Why Men Rule


Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Why Men Rule

Why Men Rule
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor
“…Which brings me to an alternate explanation — one rooted in a more Darwinian view of human sex differences. It sees the human female as having been endowed for millions of years with vast power to shape the male of her species. As the “choosier sex,” she has forced males to compete for her affections — sometimes fiercely. It is not difficult to understand why males who showed little dominance or status-oriented behavior were probably among the first scratched off her dance card. Whatever their positive qualities, she realized that during hard times, such males would have trouble competing for resources that her family would need to survive.

“By favoring males oriented toward obtaining power and resources, women unwittingly caused these traits to become common in the human male — an example of a process that Darwin named “sexual selection.” It has made the typical male more likely to respond to certain environmental cues than the typical female — and vice-versa. To the extent that male dominance of political and economic institutions has followed, it is not a consequence of a masculinist conspiracy, but of female choice. That a preference for traits such as ambition, industriousness, and competitiveness has produced a world where few men are natural egalitarians is hardly shocking…”

Excerpted from: Raider of the Lost Patriarch, by Patricia Hausman.

John Hatung’s shorthand way of putting this concept was “males and male behavior are the result of a breeding experiment run by females, a proving ground from which females can cull winning genes”.

Remember gals: when you diss men, you diss the choices made by your mother, grandmothers, and great-grandmothers all the way back up the family tree.

Oh, and have a little compassion. Us guys are just the lab rats trying to live our lives while making it through the mazes you’ve constructed.

______________________________________________
“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

08-31-2006 09:39 PM

Re: Why Men Rule
Raydogg11
Contributor
Raydogg11

MartianBachelor wrote: Remember gals: when you diss men, you diss the choices made by your mother, grandmothers, and great-grandmothers all the way back up the family tree.

Oooooh…. such an EXCELLENT point. Furthermore, when women ridicule and undermine a woman who chooses to be a homemaker and/or mother, they REALLY disrespect their mothers, grandmothers and great grandmothers. I suspect a woman will respond to this thread and say that their mother, and especially grandmother and great grandmother didn’t have a choice back then. I say, it doesn’t matter because they still did the job and most did it well. To speak about that role with such disdain, to not honor it is like not honoring a soldier just because he (or she) was drafted.

08-31-2006 10:19 PM

Re: Why Men Rule
PatriarchVerlch
Regular Contributor
PatriarchVerlch

I’d like to add, there is little or now evidence for evolution. Lot’s of evidence against it. More questions than answers.

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

08-31-2006 11:39 PM

Re: Why Men Rule
Contessa
Contributor
Contessa

That is a wonderful founding principle upon which to examine gender specific behaviours. I believe it is entirely correct that the root of male competitveness and territoriality was established by sexual selection to create a buffer to allowed young to be reared safely.

However, as always, the times, they are a changing.

What I find most interesting is that men have created their own sort of breeding program. Where females sculpt in basic biology, potent stuff I agree, men have sculpted, and in some ways emasuclated themselves, through economics.

Go back to the industrial revolution, the introduction of the assembly line…

Efficiency, speed, more product for the investment of time and effort. Sell more product more quickly for more profit. Men, who owened most of the material wealth, prospered.

Introduce automated machinery.
Efficiency, speed, more product for the investment of time. Less wage to pay. Much more profit. Men, who owned most of the material wealth, prospered. Men watched their jobs taken by machines. Families went broke.

Make things more efficient, but machines break. Engineers are required. Men with technical educations, the sons of those who could afford the schooling. Still there are some places to work. The mines, the farms, the mills and so on.

There are more machines. No more plows. No more picks. Less wage, more profit. Computers are emerging. It’s not so important to be strong anymore, the machines make the job easier. Even women can work in the factories while the men are at war. Grocery stores stock all sorts of food now, fast transportation brings food everywhere from all over the country. If your crop dies, no one really notices. Infrastructure provides food. Men don’t need to hunt anymore. A ten year old can go buy steak.

Jobs become more elaborate, education more important. Computers are getting faster, communication easier. Education is broadly available to all, but post-secondary becomes more common. you can’t get a good job with just highschool anymore.

Then the internet comes and the world explodes and implodes at the same time. You can know anything about anyone else and you can reveal everything about yourself to the world. It becomes about talking, imagination, expression, networking, relating without physical presence. Work becomes how good your language is, knowing how to decline without offense, working in a co-operative environment in team scenarios.

This is what women are good at. They emerge as communicators and team players, emapthic and creative, perhaps more aware of their social surroundings than a male who has been geared to competition. Women flood the workplace. Life is more expensive now, the extra paycheck helps a lot.

So where does that leave the traditional role of the male? No longer a hunter thanks to grocery stores, strength is dilluted by the machinery that assists or does the job tirelessly. Aggression is frowned upon, communication, relating and networking becomes critical in the job market…men in a sense have dug their own grave. The things women bred them for THEY have taken and made nearly obsolete.

Men have chosen to pursue a course of economic dominance over the “traditional” pysical roles they would play as hunter and protector which was where the female interest lay. The unfortunate thing about money is that it doesn’t care who earns it, holds it or spends it. Where lifting something heavy or hunting something dangerous require the physical biology inherent in the masculine design with money it’s about how much you have versus how much things cost.

Men themselves have open the playing field in many ways. Now with a cost of living and rates of inflation that ARE the dominant factor in the lives of most couples, there are going to be some more barriers that have to give. It’ll be painful, but in the end, we’ve created a society where we’re measure by the money in our palm, not the size of the palm holding the money.

Message Edited by Contessa on 08-31-2006 11:43 PM

08-31-2006 11:42 PM

Re: Why Men Rule
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor
That’s an interesting direction to go in. Much of what you write I can’t take issue with, but I did have a problem with the part about “…working in a co-operative environment in team scenarios .. This is what women are good at.” Men are good at that sort of thing, too. It wasn’t “every man for himself” after a certain point, and in a clan or tribal context you can see the obvious importance of cooperation and team activity, say in hunting potentially lethal big animals. After all, team sports at least are pretty much a male thing, though one of the better developments to come along the last couple of decades is the increasing participation of girls in team sports.

The other thing that occurs to me is how much where you end up at in your chain of reasoning matters or doesn’t. It used to be that reproductive success for males (how many offspring they fathered) was correlated with their social status. With a harem one guy could have nearly a thousand offspring, while the hoarding of females implied that many others would be left without a seat in the game of reproductive musical chairs. Wealthier men could and did have more kids, just as one would expect under Darwin. That correlation ended with The Enlightenment. I believe but am not sure that now there is an inverse or little correlation in the first world. Birth rates for women drop in proportion to the amount of education they get. And since education generally equals higher pay and status, poorer people end up having just as many or more kids. Perhaps because they don’t have anything better to do.

So it’s certainly true that the labor-intensive low-skilled (male) jobs have decreased in number, but it doesn’t seem to be impacting the sex selection process in the way one would expect. Something else is going on. I don’t know what it is, but it might be an interesting thing to look into.

The other thing that occurs to me is one needs a way to produce those with the skills and inclinations to become the engineer types who create the technology with makes the other men’s jobs obsolete. There was no abstract mathematics in the stone age for women to select for or against in men. So I don’t think anyone has a really good grip on this part of your scenario yet. Geoffrey Miller’s “The Mating Mind” of six years ago didn’t do much to convince me — everything in his view is a “fitness indicator” if I recall correctly — and I haven’t kept up on any possibly more recent developments. Perhaps you know of some.

______________________________________________
“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 12:43 AM

Re: Why Men Rule
Happy_Bullet
Regular Contributor
Happy_Bullet

“Jobs become more elaborate, education more important. Computers are getting faster, communication easier.”  ( … blah blah )

Don’t feminists complain that women don’t exactly have the I.T. and engineering fields cornered? And they don’t .. because men are better at understanding and utilising logical processes, evolutionarily.

So your entire argument about the uselessness of man based on an increase in technology is garbage. Last I saw of female I.T. personnel was some calendar of them posing nude, even though they were all extremely ugly. That was to drum up support for it if I recall….

Message Edited by Happy_Bullet on 09-02-2006 05:17 AM

Men have standards. Women will be compared. DEAL WITH IT.

09-02-2006 05:14 AM

Re: Why Men Rule
PANDORASBOX123
Regular Contributor
PANDORASBOX123

True more men dominate the fields of the sciences….but more and more women are joining the forces and are quite successful.

09-02-2006 11:32 AM

Re: Why Men Rule
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor
Which is why Larry Summers got canned at Harvard, at a conference addressing the “under-representation” of women in science, the premise of which is that women aren’t doing well?

______________________________________________
“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 12:28 PM

Re: Why Men Rule
PANDORASBOX123
Regular Contributor
PANDORASBOX123

Time magazine  ran a cover story of women in the sciences/engineering about 6 months ago.  There are more females in those fields today than ever before.  They are still the minority in those fields, however.  More girls are being encouraged to enter these fields after high school.

One woman engineer in the aritcle was quite good at her profession.  Her company–a US company- flew her to Italy to help them with an infrastructure problem.  Italy contracted this company to help them.  The Italians refused to work with her becasue she was a woman and wouldn’t allow her on the job site.  The company owner was a man and he told the Italians  that he would pull their contract with them if they didn’t allow her on the job site.  I give her company credit for backing her up.  The owner said she was the best one for the type of problem they were having.  This woman, in her early 50’s, told Time that in the beginning of her career , she had to deal with quite a bit sexism from the males….but she herself felt that it was improving over time.

09-02-2006 12:49 PM

Re: Why Men Rule
DontMarryNoer
Regular Contributor
DontMarryNoer

MartianBachelor wrote:
Which is why Larry Summers got canned at Harvard, at a conference addressing the “under-representation” of women in science, the premise of which is that women aren’t doing well?

No. Larry Summers got “canned” because of a silly turf war. He pushed out one professor previously … and he got pushed back. This was all after anything he had ever said. Even he knows this; don’t understand why people want to believe he is some kind of martyr.

09-02-2006 01:53 PM

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

Reader Response to “Don’t Marry Career Women” – Why Men Rule

Re: Why Men Rule
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor

DontMarryNoer wrote: …No. Larry Summers got “canned” because of a silly turf war. He pushed out one professor previously … and he got pushed back. This was all after anything he had ever said.

Which professor are you talking about? Not Cornel West, because that happened a couple of years before the early 2005 blowup.

Even he knows this; don’t understand why people want to believe he is some kind of martyr.

So you’re saying the NBER speech really had nothing to do with it, and was just the straw that broke the camel’s back? It sure got a much wider playing than the West episode.

Message Edited by MartianBachelor on 09-02-2006 01:37 PM

______________________________________________
“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 03:36 PM

Re: Why Men Rule
tellafriend
Regular Contributor
tellafriend

MartianBachelor wrote:
“…Which brings me to an alternate explanation — one rooted in a more Darwinian view of human sex differences. It sees the human female as having been endowed for millions of years with vast power to shape the male of her species. As the “choosier sex,” she has forced males to compete for her affections — sometimes fiercely. It is not difficult to understand why males who showed little dominance or status-oriented behavior were probably among the first scratched off her dance card. Whatever their positive qualities, she realized that during hard times, such males would have trouble competing for resources that her family would need to survive.

“By favoring males oriented toward obtaining power and resources, women unwittingly caused these traits to become common in the human male — an example of a process that Darwin named “sexual selection.” It has made the typical male more likely to respond to certain environmental cues than the typical female — and vice-versa. To the extent that male dominance of political and economic institutions has followed, it is not a consequence of a masculinist conspiracy, but of female choice. That a preference for traits such as ambition, industriousness, and competitiveness has produced a world where few men are natural egalitarians is hardly shocking…”

Excerpted from: Raider of the Lost Patriarch, by Patricia Hausman.

John Hatung’s shorthand way of putting this concept was “males and male behavior are the result of a breeding experiment run by females, a proving ground from which females can cull winning genes”.

Remember gals: when you diss men, you diss the choices made by your mother, grandmothers, and great-grandmothers all the way back up the family tree.

Oh, and have a little compassion. Us guys are just the lab rats trying to live our lives while making it through the mazes you’ve constructed.

This is a poor theory.

Men rule because we are DESIGNED to rule. Our functional capacity dictates that we rule. This is why men are smarter than women. This is why men are more capable than women. These are not statements of worth but of FUNCTION.

You give females too much credit because you’re applying the ridiculous feminist climate today to every other time period in history. Females are desirable when they learn how to shut up and take their cues from men. You’re assuming that men didn’t have balls back then. Men DID have balls back then, it’s just that when we look back on it through feminist-colored sunglasses, we’re told that men were ‘abusive’ and ‘controlling’.. this is typical feminist demonization of male behavior.

If you tell a dog to “sit” you’re being ‘abusive’ by restricting the dog’s freedom. And you’re being ‘controlling’ by making the dog do something that you want it to do. Forget the fact that the dog is going to get a treat if it does what you tell it. Females would rather complain about oppression and restriction, not realizing that real freedom always has limits. And those limits are imposed for the safety and enjoyment of those living under the restrictions. For instance, a child is told not to run into the street. To the child this seems like an unfair restriction by an abusive and controlling parent. But from a wiser point of view, it is a safeguard against danger and if the child listens, it receives a reward–the parent’s affection.

Idiot feminists always have kneejerk reactions to extreme situations, not realizing that their own stupidity is the reason why they’re handicapped. In essense, they throw the baby out with the bathwater. Like gun control for instance, there are extreme cases of gun abuse as with any privilege, there will always be an abusive instance. But instead of addressing that particular abuse, everyone is punished and all guns are removed.

This is exactly what is eating away at our educational system today. In the past, there was corporal punishment, if you talked back to a teacher, you got smacked. But there were abusive situations that arose. So instead of handling those particular situations, we simply did away with the entire concept of discipline. And what is the result. Schools being run by children too immature to understand their limitations. The teachers are hijacked and taken along for the ride. They have very little authority over their students which translates into very little learning occuring.

It’s the same thing on these boards. You have a lot of well intentioned men faithfully explaining to unruly children (women) how things work. But they don’t realize that before you can teach a child anything, you must first have his/her respect. Otherwise, they remain immune to common sense and are instead ruled by the notorious female condition known as selective hearing.

09-03-2006 02:51 PM

Re: Why Men Rule
MartianBachelor
Regular Contributor
MartianBachelor
Thanks for changing the subject back.

Men rule because we are DESIGNED to rule. Our functional capacity dictates that we rule. This is why men are smarter than women. This is why men are more capable than women. These are not statements of worth but of FUNCTION.

I agree with that 95+%. Evolution creates such well-functioning creatures that they look as if they were designed.

So we arrive at the same place by different means perhaps.

The other 5%? I’d say women are better at babies and kids up to the age of biological self-sufficiency (age 8? 10?), while men are better at just about everything else that matters.

“You’re assuming that men didn’t have balls back then. Men DID have balls back then.”

Again, I agree with your second sentence and therefore reject the first.
Women chose for men w/balls.

As others have said here in multiple ways, declining marriage and birth rates mean women (feminists in particular) are doing themselves in.

“It’s the same thing on these boards…”

Amen to that.

______________________________________________
“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 04:57 PM

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

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: