Are men simple beings ?


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Are men simple beings ?

Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

Honestly, I ask this in a kind gentle manner. I have my assumptions and experiences to lend me some guidance but why not ask the experts ?

09-01-2006 02:07 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
minx12
Regular Contributor
minx12

There is nothing “simple” about humankind. This board goes way far (sometimes too far) in proving that point.

09-01-2006 02:11 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
aldarris
Contributor
aldarris
In biology, for example, humanity is at the apex. But you are probably asking in the context of the controversy.

Well, men make up some 97% of Nobel Prize winners. Men dominate in politics, boardrooms. Composers of classical music are men. Conductors, open source software, video game design.

The only area of expertise where women are better is nursing.

Are men simple?
How do you define and measure simplicity?

09-01-2006 02:44 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
PatriarchVerlch
Regular Contributor
PatriarchVerlch

1590 —– Compound microscope —– Zacharias Janssen
1593 —– Water thermometer —– Galileo
1608 —– Telescope —– Hans Lippershey
1629 —– Steam turbine —– Giovanni Branca
1642 —– Adding machine —– Blaise Pascal
1643 —– Barometer —– Evangelista Torricelli
1650 —– Air pump —– Otto von Guericke
1656 —– Pendulum clock —– Christiaan Huygens
1671 —– Calculating machine —– Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
1705 —– Steam engine —– Thomas Newcomen
1710 —– Piano —– Bartolomeo Cristofori
1714 —– Mercury thermometer —– Gabriel Daniel Fahrenheit
1745 —– Leyden jar (condenser) —– E. G. von Kleist
1752 —– Lightning rod —– Benjamin Franklin
1758 —– Achromatic lens —– John Dollond
1759 —– Marine chronometer —– John Harrison
1764 —– Spinning jenny —– James Hargreaves
1769 —– Steam engine (with separate condenser) —– James Watt
1770 —– Automobile —– Nicolas Joseph Cugnot
1780 —– Bifocal lens —– Benjamin Franklin
1783 —– Balloon —– Joseph Michel Montgolfier and Jacques Étienne Montgolfier
1784 —– Threshing machine —– Andrew Meikle
1785 —– Power loom —– Edmund Cartwright
1786 —– Steamboat —– John Fitch
1788 —– Flyball governor —– James Watt
1791 —– Gas turbine —– John Barber
1793 —– Cotton gin —– Eli Whitney
1796 —– Lithography —– Aloys Senefelder
1796 —– Smallpox vaccination —– Edward Jenner
1799 —– Fourdrinier machine (papermaking) —– Louis Robert
1800 —– Electric battery —– Count Alessandro Volta
1801 —– Pattern loom —– Joseph Marie Jacquard
1804 —– Solid-fuel rocket —– William Congreve
1804 —– Steam locomotive —– Richard Trevithick
1805 —– Electroplating —– Luigi Gasparo Brugnatelli
1810 —– Food preservation (by sterilization and exclusion of air) —– François Appert
1814 —– Railroad locomotive —– George Stephenson
1815 —– Safety lamp —– Sir Humphry Davy
1819 —– Stethoscope —– René Théophile Hyacinthe La‘nnec
1820 —– Galvanometer —– Johann Salomo and Christoph Schweigger
1821 —– Electric motor —– Michael Faraday
1823 —– Electromagnet —– William Sturgeon
1824 —– Portland cement —– Joseph Aspdin
1827 —– Friction match —– John Walker
1830 —– Sewing machine —– Barthélemy Thimonnier
1831 —– Phosphorus match —– Charles Sauria
1831 —– Reaper —– Cyrus Hall McCormick
1831 —– **bleep** dynamo —– Michael Faraday
1835 —– Pistol (revolver) —– Samuel Colt
1837 —– Telegraph —– Samuel Finley Breese Morse —– Sir Charles Wheatstone
1839 —– Photography —– Louis Jacques, Mandé Daguerre and Joseph Nicéphore Niepce, William Henry Fox Talbot
1839 —– Vulcanized rubber —– Charles Goodyear
1840 —– Bicycle —– Kirkpatrick MacMillan
1845 —– Pneumatic tire —– Robert William Thompson
1846 —– Guncotton —– Christian Friedrich Schönbein
1846 —– Ether —– Crawford Williamson Long,William Thomas Green Morton, Charles Thomas Jackson
1849 —– Safety pin —– Walter Hunt
1849 —– Water turbine —– James Bicheno Francis
1850 —– Mercerized cotton —– John Mercer
1851 —– Breech-loading rifle —– Edward Maynard
1851 —– Ophthalmoscope —– Hermann Ludwig Ferdinand von Helmholtz
1852 —– Nonrigid airship —– Henri Giffard
1852 —– Elevator (with brake) —– Elisha Graves Otis
1852 —– Gyroscope —– Jean Bernard Léon Foucault
1855 —– Safety matches —– J. E. Lundstrom
1855 —– Gas burner —– Robert Wilhelm Bunsen
1856 —– Bessemer converter (steel) —– Sir Henry Bessemer
1859 —– Spectroscope —– Gustav Robert Kirchhoff and Robert Wilhelm Bunsen
1861 —– Web-fed newspaper printing press —– Richard March Hoe
1861 —– Electric furnace —– Wilhelm Siemens
1861 —– Machine gun —– Richard Jordan Gatling
1861 —– Kinematoscope —– Coleman Sellers
1866 —– Paper (from wood pulp, sulfite process) —– Benjamin Chew Tilghman
1866 —– Dynamite —– Alfred Bernhard Nobel —– Swedish
1868 —– Typewriter —– Carlos Glidden and Christopher Latham Sholes
1868 —– Air brake —– George Westinghouse
1870 —– Celluloid —– John Wesley Hyatt and Isaiah Hyatt
1874 —– Quadruplex telegraph —– Thomas Alva Edison
1876 —– Telephone —– Alexander Graham Bell
1877 —– Internal-combustion engine (four-cycle) —– Nikolaus August Otto
1877 —– Talking machine (phonograph) —– Thomas Alva Edison
1877 —– Microphone —– Emile Berliner
1877 —– Electric welding —– Elihu Thomson
1878 —– Cathode-ray tube —– Sir William Crookes
1879 —– Cash register —– James J. Ritty
1879 —– Incandescent filament lamp —– Thomas Alva Edison, Sir Joseph Wilson Swan
1879 —– Automobile engine (two-cycle) —– Karl Benz
1879 —– Arc lamp —– Charles Francis Bush
1880 —– Linotype —– Ottmar Mergenthaler
1884 —– Rayon (nitrocellulose) —– Comte Hilaire Bernigaud de Chardonnet
1884 —– Fountain pen —– Lewis Edson Waterman
1884 —– Multiple-wheel steam turbine —– Sir Charles Algernon Parsons
1884 —– Nipkow disk (mechanical television scanning device) —– Paul Gottlieb Nipkow
1885 —– Graphophone (dictating machine) —– Chichester A. Bell and Charles Sumner Tainter
1885 —– AC transformer —– William Stanley
1887 —– Gramophone (disk records) —– Emile Berliner
1887 —– Gas mantle —– Baron Carl Auer von Welsbach —– Austrian
1887 —– Mimeograph —– Albert Blake **bleep**
1887 —– Monotype —– Tolbert Lanston
1888 —– AC electric induction motor —– Nikola Tesla
1888 —– Adding machine (recording) —– William Seward Burroughs
1888 —– Kodak camera —– George Eastman
1890 —– Rayon (cuprammonium) —– Louis Henri Despeissis
1891 —– Glider —– Otto Lilienthal
1891 —– Synthetic rubber —– Sir William Augustus Tilden
1892 —– Three-color camera —– Frederick Eugene Ives
1892 —– Rayon (viscose) —– Charles Frederick Cross
1892 —– Vacuum bottle (Dewar flask) —– Sir James Dewar
1893 —– Diesel engine —– Rudolf Diesel
1893 —– Gasoline automobile —– Charles Edgar Duryea and J. Frank Duryea
1893 —– Motion picture machine —– Thomas Alva Edison
1894 —– Motion picture projection —– Louis Jean Lumière and Auguste Maries Lumière —– Charles Francis Jenkins
1895 —– Rayon (acetate) —– Charles Frederick Cross
1896 —– Experimental airplane —– Samuel Pierpoint Langley
1898 —– Sensitized photographic paper —– Leo Hendrik Baekeland
1900 —– Rigid dirigible airship —– Graf Ferdinand von Zeppelin
1902 —– Radiotelephone —– Valdemar Poulsen, Reginald Aubrey Fessenden
1903 —– Airplane —– Wilbur Wright and Orville Wright
1904 —– Diode rectifier tube (radio) —– Sir John Ambrose Fleming
1906 —– Gyrocompass —– Hermann Anschütz-Kämpfe
1906 —– Bakelite —– Leo Hendrik Baekeland
1906 —– Triode amplifier tube (radio) —– Lee De Forest
1908 —– Two-color motion picture camera —– C. Albert Smith
1909 —– Salvarsan —– Paul Ehrlich
1910 —– Hydrogenation of coal —– Friedrich Bergius
1910 —– Gyroscopic compass and stabilizer —– Elmer Ambrose Sperry
1911 —– Vitamins —– Casimir Funk
1911 —– Cellophane —– Jacques Edwin Brandenberger
1911 —– Neon lamp —– Georges Claude
1911 —– Automobile self-starter —– Charles Franklin Kettering
1912 —– Mercury-vapor lamp —– Peter Cooper Hewitt
1913 —– Ramjet engine —– René Lorin
1913 —– Multigrid electron tube —– Irving Langmuir
1913 —– Cracked gasoline —– William Meriam Burton —–
1913 —– Heterodyne radio receiver —– Reginald Aubrey Fessenden
1916 —– Browning gun (automatic rifle) —– John Moses Browning
1916 —– Gas-filled incandescent lamp —– Irving Langmuir
1916 —– X-ray tube —– William David Coolidge
1919 —– Mass spectrograph —– Sir Francis William Aston, Arthur Jeffrey Dempster
1922 —– Insulin —– Sir Frederick Grant Banting —– Canadian
1923 —– Television iconoscope —– Vladimir Kosma Zworykin
1926 —– Liquid-fuel rocket —– Robert Hutchings Goddard
1927 —– Television image dissector tube —– Philo Taylor Farnsworth
1928 —– Penicillin —– Sir Alexander Fleming
1930 —– Nylon (fiber-forming synthetic polyamides) —– Wallace Hume Carothers
1930 —– Bathysphere —– (Charles) William Beebe
1930 —– Freon (low-boiling fluorine compounds) —– Thomas Midgley and coworkers
1930 —– Modern gas-turbine engine —– Sir Frank Whittle
1930 —– Neoprene (synthetic rubber) —– Father Julius Arthur Nieuwland and Wallace Hume Carothers
1931 —– Cyclotron —– Ernest Orlando Lawrence
1931 —– Differential analyzer (analogue computer) —– Vannevar Bush
1932 —– Phase contrast microscope —– Frits Zernike —– Dutch
1932 —– Van de Graaff generator —– Robert Jemison Van de Graaff
1933 —– Frequency modulation (FM) —– Edwin Howard Armstrong
1935 —– Buna (synthetic rubber) scientists
1935 —– Radiolocator (radar) —– Sir Robert Watson-Watt
1935 —– Cortisone —– Edward Calvin Kendall, Tadeus Reichstein
1935 —– Electron microscope scientists
1935 —– Sulfanilamide —– Gerhard Domagk
1936 —– Twin-rotor helicopter —– Heinrich Focke
1939 —– DDT —– Paul Müller —– Swiss
1940 —– Betatron —– Donald William Kerst
1941 —– Turbojet aircraft engine —– Sir Frank Whittle
1944 —– V-2 (rocket-propelled bomb) scientists
1945 —– Atomic bomb —– U.S. government scientists
1945 —– Streptomycin —– Selman A. Waksman
1946 —– Electronic digital computer —– John Presper Eckert, Jr., and John W. Mauchly
1947 —– Chlormycetin —– Mildred Rebstock
1947 —– Polaroid Land camera —– Edwin Herbert Land
1947 —– Bathyscaphe —– Auguste Piccard —– Swiss
1947 —– Transistor —– John Bardeen, Walter Houser Brattain, and William Shockley
1948 —– Scintillation counter —– Hartmut Kallmann
1948 —– Aureomycin —– Benjamin Minge Duggar and Chandra Bose Subba Row
1949 —– Ramjet airplane —– René Leduc —– French
1952 —– Hydrogen bomb —– U.S. government scientists
1952 —– Bubble chamber (nuclear particle detector) —– Donald Arthur Glaser
1954 —– Solar battery —– Bell Telephone Laboratory scientists
1955 —– Synthetic diamonds —– General Electric scientists
1956 —– First prototype rotary engine —– Felix Wankel
1957 —– Sodium-cooled atomic reactor —– U.S. government scientists
1957 —– Artificial earth satellite —– USSR government scientists
1958 —– Communications satellite —– U.S. government scientists
1958 —– Integrated circuit —– Jack Kilby —–
1960 —– Laser —– Charles Hard Townes, Arthur L. Schawlow, and Gordon Gould
1960 —– Chlorophyll synthesized —– Robert Burns Woodward
1960 —– Birth-control pill —– Gregory Pincus, John Rock, and Min-chueh Chang
1966 —– Artificial heart (left ventricle) —– Michael Ellis DeBakey
1967 —– Human heart transplant —– Christiaan Neethling Barnard
1970 —– First complete synthesis of a gene —– Har Gobind Khorana
1972 —– First magnetohydrodynamic power generator —– USSR government scientists
1973 —– Skylab orbiting space laboratory —– U.S. government scientists
1974 —– Recombinant DNA (genetic engineering) —– U.S. scientists
1975 —– CAT (computerized axial tomography) scanner —– Godfrey N. Hounsfield
1975 —– Fiber optics —– Bell Laboratories
1978 —– Synthesis of human insulin genes —– Roberto Crea, Tadaaki Hirose, Adam Kraszewski, and Keiichi Itakura
1978 —– Mammal to mammal gene transplants —– Paul Berg, Richard Mulligan, and Bruce Howard
1979 —– Genetic flaw repaired in mouse cells by recombinant DNA and micromanipulation techniques —– W. French Anderson and coworkers
1981 —– Space transportation system (space shuttle) —– National Aeronautics and Space Administration engineers
1989 —– World Wide Web —– Timothy Berners-Lee

There are around 6 million registered patents at the Patent office, with 99.99% of them belonging to men, with 50% of the remaining patents held by women, husbands let their wives register.

There are about 43 inventions by women.

From computers, cars, planes, rockets, and even bras and tampons, have come from the minds of men.

Simple, in bed maybe, in reality, we light up the world.

To be fair here is a list of women inventers.

http://inventors.about.com/library/blwomeninventors.htm

Well around 50, whatever.

Women have been proving for the last 30 years that men have been right for the last 30 centuries!
http://www.verlch.blogspot.com

09-01-2006 03:00 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
tellafriend
Regular Contributor
tellafriend

Yes men are simple beings. Our wants are simple. It’s these idiot women who overcomplicate matters to justify their own failures with men.

Like men SIMPLY want to get laid. THEN we’ll think about a relationship, etc.

But women overcomplicate the issue and add all kinds of ridiculous rationalizations to the matter to try to figure out why they keep failing at it. He must be committment-phobic. He has emotional issues. He’s shallow. blah blah blah.

These are all childish tactics designed to remove responsibility from the woman.

So yes, men are simple, we’re simply smarter and more capable than women. Simple fact.

09-01-2006 03:01 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

Tellafriend you are a treat to read.

09-01-2006 03:09 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
GenghisKhan
Regular Contributor
GenghisKhan
Like tellafriend mentioned, our wants and desires are simple. Its not that we are afraid or intimidated by complexity, but in our mind – we ask ourselves what’s the point? why?

09-01-2006 03:12 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

I know women can create headbanging frustrations but men can as well. The point of my simple question was to get at what the heck does a guy need in relationship basics to make him happy on a daily basis. Let’ put sex aside I got that and totally get it – we all like it. (well most of us do)

09-01-2006 03:18 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
tellafriend
Regular Contributor
tellafriend

HSC wrote:
Tellafriend you are a treat to read.

It probably has something to do with my simplicity.

Women are diplomatic because they’re dishonest. That’s why denial is characteristic of females. That’s how they cope with things that undermine their self-esteem. That’s why political correctness is a female vehicle of communication. Because women see things in terms of “mean” and “nice” while men see things in terms of “makes sense” or “doesn’t make sense”.

I’m a treat to read because I cut to the chase and skip the beating around the bush part.

I mean, take the statement “men are smarter than women.”

This is a FACT. But women view this emotionally. They take this as a belittling of their worth as people. So they vehemently deny this FACT. This makes them ridiculous in the process. When a person doesn’t realize their limitations, they become ridiculous. Women today are really just a fable written long ago called “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” They are a ridiculous parody of themselves. Their clothing is all the tv and movies they watch telling them how special they are compared to men, when the reality is glaringly obvious–they’re NAKED. Men have no need to prove they’re smarter than women. History speaks for itself. These forums are a testament to that fact.

But what do you see women constantly proclaiming both directly and indirectly “We’re JUST AS smart as men.” This is just plain ridiculous.

Message Edited by tellafriend on 09-01-2006 03:28 PM

09-01-2006 03:22 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
GenghisKhan
Regular Contributor
GenghisKhan
Because women see things in terms of “mean” and “nice” while men see things in terms of “makes sense” or “doesn’t make sense”.
____________________________________________________

BINGO.

09-01-2006 03:26 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Are men simple beings ?

Re: Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

just the facts – that makes sense, you are simple.

contrary to you comments – I don’t subscribe to the naughty or nice Snow White version of this story. Just trying to understand what all the fuss is about.  I speak my mind and if you don’t like it sorry. I love to debate. Unlike the women you’ve noted I am reasonable and like facts and truths. I don’t dance around the issues. It is a huge waste of time.

09-01-2006 03:33 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
tellafriend
Regular Contributor
tellafriend

HSC wrote:
just the facts – that makes sense, you are simple.

contrary to you comments – I don’t subscribe to the naughty or nice Snow White version of this story. Just trying to understand what all the fuss is about.  I speak my mind and if you don’t like it sorry. I love to debate. Unlike the women you’ve noted I am reasonable and like facts and truths. I don’t dance around the issues. It is a huge waste of time.

Well as much as I’d like to believe this, women are notoriously unaware of their own shortcomings. You sound just like women everywhere who claim they are the exception to the rule. If you were as reasonable as you claim, you’d be disgusted by women on here espousing the ridiculous doctrine of feminism. You also wouldn’t be offended by factual statements like: men are smarter than women. men are more capable than women. men are more competent than women, etc. These would just be reasonable statements like saying the sky is blue.

09-01-2006 06:39 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

What I am disgusted about is the fact that many on here are not hearing both sides. I agree the legal system is slanted in the favor of women. If you read my posting about fairness on this issue you might see I am not so bad. But many men are taking this topic and making it into a field day of “let’s let out the beast and rip everyone women a new one”

I went to law school at one of the top schools in our country and competed against smart men and women to get where I am. You’ll never hear me say ” oh help me”  I’m just a girl trying to make my way in this world. You’ll never hear me say OH we don’t get our fair shakes.

I am the woman that drives next to you everyday in my nice car and you wink at me cuz I am cute. I laugh, shake my head, smile and head to work. That’s what makes the world go round. I appreciate being looked at by men. I don’t scream and say you jackbleep what are you looking at- I could care less. Have a ball.

09-01-2006 07:02 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
tellafriend
Regular Contributor
tellafriend

HSC wrote:
What I am disgusted about is the fact that many on here are not hearing both sides. I agree the legal system is slanted in the favor of women. If you read my posting about fairness on this issue you might see I am not so bad. But many men are taking this topic and making it into a field day of “let’s let out the beast and rip everyone women a new one”

I went to law school at one of the top schools in our country and competed against smart men and women to get where I am. You’ll never hear me say ” oh help me”  I’m just a girl trying to make my way in this world. You’ll never hear me say OH we don’t get our fair shakes.

I am the woman that drives next to you everyday in my nice car and you wink at me cuz I am cute. I laugh, shake my head, smile and head to work. That’s what makes the world go round. I appreciate being looked at by men. I don’t scream and say you jackbleep what are you looking at- I could care less. Have a ball.

Correction. You’re the delusional fugly in denial THINKING you’re cute just like fat chicks think they’re “average” sized. You can laugh your pumpkin sized head all the way to McDonald’s for all we care

Instead of touting your 2 dollar IQ like every other idiot women on here, how about you actually take a cue from REAL men and SHOW us your so-called intelligence by showing us where your fellow idiot women have erred.

This should be a good laugh in the making

09-01-2006 07:49 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

You have no idea what you are saying sweet pea or to whom.

09-01-2006 08:01 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
Termi0n
Regular Contributor
Termi0n

HSC wrote:
What I am disgusted about is the fact that many on here are not hearing both sides. I agree the legal system is slanted in the favor of women. If you read my posting about fairness on this issue you might see I am not so bad. But many men are taking this topic and making it into a field day of “let’s let out the beast and rip everyone women a new one”

I went to law school at one of the top schools in our country and competed against smart men and women to get where I am. You’ll never hear me say ” oh help me”  I’m just a girl trying to make my way in this world. You’ll never hear me say OH we don’t get our fair shakes.

I am the woman that drives next to you everyday in my nice car and you wink at me cuz I am cute. I laugh, shake my head, smile and head to work. That’s what makes the world go round. I appreciate being looked at by men. I don’t scream and say you jackbleep what are you looking at- I could care less. Have a ball.

You get by on your looks and lower standards in education. Ya, we know.

Message Edited by Termi0n on 09-01-2006 08:21 PM

Women want fried ice. -Arab Proverb

09-01-2006 08:17 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

Low standards in education – not hardly- UVA Law class of 1993. Getting by on my looks? Passed the Bar in NY and MA first time around.

09-01-2006 08:49 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor
Criminy, Patriarch!!

That’s an incredible compilation. Thanks zillions.

Since you’re an expert on this, is it true that no woman has ever invented anything with a moving part in it?

Inquiring minds want to know.

______________________________________________
“The loudest, most strident voices calling women weak, stupid, and incapable of competing in the world at large are the feminists.” – zed the zen priest

09-01-2006 09:13 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
Termi0n
Regular Contributor
Termi0n

HSC wrote:
Low standards in education – not hardly- UVA Law class of 1993. Getting by on my looks? Passed the Bar in NY and MA first time around.

Whopity doo. You dont need that to care for or raise children or even please your husband.

Message Edited by Termi0n on 09-01-2006 11:33 PM

Women want fried ice. -Arab Proverb

09-01-2006 11:30 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

Whoopee to you too. I do both and do well at both. Here is the kicker I don’t disagree with some of the issues of men here. Surprise surprise. You fling these broad sweeping generalizations about women and some of us don’t fit that mold.
As I said I love being a woman. I like men. I like my job and love my husband and family more. Everyone not just women should know thier limits and strive to do what they desire to do. Be honest with themselves & don’t blame others for thier short comings. Seriously, I have co-workers who blame all but the weather on thier lack of promotions and salary increases. I say study our corporate culture, get to know people, stop banging your head and complaining it will get you no where but a request to leave the company.

The question I raised was simple. What are your basic male needs? I have a man in my house and think I have him pretty well figured out but there are times when I also scratch my head in confusion…. “who is this guy?”  Here’s the deal though I friggin ask!

09-02-2006 08:40 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Are men simple beings ?

Re: Are men simple beings ?
HSC
Contributor
HSC

Margaret Knight was born in 1838. She received her first patent at the age of 30, but inventing was always part of her life. Margaret or ‘Mattie’ as she was called in her childhood, made sleds and kites for her brothers while growing up in Maine. When she was just 12 years old, she had an idea for a stop-motion device that could be used in textile mills to shut down machinery, preventing workers from being injured. Knight eventually received some 26 patents. Her machine that made flat-bottomed paper bags is still used to this very day!

one of thousands

09-02-2006 08:44 AM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
PANDORASBOX123
Regular Contributor
PANDORASBOX123

Good for you HSC!

Prior to the 20th century the majority of patents were issued to males. Could this be due to the fact that women were basically the homemakers?  They weren’t encouraged to be industrious.  True some women were allowed to go to college in those times–but only women who came from wealthy families with permission from their fathers.  So if a woman had an idea for an invention back in those days, it never left the paper it was drawn on.

The History Channel recently ran a program on the Salem witch trials.  Any women that was outspoken, that did anything that was considered unfeminine, that was a midwife, etc. was branded a witch and excuted.  This was done to eliminate outspoken/ independent women.  It worked too.

09-02-2006 11:17 AM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor
PANDORASBOX123 wrote: …Good for you HSC!
Yes, thanks for the info HSC.
All we ever hear about is how awful and dangerous the jobs were for women in those mills, so it’s good to know if wasn’t all men who made those jobs possible, and a little safer.

Prior to the 20th century the majority of patents were issued to males. Could this be due to the fact that women were basically the homemakers?
But by the time Betty Friedan got around to pointing out that “society asks so little of women”, all those male-invented labor-saving devices had made her life into a prison of boredom. This didn’t free her to invent great new things in her spare time, but to maybe go shopping. Her choice. Happens to this very day. Remember, Einstein thought up his great new ideas and worked on them during his lunch-break. Instead, women in huge numbers turn on the boob tube, as what’s on daytime TV will demonstrate.

So if a woman had an idea for an invention back in those days, it never left the paper it was drawn on.
I would think any man in business would jump at the chance to take a good idea and convert it into a profit. So maybe it wasn’t that those inventions were ignored because of some sexist man who wouldn’t pay attention because the inventor was a woman, but because they weren’t really good ideas (of which there’s never any shortage).

The History Channel recently ran a program on the Salem witch trials. Any women that was outspoken, that did anything that was considered unfeminine, that was a midwife, etc. was branded a witch and excuted. This was done to eliminate outspoken/ independent women. It worked too.
Did they remember to mention that a third of all those killed for during the Witch Craze were men? This is almost always left out of those stories. Why were those men killed too if it was all an exercise in violent sexism?

______________________________________________
“The loudest, most strident voices calling women weak, stupid, and incapable of competing in the world at large are the feminists.” – zed the zen priest

09-02-2006 02:23 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
DontMarryNoer
Regular Contributor
DontMarryNoer

But by the time Betty Friedan got around to pointing out that “society asks so little of women”, all those male-invented labor-saving devices had made her life into a prison of boredom. This didn’t free her to invent great new things in her spare time, but to maybe go shopping. Her choice. Happens to this very day. Remember, Einstein thought up his great new ideas and worked on them during his lunch-break. Instead, women in huge numbers turn on the boob tube, as what’s on daytime TV will demonstrate.

This is such an non-answer. Betty Friedan worked is in a completely different field, which is why it was convenient for you to use her as an example. But nice to see you relagted what housewives were expected to do to things machines can handle. And you seemed to have forgotten the video-game and music industry.

Also, what did Einstein think of what he wrought in the end?

So maybe it wasn’t that those inventions were ignored because of some sexist man who wouldn’t pay attention because the inventor was a woman, but because they weren’t really good ideas (of which there’s never any shortage).

Actually, it may have been both. And that the man didn’t want to be laughed at by his peers. But things that “weren’t really good ideas” came from men too. In fact, more things that “weren’t good ideas” came from men than from women. Its a two way street. You restrict a woman’s role to one area and that of men to another, they will account for both ends of the spectrum in their respected area. If men get credit for the success which was more than women then they also have to take it for the failures in that area, which was more than that of women. Most of the things invented was of neccessity. Which amounts to saying that even if those men (or women) weren’t around to do them, they would have been invented anyway.

Not to mention the things women invented that were credited to men, which happened as recently as the 1950s and 1960s. And that women were actually behind , or contributed half or more, to what men did. This just as recently as with Bill Gates. Now, unfortunately, what can make money is so lacking diversity that there isn’t many inventions of any kind but rather improvements of computers etc. If there are others, it doesn’t mean what it did years ago.

Did they remember to mention that a third of all those killed for during the Witch Craze were men? This is almost always left out of those stories. Why were those men killed too if it was all an exercise in violent sexism?

Except you missed the entire point. The women were targeted for basically being women, who were doing things inconvenient for men. The men who were killed? The fact that they were men was incidental.

09-02-2006 06:19 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
PANDORASBOX123
Regular Contributor
PANDORASBOX123

I would think any man in business would jump at the chance to take a good idea and convert it into a profit. So maybe it wasn’t that those inventions were ignored because of some sexist man who wouldn’t pay attention because the inventor was a woman, but because they weren’t really good ideas (of which there’s never any shortage

Did you ever see the movie…Something the Lord Made?
Denied a chance to become a doctor by the Great Depression, and initially denied the recognition he deserved for his work by old racial prejudices, Vivien Thomas proved that genius, persistence and ability can transcend artificially imposed restraints. His story now has been immortalized in the HBO film “Something the Lord Made,” in the National Magazine Award-winning article with the same name, as well as in the PBS documentary “Partners of the Heart.”

At Johns Hopkins, the word “breakthrough” rarely is used.  But Vivien Thomas was a pivotal player in the development of a true breakthrough at The Johns Hopkins Hospital just 60 years ago. Working with surgeon Alfred Blalock and pediatric cardiologist Helen Taussig, Thomas was part of a team that devised a means to correct a congenital heart defect known as Tetralogy of Fallot, or Blue Baby syndrome.   Vivien created this device , but because of his skin color he was denied recognition for his work.  A white doctor took all the credit….

09-02-2006 08:04 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
tellafriend
Regular Contributor
tellafriend

Proving once again that idiot women just can’t admit the truth : men are and will always be smarter than women.

Check with history next time you want to come out of the kitchen.

09-02-2006 08:46 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
PANDORASBOX123
Regular Contributor
PANDORASBOX123

Vivien’s invention was stolen by a white doctor….He didn’t receive credit for his invention.  Prominant doctors took that away from him.

09-02-2006 09:01 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
PANDORASBOX123
Regular Contributor
PANDORASBOX123

Did they remember to mention that a third of all those killed for during the Witch Craze were men? This is almost always left out of those stories. Why were those men killed too if it was all an exercise in violent sexism?

Martin–you are absolutely right on that one.  The History Channel also mentioned that some men were killed during the Salem witch trials….The men were killed by other men for their land…They stole their land—called them witches to do it.

09-02-2006 09:44 PM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor
DontMarryNoer: “This is such an non-answer. Betty Friedan worked is in a completely different field, which is why it was convenient for you to use her as an example. But nice to see you relagted what housewives were expected to do to things machines can handle. And you seemed to have forgotten the video-game and music industry.”

I’m not sure what you mean by several things in here, so I don’t really understand why you think mine was a non-answer.

DontMarryNoer: Also, what did Einstein think of what he wrought in the end?

Again, I’m not sure of what you’re trying to get at with this question. Einstein got the Nobel Prize for his work on the photo-electric effect, which is the basis for things like digital cameras. I think he’d think they were pretty cool compared to the technology available in his day 100 years ago. What exactly do you think he’s to blame for? It better be good, cause after all he was Time’s “Man of the Century”.

Except you missed the entire point. The women were targeted for basically being women, who were doing things inconvenient for men. The men who were killed? The fact that they were men was incidental.

I suppose if you were one of the men being killed it wouldn’t seem so “incidental” to you…

I doubt I’d agree with your take on the ulitmate cause for the witch craze, except that it’s most definitely an aberration for men to kill women rather than protect and provide for them, and is therefore both interesting and worthy of study, keeping in mind that it really was an aberration. As such it needs a really good explanation IMO. Since the sex ratio wasn’t 50-50 I’d go as far as Christine Larner’s subtle distinciton: “witchcraft was not sex-specific, but it was sex-related”. I also like “Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.” – Blaise Pascal (another math/science guy)

______________________________________________
“The loudest, most strident voices calling women weak, stupid, and incapable of competing in the world at large are the feminists.” – zed the zen priest

09-03-2006 02:16 AM

Re: Are men simple beings ?
Jet_Jaguar
Contributor
Jet_Jaguar

Martian, I’m certain (s)he was referring to the A-bomb.

09-03-2006 02:23 AM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Are men simple beings ?

Re: Are men simple beings ?
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor
Oh. It’s fascinating how a devout pacifist ends up having a key role in initiating the creation of The Bomb…

Copped from another web site:

Einstein’s First [of four] Letter[s] to Roosevelt

Notes: The letter that launched the arms race. A warning to President Roosevelt of the possibility of constructing “extremely powerful bombs of a new type” with hints that the German government might be doing just that. Addressed and dated Peconic, Long Island, August 2nd 1939, it was most likely written by Leo Szilard, the scientist who invented the chain reaction. Nevertheless, Einstein took full responsibility for its consequences, calling it “the greatest mistake” of his life…

Better intelligence would have shown the German program was a big fizzle, but by then the war machine was unstoppable, so we used the bombs on Japan after Germany had already been defeated (partly to justify the huge amount of money spent), but Einstein had been out of the loop for years by then. The rest is history, and still being debated. As an undergrad I wrote a term paper on this, taking the position that the use of the bombs on Japan was wrong on several counts. I still feel that way.

[Actually, I’d previously thought Einstein had said his “the greatest mistake of my life” was his introduction of the cosmological constant (a sort of universal anti-gravity) into the general relativity equations. If he’d left it out he probably would have predicted the expanding universe a decade before it was discovered observationally by Hubble (and others) and racked up Nobel #2. People of have been trying to get rid of the cosmological constant ever since, though it’s recently staged a big comeback.]

So, no, Einstein certainly was no simple being, but he was anything but typical.

______________________________________________
“The loudest, most strident voices calling women weak, stupid, and incapable of competing in the world at large are the feminists.” – zed the zen priest

09-03-2006 01:16 PM

==============================================================================
Click on the board or message subject at the top to return.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: