological explanation to justify their racial hierarchies. Which is silly because not all groups of people that were short in the past are still short now. Height is partially genetic but it’s also partially due to diet and it doesn’t correlate with intelligence, but it does directly correlate with brain size. Everybody basically has the same brain size to body ratio even though brain size varies a lot from person to person.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc sextuple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,714
It also gets even more stupid the more you look into it. Because a newborn baby is born with almost all of the neurons they’ll ever have in their life, but their brain is 1/4th the size of an adult brain. The reason why that’s possible is because your brain is 60% fat cells. So your brain gets larger as you grow up but you’re not actually adding more neurons, it’s just getting fatter.
(Edited 48 seconds later.)
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc septuple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,715
Which is why if you don’t drink enough water, your brain physically shrinks a little bit.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc octuple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,716
It’s also why birds can be so smart even with such tiny brains because they have a higher neural density than mammals. I’m not saying that this is definitely the reason why, but I suspect it might be because birds have more efficient respiration than mammals because birds have unidirectional airflow due to inheriting the saurischian breathing system from dinosaurs so they don’t need to take as many breaths to get the same amount of oxygen. So that could have some sort of implication for needing less fat to sustain the energy requirements of their brains. (Or I could be wrong).Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc nonuple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,717
But really this was just a long tangent to give me an excuse to talk about bird lungs because bird lungs are cool.
Anonymous B replied with this 2 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,719
@1,449,709 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> I don’t believe in excluding women from leadership in government.
This is the second time you used the same strawman.
You: https://minichan.net/topic/136568#reply_1449487
My response:
https://minichan.net/topic/136568#reply_1449491
You were called out for being in a patriarchal church, and twice now you've pretended like you were called out for saying it was about government so that you could avoid responding to what was actually said.
> Catholicism is my religion. You're trying to say that me being Catholic requires me to believe something that my religion doesn’t require me to believe.
No, I'm explicitly calling you out for your church's patriarchal practices.
You can't defend it, so you pretend I said something else so you can avoid engaging with the argument.
And now you've tried this exact tactic twice. Did you think the second time it would work?
> I don’t believe in excluding women from leadership in government.
This is the second time you used the same strawman.
You: https://minichan.net/topic/136568#reply_1449487
My response:
https://minichan.net/topic/136568#reply_1449491
You were called out for being in a patriarchal church, and twice now you've pretended like you were called out for saying it was about government so that you could avoid responding to what was actually said.
> Catholicism is my religion. You're trying to say that me being Catholic requires me to believe something that my religion doesn’t require me to believe.
No, I'm explicitly calling you out for your church's patriarchal practices.
You can't defend it, so you pretend I said something else so you can avoid engaging with the argument.
And now you've tried this exact tactic twice. Did you think the second time it would work?
(Edited 12 seconds later.)
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,449,723
@previous (B)
Did you know that the reason why birds have hollow bones is unrelated to flight? Saurischian dinosaurs have hollow bones as an adaptation to support larger body sizes.
Did you know that the reason why birds have hollow bones is unrelated to flight? Saurischian dinosaurs have hollow bones as an adaptation to support larger body sizes.