 |
Lonelygirl15
Forum to post messages about Bree and Danielbeast
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Lurker
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2007 10:57 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Renegade wrote: | | Lurker wrote: | | An almost devil may care attitude that would suggest they think the Order will play nice and not kidnap a drunk guy. |
Well, they didn't kidnap me yet... |
Well, have you given them a reason to?
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | Lurker, are you trying to tell me we should stop treating men and women like they are different? |
To an extent, yes. It might be more accurate to say that I think we should stop assuming - based on their sex - what emotional, mental or moral characteristics they have. We shouldn't even assume too much based on their gender either.
It really makes as much sense as making a comment about a hot woman walking by to a guy you've just met and assuming that he's going to agree with you. He might be gay and she may no do nothing for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kwicherbichen
Lonely Fan
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 183
Location: Dallas
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh. So is it not true that a man is more likely to be better at math than a girl? Or that a girl is more likely make better grades in public school than a male? Should we stop looking at things that way? Are the untrue or just unimportant?
And I thought you meant biologically and neurologically. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lurker
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | Oh. So is it not true that a man is more likely to be better at math than a girl? Or that a girl is more likely make better grades in public school than a male? Should we stop looking at things that way? Are the untrue or just unimportant? |
From what I understand they aren't true. To be entirely fair, females haven't even had very long to show what they can do with math and the sciences (though there have been some highly competent women in both categories). It's been a very male-dominated thing since the time of the ancient Greeks. As smart as those guys were, they thought some very stupid things about the intellect of women.
For instance, they thought that their uterus would shrivel up if they used their brains. Thus, to ensure the future of mankind, women had to be uneducated and devote themselves to motherhood and housework. Heck, Hippocrates even named the term "hysteria" after the Greek word for "uterus." Historically, females have been very much dissuaded from such pursuits. At times, they were locked in mental insitutions if they tried to be as educated as their husbands, held underwater in the public forum as punishment if they tried to make a public address, and even burned at the stake as witches for either of the above "offenses" to the natural order.
I'm not trying to go all Alex on you here (I'm even a male, but this kind of stuff bothers me immensely), but that's really how things have been. Even in public speaking classes to this day females are advised not to make impassioned pleas or appeals to pathos - particularly in business settings or those where the audience is largely male - because of stereotypes about them being on their period or something. I kid you not.
As for the public schools, my guess would be that has less to do with inherent characteristics and more to do with social ones and peer groups.
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | And I thought you meant biologically and neurologically. |
Well obviously there's some biological differences. I think that goes without saying.
By the way, I apologize to everyone for hijacking this thread. I really never meant for that to happen, and I'm going to get off the soapbox now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Renegade
Enthusiastic Fan
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 328
Location: Hamburg, Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lurker wrote: | | Well, have you given them a reason to? |
I'm obviously leader of the Hamburgian resistance cell. I am a great thread to the World Domination of One. 
_________________
[ YouTube Profile ] [ Dawson's Cove ]
Every time you score a goal, a starving child in Africa dies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lurker
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Renegade wrote: | | Lurker wrote: | | Well, have you given them a reason to? |
I'm obviously leader of the Hamburgian resistance cell. I am a great thread to the World Domination of One. |
I'm sure you're on their list then. Somewhere.
By the way, is this resistance cell ironically called the "Resistance of One"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jammers
Suspiciously Absent
Joined: 07 Apr 2007
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Anyone else getting tired of seeing Daniel and Jonas's characters going way over the top when they go out drinking? Most people don't act like that when they drink but they act that way every single time they drink...Taking about overacting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ziola
The Order of Denderah
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 5774
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jammers wrote: | | Anyone else getting tired of seeing Daniel and Jonas's characters going way over the top when they go out drinking? Most people don't act like that when they drink but they act that way every single time they drink...Taking about overacting. |
 You've never seen my SO drunk...he is constanly making an a$$ of himself and "holding up walls" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Renegade
Enthusiastic Fan
Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 328
Location: Hamburg, Germany
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lurker wrote: | | By the way, is this resistance cell ironically called the "Resistance of One"? |
"ironically"?? Have you never seen Rambo or Die Hard? 
_________________
[ YouTube Profile ] [ Dawson's Cove ]
Every time you score a goal, a starving child in Africa dies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lurker
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Renegade wrote: | | Lurker wrote: | | By the way, is this resistance cell ironically called the "Resistance of One"? |
"ironically"?? Have you never seen Rambo or Die Hard? |
Fair point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kwicherbichen
Lonely Fan
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 183
Location: Dallas
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | From what I understand they aren't true. To be entirely fair, females haven't even had very long to show what they can do with math and the sciences (though there have been some highly competent women in both categories). It's been a very male-dominated thing since the time of the ancient Greeks. |
It's not true? So did you get that from a study or what?
And public education system hasn't been around since ancient Greeks. Besides, what does tenure of being studied have to do with it? Does the fact that men have been studied more than women give them better math abilities and women better verbal skills?
If psychology has biological explanations (which sometimes it DOES have explainable biological roots) then MALES and FEMALES do differ mentally, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lurker
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | Quote: | | From what I understand they aren't true. To be entirely fair, females haven't even had very long to show what they can do with math and the sciences (though there have been some highly competent women in both categories). It's been a very male-dominated thing since the time of the ancient Greeks. |
It's not true? So did you get that from a study or what? |
Yes, actually. Janet Hyde's research, for instance, shows exactly that:
http://www.psychologymatters.org/thinkagain.html
There's really no biological predisposition for males to be better at mathematics. They aren't inherently better, and aren't necessarily even better at it in application. The above study also supports what Wood and Dindia had to say regarding females and verbal skills.
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | And public education system hasn't been around since ancient Greeks. |
I didn't say it had. I only addressed one sentence to the matter of the public education system:
| I wrote: | | As for the public schools, my guess would be that has less to do with inherent characteristics and more to do with social ones and peer groups. |
Research - including the one linked above - also supports that. If females may be more likely to do better in public school, it has probably nothing to do with the fact that they're female on its own.
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | Besides, what does tenure of being studied have to do with it? Does the fact that men have been studied more than women give them better math abilities and women better verbal skills? |
No. As said, males don't have better mathematical abilities nor women - to any valuable degree - better verbal skills. I was just offering that in the event that you were looking for an example of a female Albert Einstein or a female Pythagoras.
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | If psychology has biological explanations (which sometimes it DOES have explainable biological roots) then MALES and FEMALES do differ mentally, right? |
I'm not sure I understand the question, but I will say again, though, that what research we have suggests that approximately 1% of mental, emotional or moral differences in males and females are believed to be attributal to their sex without another variable arguably having made an impact - and even that might be a generous guesstimate. 1% is - statistically speaking - a negligible amount. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JustAnotherLonelyGirl.
P. Monkey's Agent
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 2094
Location: Boston
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i haven't read this thread but i almost just died laughing at this video.
(i have been gone for a few days.. so i'm delayed on this)
bree is cute again yayyyy!
_________________
"Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof."
-- V For Vendetta <3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kwicherbichen
Lonely Fan
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 183
Location: Dallas
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 2:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
So the different amount of hormones in males and females doesn't have much of an effect on behaviour?
Also, when it comes to finding partners, why do men have to approach women differently than women have to approach men for sex? Is that the 1%? Because that's a pretty important 1%. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kanazaka
Enthusiastic Fan
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 464
Location: Worth, IL
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is a good, entertaining video. And for all of the people clamoring for another "Proving Science Wrong" video--well, you kind of got your wish. Daniel and Jonas deal with stress by drinking, and Bree deals with it by focusing on the task at hand (in this case tending to the drunk boys). So, she sort of proved that women are better at dealing with stress, whereas as historically, research pointed to men being better at dealing with stress (because researchers didn't study women). But she's still stressed out, as is evident by the fact that she can't enjoy Mexico like the other girls on the beach. Pretty sad, but understandable given the Order's constant pursuit of her.
_________________
The samurai knows all  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lurker
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | So the different amount of hormones in males and females doesn't have much of an effect on behaviour? |
It may (could very well be that uncontested 1%). There's certainly side-effects when people take medications that alter ordinary hormone levels, but it might be a stretch to say that changes in behavior there are solely a result of different levels when other variables (discomfort, pain, increased stress) may be at work.
If we're talking about normal levels, then biological effects (differences in muscle mass, bone density, types of reproductive organs, etc.) are obviously the more relevant. For that matter, even though they're present at different levels in males and females, they produce comparable biological effects typically related to behavior (for instance, while males have way more testosterone, it's believed to be related to the tendency for sexual arousal in both sexes; as for estrogen, while females have more of it, it's involved in the maintence of capacity for reproduction in both sexes).
| kwicherbichen wrote: | | Also, when it comes to finding partners, why do men have to approach women differently than women have to approach men for sex? Is that the 1%? Because that's a pretty important 1%. |
What do you mean by this exactly? Are you talking about etiquette? Chivalry? Pick-up lines?
If so, all of those things are societary. There's no biological reason males and females can't just go up to one another and start groping to convey that they want to contribute to the next generation, nor is there such a reason that both sexes can't use pick-up lines, open doors for one another, pay for dinner on dates, pull out chairs for one another, etc. That's all related to societal expectations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
